Boston (UK Parliament constituency)
Boston was a parliamentary borough in Lincolnshire, which elected two Members of Parliament (MPs) to the House of Commons from 1547 until 1885, and then one member from 1885 until 1918, when the constituency was abolished.
Boston | |
---|---|
Former Borough constituency for the House of Commons | |
1547–1918 | |
Number of members | two (1547-1885); one (1885-1918) |
Replaced by | Holland with Boston |
Created from | Lincolnshire |
1352–1353s | |
Number of members | two |
Replaced by | Lincolnshire |
History
Boston first elected Members of Parliament in 1352-1353, but after that the right lapsed and was not revived again until the reign of Edward VI. The borough consisted of most of the town of Boston, a port and market town on the River Witham which had overgrown its original boundaries as the river had been cleared of silt and its trade developed. In 1831, the population of the borough was 11,240, contained 2,631 houses.
The right to vote belonged to the Mayor, aldermen, members of the common council and all resident freemen of the borough who paid scot and lot. This gave Boston a relatively substantial electorate for the period, 927 votes being cast in 1826 and 565 in 1831. The freedom was generally obtained either by birth (being the son of an existing freemen) or servitude (completing an apprenticeship in the town), but could also be conferred as an honorary status, and Boston charged a consistently escalating sum to its Parliamentary candidates who wanted to be admitted as freemen - set at £20 in 1700, it was raised to £50 in 1719, to £100 in 1790 and to £135 in 1800.
Major local landowners had some influence over election outcomes through deference of the voters - the Duke of Ancaster, for example, was generally allowed to choose one of the members up to the end of the 18th century - but in the last few years before the Reform Act at least one of the two members seems consistently to have been the free choice of the people of the town. However, bribery was rife in some of the early 19th-century elections, and the election of Thomas Fydell in 1802 was overturned when it was discovered that not only had he been paying electors five guineas for a vote, but that many of these were not qualified to vote anyway. (They were freemen not resident in the borough, whose names had been fraudulently entered as paying the poor rate at houses where they did not live, so as to appear eligible.)
Boston retained both its MPs under the Reform Act, but its boundaries were extended slightly, taking in more of the town and part of the neighbouring parish of Skirbeck. This increased the population of the borough to 12,818, although only 869 of these were eligible to vote in the first election after Reform; this had grown to just over 1,000 by the time of the Second Reform Act, when the widening of the franchise more than doubled it, over 2,500 electors being registered for the 1868 general election which followed. But by the 1870s, electoral corruption had again become a problem in Boston. The result of the 1874 election was overturned for bribery, and a Royal Commission set up to investigate; when the next general election, in 1880, had to be declared void for the same reasons, Boston's representation was suspended for the remainder of the Parliament.
Boston had its right to vote restored for the 1885 election, but the boundary changes which came into effect at the same time slightly reduced the size of the borough and allowed it only one MP. The constituency at this period was mainly middle-class but non-conformists had a strong presence, enabling the Liberals to be competitive where they might otherwise have struggled. The deciding factor which may have tilted the constituency towards the Conservatives in its final years may have been the benefit that the local fisherman saw in Tariff Reform.
The borough was abolished with effect from the general election of 1918, Boston being included in the new Holland with Boston county division.
Members of Parliament
1547-1640
Year | First member | Second member |
---|---|---|
1547 | John Wendon | William Naunton[1] |
1553 (Mar) | Leonard Irby | George Foster [1] |
1553 (Oct) | Francis Allen | George Foster [1] |
1554 (Apr) | Leonard Irby | George Foster [1] |
1554 (Nov) | Leonard Irby | George Foster [1] |
1555 | Leonard Irby | George Foster [1] |
1558 | Leonard Irby | George Foster [1] |
1559 (Jan) | Robert Carr | Leonard Irby [2] |
1562/3 | Thomas Heneage, sat for Lincolnshire, replaced Jan 1563 by John Tamworth | Leonard Irby [2] |
1571 | Christopher Hatton, sat for Higham Ferrers, replaced 1571 by Thomas Lyfield | Leonard Irby [2] |
1572 | Stephen Thymbleby | William Dodington [2] |
1584 (Nov) | Nicholas Gorges | Vincent Skinner [2] |
1586 (Oct) | Vincent Skinner | Richard Stevenson [2] |
1588/9 | Vincent Skinner | Anthony Irby [2] |
1593 | Anthony Irby | Richard Stevenson [2] |
1597 (Sep) | Anthony Irby | Richard Stevenson [2] |
1601 (Oct) | Anthony Irby | Henry Capell [2] |
1604 | Anthony Irby | Francis Bullingham |
1614 | Anthony Irby | Leonard Bawtree |
1621 | Anthony Irby | Sir Thomas Cheek, sat for Harwich replaced by Sir William Airmine |
1624 | William Boswell | Sir Clement Cotterell, sat for Grantham replaced by Sir William Airmine |
1625 | Sir Edward Barkham | William Boswell |
1626 | Sir Edward Barkham | Richard Oakley |
1628 | Richard Bellingham | Richard Oakley, unseated after petition replaced by Anthony Irby |
1629–1640 | No Parliaments summoned | |
1640-1880
1885-1918
Election | Member | Party | |
---|---|---|---|
1885 | Representation restored and reduced to one Member | ||
1885 | William Ingram | Liberal | |
1886 | Henry Farmer-Atkinson | Conservative | |
1892 | Sir William Ingram | Liberal | |
1895 | William Garfit | Conservative | |
1906 | George Faber | Liberal | |
Jan. 1910 | Charles Harvey Dixon | Conservative | |
1918 | constituency abolished |
Elections
1830s – 1840s – 1850s – 1860s – 1870s – 1880s – 1890s – 1900s – 1910s |
Elections in the 1830s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tory | Neil Malcolm | 337 | 41.2 | ||
Radical | John Wilks | 294 | 36.0 | ||
Whig | Charles Keightley Tunnard | 186 | 22.8 | ||
Turnout | 503 | ||||
Majority | 43 | 5.2 | |||
Tory hold | Swing | ||||
Majority | 108 | 13.2 | N/A | ||
Radical gain from Whig | Swing | ||||
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Whig | Gilbert Heathcote | 265 | 46.9 | +24.1 | |
Radical | John Wilks | 249 | 44.1 | +8.1 | |
Tory | Neil Malcolm | 51 | 9.0 | −32.2 | |
Turnout | 354 | ||||
Majority | 16 | 2.8 | N/A | ||
Whig gain from Tory | Swing | +20.1 | |||
Majority | 198 | 35.1 | +21.9 | ||
Radical hold | Swing | +12.1 |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Radical | John Wilks | 509 | 39.3 | −4.8 | |
Whig | Benjamin Handley | 433 | 33.4 | −13.5 | |
Tory | John Studholme Brownrigg | 353 | 27.3 | +18.3 | |
Turnout | 788 | 90.7 | |||
Registered electors | 869 | ||||
Majority | 76 | 5.9 | −29.2 | ||
Radical hold | Swing | −7.0 | |||
Majority | 80 | 6.1 | +3.3 | ||
Whig hold | Swing | −11.3 |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | John Studholme Brownrigg | 532 | 44.0 | +16.7 | |
Radical | John Wilks | 356 | 29.4 | −9.9 | |
Whig | Benjamin Handley | 321 | 26.6 | −6.8 | |
Turnout | 813 | 86.7 | −4.0 | ||
Registered electors | 938 | ||||
Majority | 176 | 14.6 | N/A | ||
Conservative gain from Whig | Swing | +10.1 | |||
Majority | 35 | 2.9 | −3.0 | ||
Radical hold | Swing | −3.3 |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | John Studholme Brownrigg | 459 | 32.6 | +10.6 | |
Whig | James Duke | 442 | 31.4 | +18.1 | |
Whig | Benjamin Handley | 350 | 24.9 | +11.6 | |
Conservative | William Rickford Collett | 156 | 11.1 | −10.9 | |
Turnout | 839 | 87.9 | +1.2 | ||
Registered electors | 955 | ||||
Majority | 17 | 1.2 | −13.4 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | −2.1 | |||
Majority | 286 | 20.3 | N/A | ||
Whig gain from Radical | Swing | +9.1 | |||
Elections in the 1840s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | John Studholme Brownrigg | 527 | 34.9 | +2.3 | |
Whig | James Duke | 515 | 34.2 | −22.1 | |
Conservative | Charles Alexander Wood | 466 | 30.9 | +19.8 | |
Turnout | 920 | 80.3 | −7.6 | ||
Registered electors | 1,146 | ||||
Majority | 12 | 0.8 | −0.4 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | +6.7 | |||
Majority | 49 | 3.3 | −17.0 | ||
Whig hold | Swing | −22.1 |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Whig | James Duke | 590 | 42.3 | +8.1 | |
Conservative | Benjamin Bond Cabbell | 466 | 33.4 | −32.4 | |
Radical | David William Wire | 339 | 24.3 | New | |
Turnout | 698 (est) | 64.4 (est) | −15.9 | ||
Registered electors | 1,083 | ||||
Majority | 124 | 8.9 | +5.6 | ||
Whig hold | Swing | +12.2 | |||
Majority | 127 | 9.1 | +8.3 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | −18.2 |
Duke resigned by accepting the office of Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds in order to contest a by-election at City of London.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Whig | Dudley Pelham | 422 | 56.8 | +14.5 | |
Radical | David William Wire | 321 | 43.2 | +18.9 | |
Majority | 101 | 13.6 | +4.7 | ||
Turnout | 743 | 77.2 | +12.8 | ||
Registered electors | 963 | ||||
Whig hold | Swing | −2.2 |
Elections in the 1850s
Pelham's death caused a by-election.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | James William Freshfield | 368 | 59.5 | +26.1 | |
Radical | David William Wire[25][26][27] | 251 | 40.5 | +16.2 | |
Majority | 117 | 19.0 | +9.9 | ||
Turnout | 619 | 64.0 | −0.4 | ||
Registered electors | 967 | ||||
Conservative gain from Whig | Swing | +5.0 | |||
Wire retired from the contest.[26]
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Whig | Gilbert Heathcote | 547 | 33.4 | N/A | |
Conservative | Benjamin Bond Cabbell | 490 | 29.9 | −3.5 | |
Whig | John Alexander Hankey[28][29] | 437 | 26.6 | N/A | |
Whig | Thomson Hankey[30] | 148 | 9.0 | N/A | |
Peelite | William Henry Adams | 18 | 1.1 | New | |
Turnout | 820 (est) | 83.1 (est) | +18.7 | ||
Registered electors | 987 | ||||
Majority | 57 | 3.5 | −5.4 | ||
Whig hold | Swing | N/A | |||
Majority | 53 | 3.3 | −5.8 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | N/A |
Heathcote resigned to contest the 1856 by-election at Rutland.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Radical | Herbert Ingram | 521 | 63.8 | N/A | |
Peelite | William Henry Adams | 296 | 36.2 | +35.1 | |
Majority | 225 | 27.6 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 817 | 81.5 | −1.6 | ||
Registered electors | 1,003 | ||||
Radical gain from Whig | Swing | N/A | |||
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Radical | Herbert Ingram | Unopposed | |||
Peelite | William Henry Adams | Unopposed | |||
Registered electors | 1,057 | ||||
Radical gain from Whig | |||||
Peelite hold |
Herbert's appointment as Recorder of Derby required a by-election.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peelite | William Henry Adams | Unopposed | |||
Peelite hold |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | Herbert Ingram | 621 | 37.3 | N/A | |
Liberal | Meaburn Staniland | 593 | 35.6 | N/A | |
Conservative | John Hardwick Hollway[31] | 452 | 27.1 | N/A | |
Majority | 141 | 8.5 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 833 (est) | 77.3 (est) | N/A | ||
Registered electors | 1,078 | ||||
Liberal hold | Swing | N/A | |||
Liberal gain from Conservative | Swing | N/A | |||
Elections in the 1860s
Ingram's death caused a by-election.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | John Malcolm | 533 | 63.8 | +36.7 | |
Liberal | George Parker Tuxford[32] | 303 | 36.2 | −36.7 | |
Majority | 230 | 27.6 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 836 | 82.0 | +4.7 | ||
Registered electors | 1,019 | ||||
Conservative gain from Liberal | Swing | +36.7 | |||
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | John Malcolm | 646 | 41.3 | +14.2 | |
Liberal | Thomas Parry* | 465 | 29.7 | −7.6 | |
Liberal | Meaburn Staniland | 453 | 29.0 | −6.6 | |
Majority | 181 | 11.6 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 782 (est) | 71.7 (est) | −5.6 | ||
Registered electors | 1,090 | ||||
Conservative gain from Liberal | Swing | +14.2 | |||
Liberal hold | Swing | −7.1 |
* On petition, Parry's election was declared void on grounds of bribery and Staniland was duly elected in his place.[33]
Staniland then resigned, causing a by-election.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | Thomas Parry | Unopposed | |||
Liberal hold |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | John Malcolm | 1,306 | 29.8 | +9.1 | |
Conservative | Thomas Collins | 1,119 | 25.5 | +4.8 | |
Liberal | Meaburn Staniland | 1,029 | 23.5 | −5.5 | |
Liberal | Thomas Mason Jones[34][35] | 926 | 21.1 | −8.6 | |
Majority | 90 | 2.0 | −9.6 | ||
Turnout | 2,190 (est) | 86.7 (est) | +15.0 | ||
Registered electors | 2,527 | ||||
Conservative hold | Swing | +8.9 | |||
Conservative gain from Liberal | Swing | +5.2 | |||
Elections in the 1870s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | William Ingram | 1,572 | 37.1 | +13.6 | |
Conservative | John Malcolm | 996 | 23.5 | −6.3 | |
Liberal | Thomas Parry | 994* | 23.4 | +2.3 | |
Conservative | Thomas Collins | 679 | 16.0 | −9.5 | |
Turnout | 2,297 (est) | 86.6 (est) | −0.1 | ||
Registered electors | 2,651 | ||||
Majority | 576 | 13.6 | N/A | ||
Liberal gain from Conservative | Swing | +11.6 | |||
Majority | 2 | 0.1 | −1.9 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | −4.3 |
* An election petition found extensive bribery relating to Parry's votes, which on the initial count totalled 1,347. However, 353 of these were struck off - and further may have been taken if the process had not stopped on 8 June 1874 - leading to Malcolm's election instead. A Royal Commission was established to investigate the borough.[36] A separate petition against Ingram was dropped.
In 1878, Malcolm then resigned in order to contest a by-election in Argyllshire, leading to a by-election in Boston.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | Thomas Garfit | Unopposed | |||
Conservative hold |
Elections in the 1880s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | Thomas Garfit | 1,412 | 26.6 | +3.1 | |
Liberal | William Ingram | 1,367 | 25.7 | −11.4 | |
Conservative | George Fydell Rowley[37] | 1,350 | 25.4 | +9.4 | |
Liberal | Sydney Buxton | 1,182 | 22.3 | −1.1 | |
Turnout | 2,656 (est) | 85.8 (est) | −0.8 | ||
Registered electors | 3,094 | ||||
Majority | 45 | 0.9 | +0.8 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | +2.1 | |||
Majority | 17 | 0.3 | −13.3 | ||
Liberal hold | Swing | −10.4 |
Bribery convictions led to the Boston writ being suspended and the 1880 result being voided.[38] The seat was again reconstituted in 1885, when it was reduced to one member.
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | William Ingram | 1,295 | 56.5 | +8.5 | |
Conservative | Nehemiah Learoyd | 996 | 43.5 | −8.5 | |
Majority | 299 | 13.0 | +12.7 | ||
Turnout | 2,291 | 84.3 | −1.5 (est) | ||
Registered electors | 2,718 | ||||
Liberal hold | Swing | +8.5 |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | Henry Atkinson | 1,192 | 51.0 | +7.5 | |
Liberal | William Ingram | 1,144 | 49.0 | -7.5 | |
Majority | 48 | 2.0 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 2,336 | 85.9 | +1.6 | ||
Registered electors | 2,718 | ||||
Conservative gain from Liberal | Swing | +7.5 | |||
Elections in the 1890s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | William Ingram | 1,355 | 51.2 | +2.2 | |
Conservative | Gilbert Heathcote-Drummond-Willoughby | 1,293 | 48.8 | -2.2 | |
Majority | 62 | 2.4 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 2,648 | 86.7 | +0.8 | ||
Registered electors | 3,054 | ||||
Liberal gain from Conservative | Swing | +2.2 | |||
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | William Garfit | 1,633 | 56.9 | +8.1 | |
Liberal | William Ingram | 1,237 | 43.1 | -8.1 | |
Majority | 396 | 13.8 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 2,870 | 87.0 | +0.3 | ||
Registered electors | 3,299 | ||||
Conservative gain from Liberal | Swing | +8.1 | |||
Elections in the 1900s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | William Garfit | 1,710 | 59.7 | +2.8 | |
Liberal | William Turner Simonds | 1,155 | 40.3 | -2.8 | |
Majority | 555 | 19.4 | +5.6 | ||
Turnout | 2,865 | 83.1 | -3.9 | ||
Registered electors | 3,448 | ||||
Conservative hold | Swing | +2.8 |
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | George Faber | 1,801 | 51.5 | +11.2 | |
Conservative | William Garfit | 1,694 | 48.5 | -11.2 | |
Majority | 107 | 3.0 | N/A | ||
Turnout | 3,495 | 89.7 | +6.6 | ||
Registered electors | 3,896 | ||||
Liberal gain from Conservative | Swing | +11.2 | |||
Elections in the 1910s
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | Charles Harvey Dixon | 1,975 | 53.5 | +5.0 | |
Liberal | Henry Lunn | 1,715 | 46.5 | -5.0 | |
Majority | 260 | 7.0 | 10.0 | ||
Turnout | 3,690 | 91.4 | +1.7 | ||
Conservative gain from Liberal | Swing | +5.0 | |||
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative | Charles Harvey Dixon | 1,875 | 52.3 | -1.2 | |
Liberal | Fitzroy Hemphill | 1,712 | 47.7 | +1.2 | |
Majority | 163 | 4.6 | -2.4 | ||
Turnout | 3,587 | 88.9 | -2.5 | ||
Conservative hold | Swing | -1.2 |
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 July 1914, the following candidates had been selected;
- Unionist: Charles Harvey Dixon
- Liberal: F. Stapleton Hiley
References
- "History of Parliament". Retrieved 2011-09-30.
- "History of Parliament". Retrieved 2011-09-30.
- Stooks Smith, Henry. (1973) [1844-1850]. Craig, F. W. S. (ed.). The Parliaments of England (2nd ed.). Chichester: Parliamentary Research Services. pp. 196–198. ISBN 0-900178-13-2.
- Mosse, Richard Bartholomew (1838). The Parliamentary Guide: a concise history of the Members of both Houses, etc. p. 175. Retrieved 16 May 2019 – via Google Books.
- "Sheffield Independent". 22 December 1832. p. 3. Retrieved 8 September 2019 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- Escott, Margaret (2009). "WILKS, John I (c.1776–1854), of 3 Finsbury Square, London". The History of Parliament. Retrieved 8 September 2019.
- Royle, Edward (1993). Ellerby, William; Pritchett, James Pigott (eds.). A History of the Nonconformist Churches of York. York: University of York. p. 75. ISBN 0-903857-58-8. Retrieved 8 September 2019 – via Google Books.
- Mosse, Richard B. (1838). The Parliamentary Guide: a concise history of the Members of both Houses, etc.
- The Assembled Commons or Parliamentary Biographer: 1838. 1838.
- Dod, Charles Roger; Dod, Robert Phipps (1847). Dod's Parliamentary Companion, Volume 15. Dod's Parliamentary Companion. p. 159.
- Ollivier, John (2007). "Alphabetical List of the House of Commons". Ollivier's parliamentary and political director. p. 37. Retrieved 15 April 2018.
- "1837 Election". London Daily News. 25 July 1849. p. 5. Retrieved 15 April 2018.
- Keyes, Michael (2011). Funding the Nation: Money and Nationalist Politics in Nineteenth-century Ireland. Gill & Macmillan. p. 88. ISBN 9780717151974. Retrieved 15 April 2018.
- Gash, Norman (2013). Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830–1850. Faber & Faber. p. 443. ISBN 9780571302901.
- "Boston Election". South Eastern Gazette. 31 July 1849. p. 8. Retrieved 15 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Elections". Greenock Advertiser. 7 August 1849. pp. 1–2. Retrieved 15 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Election Movements". Shipping and Mercantile Gazette. 6 July 1852. p. 3. Retrieved 15 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Boston". The Advocate. 27 February 1856. p. 3. Retrieved 16 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- Dod, Charles Roger; Dod, Robert Phipps (1858). Dod's Parliamentary Companion. Dod's Parliamentary Companion.
- Hewitt, Martin (2014). "The Foundations of the Mid-Victorian Campaign". The Dawn of the Cheap Press in Victorian Britain: The End of the 'Taxes on Knowledge', 1849–1869. London: Bloomsbury. p. 19. ISBN 9781472514561. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
- On petition, Parry's election was declared void and Staniland duly elected after scrutiny of the votes
- At the 1874 election, both Liberal candidates, Ingram and Thomas Parry, were initially declared elected but on petition Parry's election was declared void. After scrutiny 353 of Parry's 1,347 votes were struck off for bribery, and Malcolm, who had originally finished third, was declared elected. Following this election a Royal Commission was appointed to investigate the conduct of elections in Boston
- Harratt, Simon; Salmon, Philip (2009). "Boston". The History of Parliament. Retrieved 8 September 2019.
- Craig, F. W. S., ed. (1977). British Parliamentary Election Results 1832-1885 (e-book) (1st ed.). London: Macmillan Press. ISBN 978-1-349-02349-3.
- "Boston Election". London Daily News. 19 April 1851. p. 5. Retrieved 16 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Boston Election". Dublin Evening Mail. 23 April 1851. p. 4. Retrieved 16 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Boston Election". Yorkshire Gazette. 26 April 1851. p. 2. Retrieved 16 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Bolton". Morning Post. 9 July 1852. p. 3. Retrieved 17 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "The Elections". London Evening Standard. 2 July 1852. pp. 3–4. Retrieved 17 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- Parry, J. P. (1986). "Disunity explicit, 1874–5". Democracy & Religion: Gladstone and the Liberal Party, 1867–1875. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 415. ISBN 0521309484.
- "Local News". Lincolnshire Chronicle. 8 April 1859. p. 6. Retrieved 17 April 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Representation of Boston". Coventry Herald. 20 October 1860. p. 4. Retrieved 28 January 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "The Election Petitions". The Morning Post. 22 March 1866. p. 6. Retrieved 28 January 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Boston Election". Stamford Mercury. 6 November 1868. p. 6. Retrieved 28 January 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Borough of Eaton". Boston Guardian. 10 April 1869. p. 2. Retrieved 6 February 2018 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "The Boston Election Petition". Grantham Journal. 13 June 1874. p. 8. Retrieved 28 December 2017 – via British Newspaper Archive.
- "Boston Bribery Commissioners'". Boston Guardian. 12 Feb 1881. p. 5. Retrieved 24 November 2017.
- "The Boston Bribery Prosecutions". Stamford Mercury. 5 Aug 1881. p. 6. Retrieved 24 November 2017.
- Liberal Year Book 1907
- Debrett's House of Commons & Judicial Bench, 1886
- British Parliamentary Election Results 1885-1918, FWS Craig
- Debrett's House of Commons 1901
Sources
- D Brunton & D H Pennington, Members of the Long Parliament (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1954)
- Cobbett's Parliamentary history of England, from the Norman Conquest in 1066 to the year 1803 (London: Thomas Hansard, 1808)
- F W S Craig, British Parliamentary Election Results 1832-1885 (2nd edition, Aldershot: Parliamentary Research Services, 1989)
- Lewis Namier, The Structure of Politics at the Accession of George III (2nd edition - London: St Martin's Press, 1961)
- J. E. Neale, The Elizabethan House of Commons (London: Jonathan Cape, 1949)
- T. H. B. Oldfield, The Representative History of Great Britain and Ireland (London: Baldwin, Cradock & Joy, 1816)
- Henry Pelling, Social Geography of British Elections, 1885-1910 (London: Macmillan, 1967)
- J Holladay Philbin, Parliamentary Representation 1832 - England and Wales (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965)
- Edward Porritt and Annie G Porritt, The Unreformed House of Commons (Cambridge University Press, 1903)
- Frederic A Youngs, jr, "Guide to the Local Administrative Units of England, Vol II" (London: Royal Historical Society, 1991)
- Concise Dictionary of National Biography
- Leigh Rayment's Historical List of MPs – Constituencies beginning with "B" (part 4)