Acceso usuarios
The success of two tory candidates at Marlborough in the general election of 1734 led to a petition to the Commons from the two defeated whig candidates, alleging corruption and malpractice by the winning side. The two tories had stood on the interest of the Bruce family, led by Charles, Lord Bruce. Bruce successfully organised a vast lobbying campaign against the petition. Most of the lobbyists were MPs, but a significant number were peers, or members of aristocratic families. Lists of lobbyists and those lobbied survive in the Ailesbury (Bruce) Manuscripts, enabling historians to reconstruct and evaluate the campaign. Bruce's lobbying is a fine example of aristocratic involvement in elections to the lower House, despite such interventions having been declared unparliamentary. His triumph damaged the political standing of the prime minister, Sir Robert Walpole, who had previously declared his opposition to any candidate supported by Bruce in the borough. Bruce's lobbying also reveals extensive cross‐party co‐operation between both lobbyers and lobbied: his supporters included not only independent whigs, but many who usually voted with the ministry. This suggests that the classification of MPs in the early 18th century as either whig or tory is too simplistic and that there was more fluidity in party loyalty than has been suspected.
