Culliford, William (d. 1724), revenue commissioner, was fourth son of Robert Culliford of Encombe, Dorset, England, and his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Edward Lawrence of Creech Grange, Dorset. He was educated at Shaftesbury grammar school. In 1666 he was appointed to his first post in the revenue service, as surveyor of excise in London. Two years later he became registrar of seizures and forfeitures, in which office he served until 1684, when he was appointed as one of the seven revenue commissioners in Ireland. After recovering from a bullet wound inflicted by a sacked customs officer, Culliford moved to Ireland and retained his post until early 1688. Little is known of his time in Ireland in these years, though he later claimed that he had actively opposed the endeavours of the earl of Tyrconnell (qv) to remove protestant officials from the revenue service, and that in return he himself was removed from office, purportedly in order to make way for a catholic. Officially, Culliford was to be transferred to the English customs commission, though this appointment did not take place. He was defeated when he stood for the English house of commons in 1689 but was returned unopposed for the borough of Corfe Castle, Dorset, in March 1690. He remained out of employment until the summer of 1689, when the English treasury lords employed him on a temporary basis for visiting the western ports of England. Culliford also proved a useful assistant to the treasury lords in their deliberations on the Irish revenue in preparation for establishing Williamite government in Ireland. To that end, in February 1690 a temporary commission was issued for Culliford and Edward May to manage the Irish revenue. In May 1690 both men were appointed to the first proper Williamite revenue commission in Ireland.
Culliford's time as a commissioner was dominated by allegations of corruption and embezzlement. The allegations centred on the commissioners’ role in managing the forfeitures arising from the 1689–91 war in Ireland. In October 1691, in response to growing concern over the issue, the Irish chancellor of the exchequer, Sir Charles Meredith, gave evidence incriminating Culliford and May to the English commission of accounts. Culliford bore the brunt of the ensuing investigations, and became the scapegoat for the mismanagement of the previous two years. In February 1692, when the English house of commons turned their attention to the Irish forfeitures, a report was made against Culliford. As an MP, Culliford denied all the charges in the report in person. Further proceedings were prevented by the adjournment of parliament. The following month the Irish lord lieutenant designate, Henry, Viscount Sidney (qv), noted that the Irish revenue commission was to be substantially altered, with Culliford being left out until he could prove his innocence. In April Culliford was heard before the English treasury board, and although the treasury lords felt there was not enough evidence against him to constitute a legal proof of corruption and embezzlement, they did not think it was appropriate to continue him in office. Culliford's dismissal was reported in a newsletter on 14 April.
Culliford's removal from office did not bring his troubles to an end. The Irish parliament, which convened in October 1692, chose to pursue the investigations further, by way of the committee of grievances in the house of commons. The first report from the committee charged Culliford with taking forfeited goods to his own use. Nor did he help the situation when he claimed that his privilege as an English MP freed him from any obligation to participate in the committee's investigations. He was attacked in committee reports on two more occasions and had two petitions rejected by the commons before the abrupt prorogation of parliament saved him from any further censure on 3 November, the day before charges against him were to be discussed in the house. Although Sidney claimed the precipitate prorogation was due to the commons’ ‘sole right’ claim, the more apposite reason would appear to be Sidney's desire to protect Culliford and other government officials from impeachment.
Culliford faced one last crisis in the renewed investigations in the English parliament in February 1693. Once again his name arose in the evidence given by Irish politicians to that parliament, though no action was taken against him, apart from the temporary suspension of his privilege as an MP. His name was also mentioned in the articles of impeachment against the former lords justices, Sir Charles Porter (qv) and Thomas, Lord Coningsby (qv), in the English parliament in late 1693, and he received another mention in the report from the committee of public accounts in the Irish commons in December 1695.
Culliford's rehabilitation in government took a number of years, and his first employment since 1692 did not occur until September 1696, when he was appointed to the new English office of inspector general of imports and exports. In 1697 he gave evidence to the English board of trade regarding the Irish woollen industry. As with the other examinants, he advocated the encouragement of the linen industry in place of the woollen. Throughout the 1690s he continued to sit as an MP in the English parliament, and was active in relation to various parliamentary affairs relating to Ireland. In 1701 he was appointed to the English customs commission, from which he was removed in 1712. After the Hanoverian succession he was appointed for a brief period as a customs commissioner in Scotland. He married first Honor Ayliffe, and secondly (a. 26 August 1671) Eleanor, daughter of Robert Blanding of Yorkshire, with whom he had two sons and four daughters. He died in 1724, and was buried at Corfe Castle on 19 March.