BEFORE the passing of the Reform Bill the number of electors on the
county register was not much more than 3,500. At the last revision there
were in the eastern division, 6,515; western, 4,135.
1802—JULY 12—(General Election, the old Parliament having run out its
legal term.)—The Hon. Edward Foley, of Stoke Edith, and Wm. Lygon, Esq.,
reëlected without opposition.
1803—JULY 19—(Vacancy occasioned by the death of the Hon. E. Foley.)—The
Hon. W. Ward elected without opposition.
1806—MARCH 3—(Vacancy occasioned by the elevation of Wm. Lygon, Esq., to
the Peerage.)—The nomination takes place in the Castle Yard, Worcester.
The Hon. W. B. Lygon, son of the peer recently created, was proposed by
the Rev. Mr. Pyndar, and seconded by Thomas Hornyold, Esq. The Hon. W.
H. Lyttelton, undeterred by the Beauchamp influence, then thought to be
overwhelming, came forward “to assert the independence of the county,”
and was proposed by John Amphlett, Esq., of Clent, and seconded by the
Rev. Mr. Onslow, Vicar of Kidderminster. The show of hands was in favour
of Mr. Lygon, and a poll demanded by his opponent. After five days’
polling Mr. Lyttelton resigned, the numbers then being—Lygon, 1,502;
Lyttelton, 1,145—majority for Lygon, 357. A sharp correspondence,
imputing artifices, fraud, &c., afterwards took place between the
candidates. The representation of the county had not been contested
previously since the general election of 1741 (64 years before), when the
numbers were Lechmere, 2,309; Pitt, 2,120; Deerhurst, 1,930; Lyttelton,
1,412.
1806—NOVEMBER 7—(General Election on the accession of the short-lived Fox
ministry.)—The Hon. Mr. Lygon, and the Hon. Mr. Lyttelton, returned
together without opposition; the Hon. Mr. Ward having retired from the
representation in consequence of ill health.
1807—MAY—(General Election—Change of Ministry, and Appeal by the King to
the country on the Catholic Question.)—Hon. W. B. Lygon, and Hon. W. H.
Lyttelton, reëlected without opposition. A storm came on while the
election was proceeding, and the Sheriff was obliged to retire into the
Castle to finish the proceedings. It is noticed that the accommodation
in the Castle Yard was of the worst possible description.
1812—OCTOBER—(General Election.)—The Hon. W. B. Lygon, and Hon. W. H.
Lyttelton, returned again without opposition.
1816—NOVEMBER—(On the elevation of Lord Elmley, the Hon. W. B. Lygon, to
the peerage by the death of his father, Earl Beauchamp.)—Col. H. B.
Lygon, younger brother of the former member, elected without opposition.
1818—JUNE—(General Election.)—Col. Lygon, and the Hon. W. H. Lyttelton,
reëlected without opposition.
1820—MARCH—(General Election on the demise of George III)—The Hon. W. H.
Lyttelton retired from the representation from family considerations, and
Sir Thomas Winnington, Bart., offered himself as a candidate in his
stead. At the nomination, Col. Lygon was proposed by Sir A. Lechmere,
and seconded by Sir William Smith, Bart.; and Sir Thomas Winnington was
proposed by T. S. Vernon, Esq., and seconded by E. M. Wigley, Esq. There
was no opposition.
1826—JUNE—(General Election. Parliament dissolved by George IV, its
possible sands having almost run out.)—Col. Lygon and Sir Thomas
Winnington, Bart., reëlected without the shadow of an opposition.
1830—AUGUST—(General Election on the accession of William IV.)—Sir Thomas
Winnington retired from the representation, and the Hon. Thomas Henry
Foley, son of Lord Foley, was elected in his stead, with Colonel Lygon,
who thus for the fifth time was returned without opposition.
1831—MAY—(General Election to take the sense of the country on the Reform
Bill.)—The Reformers from the first moment that this election became
imminent, looked about for a candidate to oppose Col. Lygon. First, Mr.
Sergeant Russell was mentioned, and then John Richards, Esq., of
Stourbridge. The last named gentleman actually did one week issue an
address to the freeholders, but, frightened at hearing that the Dowager
Lady Beauchamp had subscribed £50,000 to fight the country, he hastily
withdrew on the next. However, a few days before the election, Captain
Spencer, brother to Lord Althorp, allowed himself to be named as a
candidate, and a tremendous struggle ensued. Col. Lygon, while
canvassing in the Corn Market, Worcester, was attacked by a town’s
rabble, and compelled to take refuge in a neighbouring tavern. On the
morning of the nomination, Col. Lygon assembled his friends at
Madresfield; Mr. Foley at the New Inn, Ombersley Road; and Captain
Spencer, at the Talbot, Tything. The nomination took place in the Castle
Yard, Osman Ricardo, Esq., High Sheriff, being returning officer. John
S. Pakington, Esq., proposed Col. Lygon, who was seconded by John
Phillips, Esq.; T. T. Vernon, Esq., proposed, and T. C. Hornyold, Esq.,
seconded, the Hon. Mr. Foley; and Sir C. S. Smith, Bart., and Robert
Berkeley, Esq., were Captain Spencer’s proposer and seconder. Before the
show of hands was taken, Dr. Beale Cooper demanded proof of Captain
Spencer’s qualification, whereupon the Captain said he had expected such
a demand, and handed to the under sheriff a deed _bearing date April_ 30,
purporting to be a grant from Earl Spencer to Captain Spencer, of a rent
charge to the amount of £600 upon manors and estates in the county of
Herts. The show of hands was declared to be in favour of Foley and
Spencer, whereupon Col. Lygon demanded a poll, which immediately
commenced. Col. Lygon headed the poll the first day, but never
afterwards; and on the morning of the seventh day he resigned all further
contest, the numbers then being—Foley, 2,034; Spencer, 1,765; Lygon,
1,335. At the close of each day speeches were made by the candidates and
their friends, from the booths at the back of the Talbot Inn, Tything;
and the coalition formed between Foley and Spencer, on finding that
Colonel Lygon’s friends were plumping for him, formed a most fertile
topic for talk. A riot took place in Broad Street one evening, in
consequence of one of Col. Lygon’s friends having imprudently irritated
the mob by throwing a decanter amongst them from the committee-room. The
windows of the room were immediately broken, and other disturbances took
place. There can be no doubt that the result of this election had great
effect upon the country generally.
A dinner was given in the next week to the Hon. Mr. Foley and Captain
Spencer, at the Bell Inn, with Sir Thomas Winnington, Bart., in the
chair. Sir C. S. Smith was in the vice-chair, and Lord Lyttelton and
about 100 other gentlemen were present. Dinners were also given to the
successful candidates at Hagley, Kidderminster, Evesham, Stourbridge,
Dudley, and Birmingham. The Birmingham dinner was held at Dee’s Hotel,
with Dr. Edward Johnstone in the chair.
Immediately after the election a meeting of Col. Lygon’s friends was held
at the Hoppole, Worcester, “to take into consideration the best mode of
testifying their approbation of his manly, spirited, and patriotic
conduct upon the late election; and for his faithful services during the
fifteen years he represented this county in Parliament.” J. S.
Pakington, Esq., was called to the chair, and there was a very
respectable attendance. Mr. Pakington asserted that the minority who had
voted for the Colonel, comprised the majority of the education and
respectability of the county. The “discreditable coalition” proved the
theme of much lamentation. Resolutions approving of Col. Lygon’s
Parliamentary career and general conduct were agreed to, and a
subscription entered into for the purchase of plate. This was presented
at a dinner at the Hoppole, in February, 1832. It was a superb vase, 57
inches in circumference, supported on a massive column and plinth,
decorated with embossed Acanthus leaves, and weighing in the whole 600
oz. It was designed by the inscription to be “a testimony of the
gratitude of his political friends for his long and faithful attention to
their interest in Parliament, and especially for his support of our
glorious and long cherished constitution.” John S. Pakington, Esq., was
the president of the evening, and presented the testimonial.
1832—DECEMBER—(Election rendered necessary by the passing of the Reform
Bill.)—The county now divided into two divisions.—_West
Worcestershire_.—The Hon. T. H. Foley (Whig), and Col. Lygon
(Conservative), returned without opposition. The nomination took place
in the space fronting the County Gaol, and the candidates were not
proposed or seconded, the cries of “Foley and Lygon” by the crowd,
without any other person being named, being taken by the Sheriff as
sufficient.
_East Worcestershire_.—The nomination of candidates took place at
Droitwich, Mr. Pakington (Conservative), being proposed by James Taylor,
Esq., and John Phillips, Esq., of Hanbury Hall; Thomas Henry Cookes,
Esq., (Whig) by Sir Thomas Winnington, Bart., and C. E. Hanford, Esq.;
and Wm. Congreve Russell, Esq., (Whig) by T. T. Vernon, Esq., and W.
Acton, Esq. The High Sheriff declared the show of hands to be in favour
of Mr. Pakington and Mr. Cookes, whereupon a poll was demanded for Mr.
Russell. After the two days’ poll the numbers were declared to
be—Russell, 2,576; Cookes, 2,516; Pakington, 1,916. The whole
proceedings were conducted in a peaceable and gentlemanly manner, and Mr.
Pakington, who addressed the electors at the “Declaration,” as well as
the successful candidates, was very well received. He complained of
broken promises, and the coalition of his opponents as fettering the
“independence” of the county, but declared himself neither disheartened
nor offended.
1833—MAY—_West Worcestershire_.—(Vacancy occasioned by the elevation of
the Hon. T. H. Foley to the House of Peers, on the death of his
father.)—The nomination took place in the field at the back of the Talbot
Inn, Tything. Sir Christopher Smith, Bart., proposed Captain H. J.
Winnington, who was seconded by Robert Berkeley, Esq. John Williams,
Esq., and T. C. Brock, Esq., proposed and seconded John S. Pakington,
Esq., who, to the great detriment of his cause, was not present during
any part of the proceedings—having just previously sailed to America.
Major Bund spoke at the hustings on his behalf. A Mr. Crowther also made
many attempts to be heard, but was hissed down, and he afterwards
explained in a letter to the newspapers that instead of being Mr.
Pakington’s opponent, as formerly, he intended to be his supporter,
because Captain Winnington and the Whigs had voted for the erection of
the New County Courts, while Mr. Pakington, on the contrary, “had always
opposed that unnecessary and shameful expenditure of the freeholders’
money.” The show of hands was very decidedly in favour of Captain
Winnington, and the Court was declared adjourned (from the Wednesday) to
the following Monday. At the end of the first day’s poll Captain
Winnington was 79 a-head, and the utmost excitement prevailed. Lord
Eastnor addressed the multitude on Mr. Pakington’s behalf, and the Rev.
Thomas Pearson spoke for Captain Winnington. The second day only
increased Captain Winnington’s majority, but the result was not certainly
known till the declaration of the numbers by the High Sheriff, on
Thursday morning, when they were announced to be—for Captain Winnington,
1,369; for Pakington, 1,278: majority for Winnington, 91. Mr. Pakington
had a majority in the Worcester and Upton divisions, but was beaten in
those of Stourport and Tenbury. Out of 3,122 voters, 2,647 were polled,
and though there had never been so close a contest in the county before,
it was carried on with very good humour. Captain Winnington’s return was
celebrated by a dinner at the Star and Garter Hotel, with Sir C. S. Smith
in the chair.
1835—JANUARY—_East Worcestershire_.—(General Election on the breaking up
of the Grey and Spencer cabinet, and the accession of the Duke of
Wellington and Sir R. Peel to power.)—Mr. Russell retired from the
representation at this election, on the score of ill-health, and his
place was taken on the Reform interest by Edward Holland, Esq., of
Dumbleton. Mr. Horace St. Paul was brought forward late in the day by
the Conservatives. Sir Thomas Winnington, M.P., and C. E. Hanford, Esq.,
proposed Mr. Cookes, the former member. James Taylor, Esq., of Moseley
Hall, and Mr. Whitmore Jones, proposed Mr. St. Paul; and Mr. Bate, of
Stourbridge, and Mr. Acton, Mr. Edward Holland. The choice of the people
at the nomination was declared to have fallen on Messrs. Cookes and
Holland, and a poll was demanded for Mr. St. Paul. At the end of the two
days’ poll the numbers were—Holland, 2,254; Cookes, 2,192; St. Paul,
2,145. Majority of Cookes over St. Paul, 47. 4,125 persons voted out of
5,226 on the register. There was some rioting at Stourbridge, which
necessitated the sending for two troops of lancers from Birmingham, and
Mr. St. Paul, declaring that some of his voters had been prevented from
coming to the poll by violence, presented a protest against the election.
A petition was talked of on this ground, but it came to nothing. A
dinner was given to the successful candidates, at the Golden Cross Hotel,
Bromsgrove, at which Colonel Davies presided. A similar dinner at
Stourbridge, with J. H. H. Foley, Esq., in the chair, gave rise to a
correspondence between Messrs. Robins, Hickman, Hodgetts, and Trow, and
Mr. Robert Scott and Lord Lyttelton. The first named gentlemen chose to
believe that some remarks made by Mr. Scott on the partiality and
incompetency of the county magistracy generally, were intended for
themselves, and they appealed to Lord Lyttelton to institute an inquiry.
The Lord Lieutenant not only refused to accede to their request, but
rebuked them for the language they had used.
_West Worcestershire_.—The candidates were as before, Colonel Lygon and
Mr. Pakington, who professed to coalesce on the Conservative interest,
and Captain Winnington, Whig. Sir A. Lechmere and the Hon. W. Coventry
proposed Col. Lygon; Mr. Osman Ricardo and Mr. Berkeley, Captain
Winnington; and Lord Eastnor and Mr. T. C. Brock, Mr. Pakington. The
show of hands was declared to be in favour of Captain Winnington and Mr.
Pakington. At the close of the poll the numbers were—Lygon, 1,945;
Winnington, 1,938; Pakington, 1,773: majority for Winnington, 165. 3,619
persons voted out of 4,126 upon the register.
1837—JULY—(General Election on the death of William IV.)—_West
Worcestershire_.—General Lygon and Captain Winnington reëlected without
opposition.
_East Worcestershire_.—Here there was a fierce contest, ending in the
return, for the first time, of two Conservatives. Before the election
took place the Conservatives offered a compromise, and suggested that one
of each party should be allowed to walk over, but the Liberals were so
sanguine of winning that they would not listen to the proposal. Mr.
Cookes had retired from the representation from ill-health, but his place
was supplied by Mr. J. H. H. Foley, who, with Mr. Holland, came forward
in the Liberal interest, while the Conservative candidates were Mr. H.
St. Paul and Mr. Barneby. On the hustings Colonel Davies and Sir William
Rouse Boughton, Bart., proposed Mr. Holland; T. H. Cookes, Esq., (the
late member) and James Foster, Esq., Mr. Foley; James Taylor, Esq., and
Thomas Hawkes, Esq., M.P., Mr. H. St. Paul; and Lord Eastnor and Edward
Dixon, Esq., Mr. Barneby. The show of hands was in favour of Messrs.
Barneby and St. Paul; and after the two days’ poll they were declared
duly elected; the numbers being—St. Paul, 2,595; Barneby, 2,528; Holland,
2,175; Foley, 2,168. In the Stourbridge, Bromsgrove, and Evesham
districts only, had the Liberal candidates a slight majority. Mr. Horace
St. Paul’s expenses at this election are said to have been £16,000.
1841—JUNE—(General Election. The Parliament having declared their want
of confidence in the ministers, the Whigs appeal to the people on the
Corn Law, Sugar, and Irish Registration questions. Sir Robert Peel’s “no
confidence” motion had been carried by a majority of one against
ministers.)—_West Worcestershire_.—General Lygon and F. Winn Knight,
Esq., nephew of the late John Knight, Esq., of Downton Castle, were
elected without opposition. Captain Winnington had retired from the
field in consequence of the division amongst his supporters on the Corn
Law question. He had constantly voted against any alteration of the Corn
Laws, and therefore did not please the constituencies of the towns. With
this state of things, added to the loss of the Foley interest in the
county, he could have had no chance, and therefore refused to disturb the
division by a contest.
_East Worcestershire_.—John Barneby, Esq., and James Arthur Taylor, Esq.,
returned. Mr. Horace St. Paul retired from the representation because of
ill-health, and for the same reason Mr. Holland declined to offer on the
Liberal interest. The Hon. Captain St. George Foley, brother of Lord
Foley, offered himself to the electors as an advocate of Liberal
measures, and of a moderate fixed duty upon corn. At the nomination at
Droitwich, Mr. Barneby was proposed by J. S. Pakington, Esq., M.P., and
W. Hemming, Esq.; Captain Foley, by James Foster, Esq., and Robert Scott,
Esq. M.P., in long and able speeches; and Mr. Taylor, by C. Noel, Esq.,
and Whitmore Jones, Esq. The show of hands was in favour of Barneby and
Taylor, and Captain Foley’s friends demanded a poll. At a meeting,
however, which was held at Mr. Galton’s, shortly after nomination, it was
decided, much to Captain Foley’s own mortification, not to proceed to a
poll, and that determination was communicated the same evening to the
opposite party. The Sheriff at first thought that he should be obliged
to take a poll, under the circumstances, notwithstanding, and the
Attorney General’s opinion was taken upon the point, but this being in
favour of the propriety of dispensing with the poll, Messrs. Barneby and
Taylor were declared duly elected without further trouble.
1847—JANUARY—_East Worcestershire_.—(Election to supply the vacancy
caused by the decease of John Barneby, Esq.)—Captain Rushout was the
first candidate announced, but J. H. H. Foley, Esq., having intimated his
intention of contesting the division, a meeting of the Conservative party
was called at Droitwich, at which an arrangement was entered into, by
which Mr. Foley retired from the field at present, and was to be
permitted to come in unopposed at the next election, when it was expected
that a vacancy would be caused by the retirement of Mr. James Arthur
Taylor. This created a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst the
Conservative electors, but the contracting parties were too influential
to admit of their decision being contravened. Captain Rushout was,
therefore, on this occasion elected without opposition.
1847—AUGUST—(General Election on the retirement of Sir Robert Peel from
office, after carrying his free trade measures.)—_East
Worcestershire_.—In consequence of the arrangement noticed above, Mr. J.
H. H. Foley was allowed to come in in the place of Mr. J. A. Taylor, who
retired from Parliament, and with Captain Rushout was returned unopposed.
_West Worcestershire_.—General Lygon and Mr. Knight were returned without
opposition.