Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth (UK Parliament constituency)

Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth was a parliamentary constituency centred on the towns of Radcliffe and Farnworth in Lancashire. It returned one Member of Parliament (MP) to the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, elected by the first past the post system.

Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth
Former constituency
for the House of Commons
1885–1918
Number of membersone
Replaced byHeywood and Radcliffe, Farnworth
Created fromSouth East Lancashire

History

This area had previously been represented as part of South East Lancashire division. Under the Redistribution of Seats Act 1885, the constituency was created for the 1885 general election and was abolished for the 1918 general election.

Boundaries

The South East Lancashire, Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth Division was defined in the 1885 legislation as consisting of the parishes of Farnworth, Kearsley, Little Hulton and Pilkington (including Whitefield and Unsworth) and the parish of Radcliffe except the area in the Municipal Borough of Bury.[1][2]

At the next redistribution of seats in 1918, the constituency was split between two new seats: Farnworth (which included Little Hulton and Kearsley) and Heywood and Radcliffe (which took in Unsworth and Whitefield).[3]

Members of Parliament
ElectionMemberParty
1885 Robert Leake Liberal
1895 John James Mellor Conservative
1900 Theodore Taylor Liberal
1918 constituency abolished: see Heywood and Radcliffe & Farnworth

Elections
Decades:

Elections in the 1880s
General election 1885: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Robert Leake 5,092 52.7 N/A
Conservative William Hulton 4,579 47.3 N/A
Majority 513 5.4 N/A
Turnout 9,671 92.7 N/A
Registered electors 10,433
Liberal win (new seat)
General election 1886: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth [4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Robert Leake 4,695 50.7 -2.0
Conservative Frederick Milner 4,559 49.3 +2.0
Majority 136 1.4 -4.0
Turnout 9,254 88.7 -4.0
Registered electors 10,433
Liberal hold Swing -2.0

Elections in the 1890s
Mellor
General election 1892: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Robert Leake 4,999 50.5 -0.2
Conservative John James Mellor 4,904 49.5 +0.2
Majority 95 1.0 -0.4
Turnout 9,903 92.7 +4.0
Registered electors 10,686
Liberal hold Swing -0.2
Pollard
General election 1895: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Conservative John James Mellor 5,523 52.9 +3.4
Liberal George Pollard 4,923 47.1 -3.4
Majority 600 5.8 N/A
Turnout 10,446 92.8 +0.1
Registered electors 11,259
Conservative gain from Liberal Swing +3.4

Elections in the 1900s
Taylor
General election 1900: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Theodore Taylor 5,497 50.3 +3.2
Conservative J.C. Cross 5,437 49.7 -3.2
Majority 60 0.6 N/A
Turnout 10,834 89.3 -3.5
Registered electors 12,244
Liberal gain from Conservative Swing +3.2
General election 1906: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Theodore Taylor 6,719 56.8 +6.5
Conservative S. Musgrave 5,117 43.2 -6.5
Majority 1,602 13.6 +13.0
Turnout 11,836 90.0 +0.7
Registered electors 13,151
Liberal hold Swing +6.5

Elections in the 1910s
General election January 1910: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Theodore Taylor 7,367 55.8 -1.0
Conservative Edward White 5,827 44.2 +1.0
Majority 1,540 11.6 -2.0
Turnout 93.9 +3.9
Registered electors 14,046
Liberal hold Swing -1.0
General election December 1910: Radcliffe-cum-Farnworth[4]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Liberal Theodore Taylor 6,721 53.1 -2.7
Conservative Edward Bagley 5,937 46.9 +2.7
Majority 784 6.2 -5.4
Turnout 12,658 90.1 -3.8
Registered electors 14,046
Liberal hold Swing -2.7

General Election 1914/15:

Another General Election was required to take place before the end of 1915. The political parties had been making preparations for an election to take place and by the July 1914, the following candidates had been selected;

gollark: Also, ye olden CPUs had less efficient transistors but fewer of them, and did not have to continuously run a billion inefficient Java programs or something.
gollark: No, it's improving in some ways but worsening in others.
gollark: Practical clock frequencies might actually be going *down*.
gollark: Yes, we are hitting downscaling issues.
gollark: Also, batteries were worse, and so was processor energy efficiency IIRC.

References
  1. 1885 c.23 sch.7
  2. Boundary Commissioners for England and Wales (1885). "South East Lancashire, New Divisions of County (Map)". Report of the Boundary Commissioners for England and Wales. londonancestor.com. Retrieved 2008-09-28.
  3. F A Youngs Jr., Guide to the Local Administrative Units of England, Vol. II: Northern England, London, 1991
  4. British Parliamentary Election Results 1885-1918, FWS Craig

Sources
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.