The Parliament of 1624 was a historically important Parliament. In the 1500's the king was still assumed to have absolute power over foreign affairs. Robert Ruigh's study of this Parliament is of interest for the light it throws on the activities of the Montagus and Spencers, who dominated the politics of Northamptonshire. Ruigh:

"... When, in 1624, James I took his people into his confidence, he thereby created a precedent for parliamentary discussion of foreign affairs. The historical reevaluation of that precedent is the raison d'etre of this study.

... Why was a reappraisal of English foreign policy necessary...? Who were the people thereby involved in the decision-making process? ..." Ruigh

"Northamptonshire was the patronage preserve of two noble families: the Spencers and the Montagus. The traditional division of the county into eastern and western sections was unofficially recognized as a basis for apportioning the knightships of the shire. Edward, Lord Montagu, and Robert, Lord Spencer, heads of the eastern and western sections of the county, respectively, held conference at Boughton concerning the knights of the shire as soon as rumors of an impending Parliament began to circulate. They agreed that Sir William Spencer and Richard Knightley, members of Parliament for the county in 1621, should be reelected. On January 4, Lord Spencer reminded Lord Montagu of this understanding, but by that time Montagu had communicated with others in the east who had resolved to acquaint Spencer with their desire that the "ancient course" might be observed "to have a knight on each side for the better service of the country, without any opposition." Montagu assured Spencer that his son would be unopposed, but he asked that "your Lordship would be pleased to prevail so much with my cousin Knightley (whom I think very worthy of the place), that having had the honour already of it, he would give way now to Sir Lewis Wattson, and so the business may be carried fairly without any offence." To this suggestion Lord Spencer returned an unequivocally negative answer. He denied that it was an ancient custom to have one knight of the shire from each district, and he noted that "cousin" Knightley was by far the fittest candidate. Since both Knightley and Watson were Montagu's kinsmen, Lord Spencer urged that they be considered with "more judicious balance," and he held Montagu to the terms of the original agreement. On January 15, Sir William Spencer and Richard Knightley were reelected...

The east-west division of Northamptonshire was also apparent in the apportionment of borough seats. Of the two boroughs in the east, Peterborough was the least susceptible to Montagu influence, but it appears that Sir Francis Fane had Montagu's blessing in 1624. When Fane became Earl of Westmorland on December 29, 1624, he was replaced ... by Christopher Hatton, heir to extensive Northamptonshire estates, who in 1630 married Lord Montagu's niece. Higham Ferrers with its single seat had been frequently at the disposal of the Montagu family since Elizabethan times. It reelected Lord Montagu's brother, Sir Charles, who apparently made his chief residence in London.

Spencer influence predominated in the western boroughs. The friendly relations subsisting between the corporation of Northampton (the town, ed.) and the Spencer family were such that in 1626 the town resolved to support Sir William Spencer's candidacy for the county seat despite his avowed desire to be excused from that service. ...

Undoubtedly the strong Puritan tendencies of the Spencer-Knightley combination had some significance in parliamentary elections, but its influence was by no means decisive. Lord Montagu, too, was tainted with Puritanism, much to King James's distaste. When the county was split by political differences in 1624, it was not over religious issues, but rather about the Earl of Westmorland's high-handed transfer of the quarter sessions from Northampton to Kettering. The Protestant gentry and nobility ... disagreed about matters of local administration and family prestige." Ruigh

"Sir Charles Montagu to Sir Edward Montagu, Dec. 13 1620

... His Majesty of himself spake to my brother of you, and said he did not confer this great trust upon him only for love to himself, but of all our family, whom he thought loved him and were faithful to him, and through you smelt a little of Puritanism, yet he knew you to be honest and faithful to him. ..."

Sources:
The Parliament of 1624: Politics and Foreign Policy, Robert E. Rugh.

http://www.montaguemillennium.com/familyresearch/northampton.htm