1835—January—(General Election.)—Sir Charles Cockerell again came forward as a candidate; but Mr. Hudson retired at the last moment, being opposed by Mr. Peter Borthwick, the unsuccessful candidate at the previous election. However, Mr. Rudge was put in nomination in his absence by the Liberals, and a poll demanded on his behalf; the show of hands being in favour of Sir Charles and Mr. Borthwick. On the hustings Mr. George May charged Mr. Borthwick with having failed as a bookseller in Dalkeith, and having been excommunicated by the Scotch United Secession Church. Mr. Borthwick denied it, and said it was a relative whose debts he had paid for him. Mr. Rudge eventually declined to stand the poll, and Sir Charles Cockerell and Mr. Borthwick were declared duly elected. In June a dinner was given to Mr. Borthwick in the Guildhall, the chair being taken by Lieutenant Amherst; and a party of 160 sat down. The charge made against Mr. Borthwick having been repeated in the Bath Guardian, near which town he then lived, he commenced an action against the proprietors for libel, which was tried in April, 1836, and ended in a verdict for Mr. Borthwick on some counts of the indictment, with £100 damages; but the jury held it proved that Mr. Borthwick had been a bookseller in Dalkeith—had failed—had been in gaol—and had been a professional, but unsuccessful, performer on the stage of the Surrey Theatre.
1837—February—(Election in consequence of the death of Sir Charles Cockerell.)—The candidates were Lord Marcus Cecil Hill, brother of the Marquis of Downshire, on the Liberal interest, and George Rushout Bowles, Esq., nephew of Lord Northwick and the Dowager Lady Cockerell, on the Conservative side. On the hustings, Lord Hill was proposed by Mr. Benjamin Workman and Mr. T. N. Foster; and Mr. Bowles by Mr. Thomas Blayney and the Rev. Joseph Harling. The Mayor declared the show of hands to be in favour of Mr. Bowles, though his decision was questioned. The contest was a close one, ending in Mr. Bowles’s election; the numbers being—Bowles, 165; Hill, 140. About 60 electors did not vote.
1837—July—(General Election.)—The Hon. George Rushout and Mr. Peter Borthwick, the former members, coalesced to prevent the return of Lord Marcus Hill—who, for the second time, came forward on the Liberal interest—and they were successful; the numbers being—for Rushout, 168; Borthwick, 166; Hill, 156. Of 490 votes recorded, 124 were plumpers; and 119 of these were for Lord Hill. The Liberal party were loud in their indignation against the bribery which they asserted to have been practised. The return was petitioned against; and the committee ballotted for, consisted of six Conservatives and five Liberals: Sir Robert Peel, Bart., being chairman. Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Rushton were the counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Thessiger, Mr. Austin, &c., for the sitting members. Shortly after the opening of the case, the petition, as far as regarded Mr. Rushout, was abandoned, and Mr. Borthwick alone proceeded against. Mr. Borthwick was charged with bribery, both by himself and his agents; he was also declared to want qualification; and as many as 100 of his votes were objected to. The cases of bribery alone were gone into; and the one proved was that of Ebenezer Pierce, to whom Mr. Borthwick had presented a silver snuff box. He canvassed this voter personally, about a week before the election, and promised him a silver snuff box, which Mr. Charles Best afterwards brought him, with Mr. Borthwick’s compliments, and told him to put it by till after the election. It was proved that the box had been purchased at Stow and Mortimer’s by Mr. Borthwick, in the interim, and he had ordered them to engrave on it—“Ex dono amici sui conducit.” The committee, upon this, decided that Mr. Borthwick had been guilty of bribery. Mr. Austin abandoned the scrutiny, and permitted Lord Marcus Hill to be put in a majority of one, by permitting the votes of several persons, who admitted that they had been Mr. Borthwick’s paid agents, to be struck off; but he declared that the decision of the committee in the snuff box case had struck him with the utmost surprise, and begged to be allowed to call evidence to clear Mr. Borthwick’s character. Mr. Cockburn did not object, but the committee refused to hear any more evidence. The committee reported on March 20, 1838, and the return being amended, Lord Marcus Hill took his seat immediately afterwards. Soon after the decision of the committee was known, a dinner was given to Mr. Borthwick, and he was presented with an oblong silver salver, which had been subscribed for by the wives and daughters of the Conservative electors. The Rev. Mr. Harling presented the plate, and J. Amherst, Esq., presided at the dinner. Mr. Borthwick made a very long speech, reviewing his connection with the borough, and animadverting upon his late colleague, Mr. Rushout, in unmeasured terms, for having forsaken him before the committee. The language he made use of caused a challenge, and the two gentlemen met at Wormwood Scrubs. After a second discharge, without effect, Mr. Borthwick withdrew the offensive expressions. Lord Marcus Hill was also entertained at a dinner at the Town Hall, over which T. N. Foster, Esq., (the Mayor) presided; and a party of 200 gentlemen sat down to the tables.
1841—July—(General Election.)—The candidates were again Lord Marcus Hill, Mr. Rushout, and Mr. Peter Borthwick; the latter, indeed, did not make his appearance throughout the election, but he was strongly supported by a section of the Conservatives, who thought he had been ill used by Mr. Rushout in the matter of the previous election—and, generally, he seemed to be a favourite with the populace. At the hustings, Lord Marcus Hill was proposed by Edward Rudge, Esq., and the Rev. B. Bonaker; Mr. Rushout by Dr. Beale Cooper and the Rev. M. Shaw; and Mr. Borthwick by R. Blayney, Esq., and G. Eades, Esq. Mr. Francis Holland spoke for Mr. Borthwick; and on the show of hands, three-fourths of the meeting held up theirs for that gentleman, about one half for Lord Marcus, and but few for Mr. Rushout. At the close of the poll the numbers were—Hill, 188; Borthwick, 161; Rushout, 137. Lord Hill had 108 plumpers; Borthwick, 42; and Rushout, 34. After the canvass, but prior to the election, Lord Marcus was made a privy councillor, and appointed to the office of Comptroller of the Royal Household.
1847—July—(General Election.)—Mr. Borthwick retired from the representation, and his place was taken by Sir Henry Willoughby, a moderate Conservative and free trader. A third candidate came into field, late in the day, in the person of Sir Ralph Howard, formerly member for Wicklow, who professed Radical views. At the nomination, Lord Marcus Hill and Sir Ralph Howard had the show of hands. The polling was a very quiet affair, and at the close of the struggle Lord Marcus Hill was found to have 195 votes; Sir Henry Willoughby, 172; and Sir Ralph Howard, 131.
DROITWICH.
Droitwich was formerly one of the closest of Whig boroughs, and was entirely under the influence of the Foley family. To the return for the first election recorded below, the names of nineteen persons are appended in the books of the Droitwich Corporation; and at a much more recent date, ten persons returned two members to Parliament. The present constituency of the borough numbers 368.
1802—July—(General Election.)—Sir Edward Winnington, Bart., and the Hon. Andrew Foley, reëlected.
1805—February—(Vacancy on the death of Sir Edw. Winnington.)—Thomas Foley, Esq., son of the Hon. Andrew Foley, elected.
1806—November—(General Election.)—The Hon. Andrew Foley, and Lieutenant Colonel Foley.