A History of Parliamentary Elections and Electioneering in the Old Days: Showing the State of Political Parties and Party Warfare at the Hustings and in the House of Commons from the Stuarts to Queen VictoriaGrego, Joseph
History
A History of Parliamentary Elections and Electioneering in the Old Days: Showing the State of Political Parties and Party Warfare at the Hustings and in the House of Commons from the Stuarts to Queen Victoria
Grego, Joseph
Great Britain -- Politics and government; Great Britain. Parliament -- Election
“Admiral Hood tells me he left Lord Nugent at Bath, disposed
to come to town if a vote at Westminster should be material. I
think from the state of the poll it may be very much so. There
is no doubt, I believe, of final success on a scrutiny, if we
are driven to it; but it is a great object to us to carry the
return for both in the first instance, and on every account
as great an object to Fox to prevent it. It is uncertain
how long the poll will continue, but pretty clear it cannot
be over till after Monday. If you will have the goodness to
state these circumstances to Lord Nugent, and encourage his
good designs, we shall be very much obliged to you; and still
more, should neither health nor particular engagements detain
you, if, besides prevailing upon him, you could give your own
personal assistance. At all events I hope you will forgive
my troubling you, and allow for the importunity of a hardened
electioneerer.... Mainwaring and Wilkes are considerably ahead
in Middlesex, and Lord Grimston has come in, instead of Halsey,
for Herts.”
Pitt further alludes to W. W. Grenville, his cousin, “the kissing young
gentleman” who visited Cowper in the course of his canvass, “I have
not yet heard the event of Bucks, but William was safe, and, by the
first day’s poll, Aubrey’s prospect seems very good.” John Aubrey was
returned second, and William Grenville was at the head of the poll.
Fox’s prospects were gradually improved as concerned his own seat at
Westminster; but the slaughter amongst his followers was altogether
unexampled, the muster-roll of “Fox’s Martyrs” grew ominously longer as
each election was determined. On the twenty-third day of the polling at
Covent Garden the Whig chief passed Sir Cecil Wray, and continued to
advance until the fortieth, when, by law, the contest closed. On the
17th of May, the poll stood--Lord Hood, 6,694; Fox, 6,237; Sir Cecil
Wray, 5,998.
“There was,” writes Earl Stanhope, “strong reason, however,
to suspect many fraudulent practices in the previous days,
since it seemed clear that the total number of votes recorded
was considerably beyond the number of persons entitled
to the franchise. For this reason Sir Cecil Wray at once
demanded a scrutiny, and the High Bailiff--illegally, as Fox
contended--granted the request. But further still, the High
Bailiff, Mr. Corbett, who was no friend to Fox, refused to
make any legal return until this scrutiny should be decided.
Thus Westminster was left for the present destitute of
Representatives, and Fox would have been without a seat in the
new Parliament but for the friendship of Sir Thomas Dundas,
through which he had been already returned the member for the
close boroughs of Kirkwall.”
Gallant Whig poetasters were rapturous in their praises of the fair
canvassers who were making such havoc in the Tory ranks.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account