Part 3

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.

CITY OF WORCESTER.

THE constituency of the city is no larger now than it was in days of yore, when freemen were made in any quantity at the pleasure of the corporation; often while the election was proceeding. The number of voters now on the register is about 2,200; of these, 1,099 still qualify as freemen, and nearly 700 have no other qualification.

1802—(General Election)—The electors having been convened together in the Guildhall for the nomination in the usual manner, the Mayor (Mr. Rowlands) proposed the reëlection of Edward Wigley and Abraham Robarts, Esqs., the previous members. This proposition was seconded, and the business of the day went on most smoothly until within seven minutes of the hour at which the writ was made returnable, when the hall became suddenly and most violently agitated by the arrival of Joseph Scott, Esq., of Great Barr, a relative of Lord Dudley and Ward, who came forward and declared himself a candidate, as he said, in compliance with the wishes of a number of the inhabitants. A poll was demanded on his behalf, which immediately commenced, and continued for four days; at the end of which, the numbers were—Robarts, 2,163; Scott, 1,197; Wigley, 1,180. On the fifth morning Mr. Wigley retired, and Robarts and Scott were declared duly elected. There was no disturbance. Politics seem to have entered very little into consideration, and the matter to have been decided by person and purse. Mr. Wigley, in his retiring address to the “Worthy Freemen of the City of Worcester,” intimated that he had come forward thirteen years before, at their own request, to rescue their city from becoming a Government nomination borough, and he did not see why he should now have been rejected. To those “who promised him their support, but voted for his opponent, he had nothing to say, because he could say nothing that would be pleasing to himself.” A meeting of his friends and supporters was afterwards held at the Crown Inn, Henry Wakeman, Esq., presiding, at which resolutions were passed thanking Mr. Wigley for his conduct in Parliament, and his great attention to the interests of this city, where he and others of his family had resided for more than thirty years, and “been an example, rarely exceeded, of piety, benevolence, and charity.”

1806—OCTOBER—(General Election.)—Candidates, Abrm. Robarts, Esq., the former member; Colonel Bromley, of Abberley Lodge; and William Gordon, Esq., who rested his claims to support on the fact of his being a mercantile man, and, as such, better fitted to represent the city of Worcester than Colonel Bromley, a country gentleman. He was supported by gentlemen who were disgusted by the unblushing bribery of previous elections. After three days’ polling, Mr. Gordon retired, the numbers being—Robarts, 856; Bromley, 563; Gordon, 348: total number of freemen polled, 902. Mr. Gordon was afterwards _fêted_ at the Crown Hotel, on which occasion he attributed his defeat to his being so late in the field. Mr. Gordon, however, afterwards presented a petition against Colonel Bromley’s return, which that gentleman declined to defend, and accepted the Chiltern Hundreds, so that the seat again became vacant.

1807—FEBRUARY 13—At the election thus rendered necessary, Alderman Squires proposed William Gordon, Esq., and Alderman Carden, John Attersoll, Esq., both gentlemen being London merchants. Mr. Gordon declared himself to be a staunch Church and King man, and utterly opposed to the continuance of the Slave Trade. Mr. Attersoll talked a little more about civil and religious freedom. There seems to have been no show of hands taken, and both parties required a poll, which was commenced amidst a great deal of fighting and outrage. After three days’ polling Mr. Attersoll retired, the numbers being—Gordon, 766; Attersoll, 414: majority for Gordon, 352. A petition was next presented against Mr. Gordon’s return, on the score of bribery, by several inhabitants of the city. A meeting was held at the Crown, to take steps to counteract this petition, Mr. J. Palmer in the chair. Mr. Hebb moved the resolutions, in a speech which the reporter of the time says “displayed great constitutional knowledge and erudition.” The petition was dismissed in consequence of the necessary recognizances not being entered into.

1807—MAY 6—(General Election.)—Mr. Robarts and Mr. Gordon returned without opposition. Mr. Attersoll having canvassed the electors, and found that he had no chance, retired on the eve of the contest.

This election was chiefly remarkable for the quantity of pens and ink wasted upon it. Mr. Gordon, after being returned as an “independent” member, followed the example of most of his contemporary M.P.’s, in turning his position to account, and obtained from the Government a license to trade with Spain. He was warned of the consequences of becoming a tool of Government by Mr. Hebb, in a series of letters bearing the signature of Cato Uticensis. Then followed various blasts and counter-blasts, especially a sheet of rhyme called the _Doctoriad_, to which there was a smart replication under the title of the _Gordonian_; and these were for some time the _poemes celébres_ of Worcester elections.

1812—OCTOBER 5—(General Election.)—Mr. Robarts and Mr. Gordon again candidates, though, as the latter was out of the country, he was represented by his father-in-law, Sir George Cornewall. A day or two before the election, a number of freemen presented a requisition to Lord Deerhurst, pressing him to offer himself, which he did. At the nomination, Mr. Robarts and Lord Deerhurst obtained the show of hands, and a poll was demanded on behalf of Mr. Gordon. After eight days’ contest—severer than any which had taken place in the city since the celebrated one in 1761, between Sir William Watkin Lewes and Mr. Rouse—the numbers were found to be—Robarts, 1,248; Gordon, 939; Deerhurst, 855. Lord Deerhurst then retired, having won golden opinions from all sorts of men, by the eloquence of his speeches, the courtesy of his manner, and the good humour he had maintained. He polled a majority of the resident freemen, but was beaten by the out-voters. The number of freemen polled at this election was 1,765. No particular political principle seems to have been at all involved in the contest. A gold cup was afterwards purchased by Lord Deerhurst’s supporters, and presented to him at a dinner at the Crown; Thomas Farley, Esq., in the chair.

1816—DECEMBER—(Vacancy on the death of A. Robarts, Esq.)—Lord Deerhurst again offered himself as a candidate, and Colonel Davies made his first appearance in Worcester. He continued an active canvass for some time, but at last finding that Lord Deerhurst had indubitably secured a majority of votes, he withdrew. Lord Deerhurst was proposed at the hustings by the Mayor (R. Chamberlain, Esq.), and seconded by E. M. Wigley, Esq. The chairing took place immediately afterwards, and the chair itself was very prematurely demolished by the mob in High Street. On the following day a grand dinner was given to the new member at the Hoppole.