COUNTY OF WORCESTER.
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.