Improvement writers argued that drainage would bring prosperity and population growth to fenland communities; locals counter-argued that their communities were already thriving. The detailed surviving records from early modern Whittlesey, in the Isle of Ely, are analysed here to test the accuracy of these opposing claims. Using the returns of the 1523 Lay Subsidy, the 1563 ecclesiastical census, the Lady Day 1674 Hearth Tax records and the 1676 Compton Census, together with bishops' transcripts and probate inventories, this article finds that although the population did indeed increase after drainage, the pre-drainage population was also increasing. The Michaelmas 1664 Hearth Tax records are analysed to uncover something of the character of the inhabitants and the 1674 Lady Day returns are then used to test the relative wealth of the community compared with that of sub-regions throughout England identified by Tom Arkell. Finally, there is a discussion of Whittlesey's housing stock.
Following the 1654 elections, the first to be held after the imposition of the Instrument of Government, petitions of complaint were presented by voters from various constituencies to Cromwell and his council. Most of the petitions were investigated, some MPs being subsequently barred from taking their seats, but only one was excluded on the grounds of immorality: George Glapthorne, an MP for the Isle of Ely. This re‐examination of his case indicates that Glapthorne, an unpopular local figure because of his involvement in drainage and enclosure, had been the subject of a successful smear campaign. The Instrument of Government had redefined the franchise, which, it has been argued, decreased the size of the electorate. Annexed to the petition presented by voters in the Isle was a list of 124 men who had been physically prevented from entering the polling hall. This list reveals the presence of Walloon settlers in the Isle; local records indicate that such men qualified for the new franchise because they were leasing fertile, drained land in the Fens, thus increasing the electorate in that area. By considering the local context of a disputed election, this study adds to the debate concerning the interpretation of the Instrument of Government in terms of the eligibility, not only of a parliamentary candidate, but also of voters.