Electoral results for the Division of Echuca
This is a list of electoral results for the Division of Echuca in Australian federal elections from the division's creation in 1901 until its abolition in 1937.
Members
Member | Party | Term | |
---|---|---|---|
James McColl | Protectionist | 1901–1904 | |
Free Trade/Anti-Socialist | 1904–1906 | ||
Albert Palmer | Anti-Socialist | 1906–1909 | |
Commonwealth Liberal | 1909–1917 | ||
Nationalist | 1917–1919 | ||
William Hill | Victorian Farmers' Union/Country | 1919–1934 | |
John McEwen | Country | 1934–1937 |
Election results
Elections in the 1930s
1934
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Labor | William Hartshorne | 12,407 | 29.2 | +29.2 | |
Country | John McEwen | 11,371 | 26.7 | +31.1 | |
Country | Galloway Stewart | 10,075 | 23.7 | +23.7 | |
Country | William Moss | 8,663 | 20.4 | +20.4 | |
Total formal votes | 42,516 | 97.4 | |||
Informal votes | 1,132 | 2.6 | |||
Turnout | 43,648 | 95.1 | |||
Two-party-preferred result | |||||
Country | John McEwen | 27,599 | 64.9 | ||
Country | Galloway Stewart | 14,917 | 35.1 | ||
Country hold | Swing | ||||
1931
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country | William Hill | 16,116 | 39.7 | -14.0 | |
Independent Country | Galloway Stewart | 14,278 | 35.2 | +35.2 | |
Independent Country | William Moss | 8,020 | 19.8 | +19.8 | |
Independent UAP | John Fitzpatrick | 2,168 | 5.3 | +5.3 | |
Total formal votes | 40,582 | 96.7 | |||
Informal votes | 1,376 | 3.3 | |||
Turnout | 41,958 | 95.6 | |||
Two-party-preferred result | |||||
Country | William Hill | 21,278 | 52.4 | -1.3 | |
Independent | Galloway Stewart | 19,304 | 47.6 | +47.6 | |
Country hold | Swing | -1.3 | |||
Elections in the 1920s
1929
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country | William Hill | 21,750 | 53.7 | -6.3 | |
Labor | Edward Hill | 18,734 | 46.3 | +46.3 | |
Total formal votes | 40,484 | 98.3 | |||
Informal votes | 712 | 1.7 | |||
Turnout | 41,196 | 96.1 | |||
Country hold | Swing | -6.3 | |||
1928
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country | William Hill | 23,265 | 60.0 | -5.3 | |
Country Progressive | Frederick Churches | 15,486 | 40.0 | +40.0 | |
Total formal votes | 38,751 | 96.8 | |||
Informal votes | 1,263 | 3.2 | |||
Turnout | 40,014 | 94.4 | |||
Country hold | Swing | -5.3 | |||
1925
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country | William Hill | 25,321 | 65.3 | -5.0 | |
Labor | Patrick O'Hanlon | 13,451 | 34.7 | +34.7 | |
Total formal votes | 38,772 | 98.5 | |||
Informal votes | 576 | 1.5 | |||
Turnout | 39,348 | 93.4 | |||
Country hold | Swing | -5.0 | |||
1922
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country | William Hill | 13,991 | 70.3 | +27.0 | |
Nationalist | James Stewart | 5,914 | 29.7 | -3.4 | |
Total formal votes | 19,905 | 95.9 | |||
Informal votes | 854 | 4.1 | |||
Turnout | 20,759 | 52.2 | |||
Country hold | Swing | +27.0 | |||
Elections in the 1910s
1919
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Victorian Farmers | William Hill | 11,411 | 43.3 | +43.3 | |
Nationalist | James Stewart | 8,734 | 33.1 | -27.6 | |
Labor | Edward Russell | 6,218 | 23.6 | -15.7 | |
Total formal votes | 26,363 | 96.9 | |||
Informal votes | 852 | 3.1 | |||
Turnout | 27,215 | 76.9 | |||
Two-party-preferred result | |||||
Victorian Farmers | William Hill | 16,878 | 64.0 | +64.0 | |
Nationalist | James Stewart | 9,485 | 36.0 | -24.7 | |
Victorian Farmers hold | Swing | +24.7 | |||
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Victorian Farmers | William Hill | 13,800 | 68.8 | +68.8 | |
Nationalist | Frederick Purcell | 4,848 | 24.2 | -36.5 | |
Ind. Nationalist | Edwin Purbrick | 1,418 | 7.1 | +7.1 | |
Total formal votes | 20,066 | 97.2 | |||
Informal votes | 572 | 2.8 | |||
Turnout | 20,638 | 59.5 | |||
Two-party-preferred result | |||||
Victorian Farmers | William Hill | 72.3 | +72.3 | ||
Nationalist | Frederick Purcell | 27.7 | -33.0 | ||
Victorian Farmers gain from Nationalist | Swing | +33.0 |
1917
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nationalist | Albert Palmer | 17,585 | 60.7 | +2.5 | |
Labor | Thomas Power | 11,371 | 39.3 | -2.5 | |
Total formal votes | 28,956 | 98.1 | |||
Informal votes | 554 | 1.9 | |||
Turnout | 29,510 | 83.3 | |||
Nationalist hold | Swing | +2.5 | |||
1914
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | Albert Palmer | 16,805 | 58.2 | +0.6 | |
Labor | James Gourley | 12,053 | 41.8 | +6.1 | |
Total formal votes | 28,858 | 98.0 | |||
Informal votes | 589 | 2.0 | |||
Turnout | 29,447 | 80.7 | |||
Liberal hold | Swing | -2.8 | |||
1913
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | Albert Palmer | 15,618 | 57.6 | +14.0 | |
Labor | Chris Fitzgerald | 9,692 | 35.7 | +25.0 | |
Independent | Egbert England | 1,811 | 6.7 | +6.7 | |
Total formal votes | 27,121 | 97.4 | |||
Informal votes | 734 | 2.6 | |||
Turnout | 27,885 | 74.0 | |||
Liberal hold | Swing | +10.6 | |||
1910
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | Albert Palmer | 7,881 | 43.7 | -56.3 | |
Independent | William Orr | 7,757 | 43.0 | +43.0 | |
Independent | Anthony O'Dwyer | 1,188 | 6.6 | +6.6 | |
Independent Liberal | William Everard | 1,052 | 5.8 | +5.8 | |
Independent Liberal | John Davies | 168 | 0.9 | +0.9 | |
Total formal votes | 18,046 | 97.4 | |||
Informal votes | 476 | 2.6 | |||
Turnout | 18,522 | 62.4 | |||
Liberal hold | Swing | -56.3 | |||
Elections in the 1900s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anti-Socialist | Albert Palmer | 11,618 | 52.6 | +2.5 | |
Protectionist | Thomas Kennedy | 10,481 | 47.4 | -2.5 | |
Total formal votes | 22,099 | 99.0 | |||
Informal votes | 230 | 1.0 | |||
Turnout | 22,329 | 71.5 | |||
Anti-Socialist hold | Swing | +2.5 | |||
1906
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anti-Socialist | Albert Palmer | 7,656 | 50.1 | +13.4 | |
Protectionist | Thomas Kennedy | 7,624 | 49.9 | -13.4 | |
Total formal votes | 15,280 | 94.6 | |||
Informal votes | 867 | 5.4 | |||
Turnout | 16,147 | 55.3 | |||
Anti-Socialist gain from Protectionist | Swing | +13.4 |
1903
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Protectionist | James McColl | 5,511 | 63.3 | +9.3 | |
Free Trade | Henry Williams | 3,188 | 36.7 | -9.3 | |
Total formal votes | 8,699 | 97.2 | |||
Informal votes | 254 | 2.8 | |||
Turnout | 8,953 | 44.3 | |||
Protectionist hold | Swing | +9.3 | |||
1901
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Protectionist | James McColl | 3,632 | 54.0 | +54.0 | |
Free Trade | Max Hirsch | 3,091 | 46.0 | +46.0 | |
Total formal votes | 6,723 | 99.3 | |||
Informal votes | 48 | 0.7 | |||
Turnout | 6,771 | 59.6 | |||
Protectionist win | (new seat) | ||||
gollark: I offloaded my imagination to GPT-Neo last week.
gollark: Other compilers, and starting interpreted programs.
gollark: Kotlin contains OOP and bad Java tooling.
gollark: Lua is very elegant but annoying sometimes and libraries.
gollark: Rust's really nice but I don't actually want to care about lifetimes all the time, and the compiler is slow. Python is very fast for me to prototype with but not very robust. JS is the same but slightly worse, and I only use it because web platform. ML-family things could be cool but have bad tooling and libraries.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.