Number of members One | ||
Created from Dingwall, Dornoch, Kirkwall, Tain, Wick Major settlements Dingwall, Dornoch, Kirkwall, Tain, Wick Replaced by Dornoch, Kirkwall, Tain, Wick Burghs | ||
Tain Burghs, was a constituency of the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain from 1708 to 1801 and of the Parliament of the United Kingdom from 1801 to 1832, sometimes known as Northern Burghs. It was represented by one Member of Parliament (MP).
Contents
- Boundaries
- History
- Elections
- Elections of the 1700s
- Elections of the 1740s
- Elections of the 1770s
- Elections of the 1780s
- Elections of the 1790s
- Elections of the 1800s
- Elections of the 1830s
- References
The first election in Tain Burghs was in 1708. In 1707-08, members of the 1702-1707 Parliament of Scotland were co-opted to serve in the first Parliament of Great Britain. See Scottish representatives to the 1st Parliament of Great Britain, for further details.
Boundaries
The constituency was a district of burghs created to represent the Royal burghs of Dingwall, Dornoch, Kirkwall, Tain and Wick, which had all been separately represented with one commissioner each in the former Parliament of Scotland.
In 1832 Cromarty was added to the district and it was renamed Wick Burghs.
History
The constituency was enfranchised, as part of the arrangements for representing Scotland in the united Parliament, under the terms of the Act of Union 1707.
The first Member of Parliament (MP), for the five Burghs, was elected at Tain in 1708. Lord Strathnaver was the eldest son of a Scottish peer. He would not have been eligible to be elected to the Parliament of Scotland. It was disputed that Strathnaver was eligible to be elected to the Parliament of Great Britain, as the representative of a Scottish seat.
On 3 December 1708, the House of Commons decided the issue, as at that time the House judged the eligibility of its members itself rather than leaving the issue to be decided by a Judge.
After the House called in counsel, the election petitions and representations in writing were read out and the lawyers put forward arguments for their clients. After counsel had withdrawn a question was formulated and put to a vote.
The proposition the House voted on was "that the eldest sons of the Peers of Scotland were capable by the Laws of Scotland at the time of the Union, to elect or be elected as Commissioners for the Shire or Boroughs [sic, see Burghs] to the Parliament of Scotland; and therefore by the Treaty of Union are capable to elect, or be elected to represent any Shire or Borough [sic] in Scotland, to sit in the House of Commons of Great Britain".
The House rejected the motion and so declared that Lord Strathnaver was ineligible to be elected an MP for Tain Burghs.
The most prominent English political figure, to represent a Scottish constituency in the 18th century, was Charles James Fox. In the 1784 general election, Fox sought re-election for the Westminster constituency. Political opponents challenged Fox's election. As Westminster had the largest electorate of any English borough, the scrutiny of votes (to check that each voter had been legally qualified to participate in the election) was thought likely to take a long time. To avoid Fox being out of Parliament, until the Westminster election petition was decided, a Scottish friend arranged for him to become member for Tain Burghs.
It took until 1786 for Fox to be confirmed as a duly elected MP for Westminster. Fox then chose to represent his English constituency and the Scottish one became vacant.
Elections
The electoral system for this constituency gave each of the five burghs one vote, with an additional casting vote (to break ties) for the burgh where the election was held. The place of election rotated amongst the burghs in successive Parliaments. The vote of a burgh was exercised by a burgh commissioner, who was elected by the burgh councillors.
The primary source for the results was Stooks Smith with additional information from the History of Parliament series. For details of the books used, see the Reference section below.
The reference to some candidates as Non Partisan does not, necessarily, mean that they did not have a party allegiance. It means that the sources consulted did not specify a party allegiance.