Parliamentary Lists

In this appendix lists having reference to Members’ general political allegiance and behaviour are noted first, specifically Scottish and Irish lists appearing as an addendum. Division lists, recording their actual votes (or consolidated votes) on specific questions before the House, follow. Commentaries on them may be found in the Introductory Survey.

11 May 1790. List of Members who were at the meeting at Burlington House. This list in the Blair Adam mss, pre-dating the dissolution of 1790 by a month, supplies the names of 102 opposition Members mustered for a conference by the Duke of Portland, the Whig leader.

April 1791. Forecast list of 539 Members’ votes on the exemption of Scotland from the Test Act (division of 10 May), compiled by Sir Gilbert Elliot, and consisting of 167 pro, 280 con, and 81 doubtful, with occasional remarks against Members’ names.1

December 1792. List of 109 supposed Portland Whigs.2 This list in the Minto mss was critically annotated by Portland, whose adherents did not follow Fox into opposition on the address, 13 Dec.

1792. Whig Club (London, 1792) lists members, distinguishing those who were MPs. There had been a previous publication of this kind in 1788. A later one, in 1799, noted seceders from the Club. Admissions were reported from time to time in the Morning Chronicle.

1793. A list of the members of the Society of the Friends of the People distinguishes MPs.3 So does a list of the committee of the Friends of the Liberty of the Press, in the Morning Chronicle, 21 Mar. 1793.

February 1793. A list of opposition Members invited to Windham’s house to muster in support of government in wartime appears both in Windham’s papers4 and in the Minto mss.5 The latter distinguishes those who attended on 10 Feb. from those who did so on 17 Feb. and those who did not accept the invitation on either date. Lord Sheffield writing to Lord Auckland, 22 Feb.,6 also (incompletely) listed attendance at the meetings.

28 Feb. 1793. Whig Club resolutions, followed by a list of Members seceding from the Club.7

3 Jan. 1795. The Courier lists 21 Members ‘who had previously supported the war’, but who on 30 Dec. voted for Wilberforce’s amendment in favour of peace negotiations.

1795. George Rose’s election forecast for the Treasury8 distinguishes 99 Members who were then ‘con’, i.e. hostile to government. The categories of ‘hopeful’ and ‘doubtful’ which he employed respectively in 23 and 21 cases in the same forecast cannot with certainty be applied ad personam as they have a bearing on the anticipated result of the elections.

1796. Three lists in the Chatham papers9 of persons in quest of seats are of 66 ministerial supporters applying to government for a berth: there are many Members, past and future, among them.

9 Mar. 1797. List of Members who met at Sir John Sinclair’s invitation to form an ‘armed neutrality’ in the House, compiled by Charles Abbot.10 Abbot lists 19 of ‘about thirty’ who were present. For possible additions, see The Times, 13 Mar. 1797, and Geo. III Corresp. ii. p. xxiii.

Feb. 1801. On 24 Feb., The Times listed the names of 30 Members ‘not in the habit of voting with the opposition’, who joined the minority on Sturt’s motion of 19 Feb. critical of the Ferrol expedition.

May 1802. On 21 May The Times listed the names of 30 stewards for the celebration of Pitt’s birthday a week thence, all but a few of them Members. This pinpoints Members personally attached to Pitt in an attempt to wean him from support for Addington’s ministry.

16 Nov. 1802. The principal opponents of Addington’s ministry were listed by the Speaker11 in two groups led by William Windham (ten of them) and George Canning (eight of them).

June 1803. In a letter to his friend John Hookham Frere, 9 June,12 Canning classifies supporters of Patten’s censure motion as ‘Grenvilles and Windham’s’, ‘us, or P[itt]’s friends’, ‘L[or]d Fitzwilliam’s’ and ‘stragglers’.13

March 1804. A preliminary classification of Members by George Rose in the Chatham papers14 lists 106 under ‘Pitt’, 76 under ‘Fox’, 21 under ‘Windham’ and 17 under ‘Addington’.

May 1804. George Rose and Charles Long, for the Treasury, classified some 270 Members not expected to support Pitt’s second ministry in a bid to convince the King of Pitt’s need of ‘some other aid’. Included in the lists15 were 42 adherents of the Prince of Wales, 79 Foxites, 68 Addingtonians, 23 Grenvillites and 58 doubtful.

[Sept.] 1804. A comprehensive analysis by the Treasury of the whole House.16 The categories were Pitt; Fox and Grenville; doubtful Addingtonian, and the Prince’s friends. Some further attempt was made to clarify the ‘doubtful’ category.17

25 July 1805. A further comprehensive analysis by the Treasury of the whole House18 distinguishes supporters of Pitt, of opposition and of Lord Sidmouth, and adds doubtfuls to all three of these categories. This list was apparently intended to assess Pitt’s prospects of survival without Sidmouth’s support, and without an overture to the opposition.

1806. A list of the Parliament elected in 1806, classified as to attitude towards the abolition of the slave trade, in the Holland House mss.19 The categories are ‘staunch friends’, ‘friendly’, ‘doubtful’ and ‘adverse’. This draft has been much altered to allow for transfers from one category to another.

22 June 1807. The Morning Chronicle lists 182 Members who voted for Brand’s or Lyttelton’s motion against the Portland administration in April, and 68 others who did not vote (26 because they were new Members) and were ‘totally unconnected with His Majesty’s new government’. By deduction this list supplies ten Members who voted for Lyttelton’s and not for Brand’s motion.

1807. List of supporters of the late administration at a dinner held after the general election of 1807.20 This claims to include 137 Members— all but three are listed.

18 Jan. 1809. List of Whigs who met to endorse George Ponsonby’s leadership.21 Forty-four names are listed.

Mar. 1810. A comprehensive list of the House compiled for the Whigs at the instigation of Brougham, procured by their enemies and published in the Satirist in June. It was drawn up between 19 and 24 Mar. The categories are ‘present opposition (thick and thin men, who vote against ministers on all occasions)’; ‘hopeful’; ‘doubtful’; ‘Lord Sidmouth’; ‘Mr Perceval’; ‘Mr Canning’; ‘Lord Castlereagh’; ‘Lord Wellesley’; ‘no party’; ‘against the opposition’; and ‘government’. The list was designed not only to assess opposition prospects for the crucial division on the Scheldt inquiry, but to judge their strength as a prospective administration— whence the distinction of the two last categories.

19 Jan. 1811. Two lists in the Blair Adam mss of persons ‘to whom expresses were dispatched ... to bring them to London’ and ‘to whom messengers were sent to detain them in London’ are evidence of the Whig muster on the Regency bill. There are 13 names in the first list and 19 in the second.

June 1811. Lists including Members sympathetic to parliamentary reform appear in Cobbett’s Pol. Reg. xix. 1516-21, in Cartwright Corresp. ii. 371-5 and in the Morning Chronicle, 7 June 1811. The Friends of Constitutional Reform who had met in March of that year canvassed many Members, as appears in the circular for attendance, with manuscript additions in the Whitbread mss W1/4453. How few Members were induced to rally to them appears in the same source (W1/4455). A list of members of the Hampden Club drawn up on 14 May 1814 includes 16 Members in this period.

1812. After the election of 1812 the Treasury listed its supporters, adding ‘hopefuls’ and ‘doubtfuls’.22 There are also, in the Liverpool mss,23 two lists of adherents of Lord Wellesley and of George Canning in the ‘last Parliament’ and in the ‘present Parliament’. Charles Greville the diarist reported on 22 Mar. 182024 ‘I have just found a list of the Members of Parliament who formed the party of Ld. Wellesley and Canning when they were united, and headed a party in the H[ouse] of C[ommons]’. The list contains 15 Wellesleyites and 17 Canningites.

1813. A list of Members of the current Parliament,25 updated to 20 Sept. 1813, but not entirely accurate, presumably compiled by Henry Heneage St. Paul. Among other things it attempts political classification: ‘ministerialists’ number 383, ‘opposition’ 202, ‘Canning’ 36 and ‘no party’ 29. Some of the classifications of Members are questionable.

1815. The Pitt Club 26 handbook provides lists of Members who were officials then and stewards of the Club’s triennial commemorations in 1808, 1811, 1814.

[13 Apr. 1818] ‘A list of gentlemen to whom Lord Liverpool’s notes have been sent for a meeting on Monday at Fife House.’ Seventy-eight Members to whom the premier outlined government proposals for the royal dukes’ marriage grants are listed.27

[1818] Three government lists for dinner parties, excluding ‘official men’. There are just over 30 Members in each of the lists.28

1818. Signatories to the requisition to George Tierney to lead the Whigs in the House of Commons after the general election. There were 113, and six Members who ‘approved but would not sign’ were appended.29

SCOTTISH LISTS

1802. State of the last General Election in Scotland, compiled by Charles Innes for the Home secretary.30 This divides the Scots Members into three categories: ‘those who are either independent altogether or in direct opposition to Mr [Henry] Dundas’; ‘those who will most probably support administration, even if Mr Dundas were to go into opposition’; and ‘those who would probably adhere to Mr Dundas, and the situation they stand in with regard to government’. The background of this compilation was the strained relationship between Addington, the premier, and Dundas, Pitt’s election manager for Scotland, during the general election of 1802. Charles Innes had also compiled a ‘State of the probable returns of Members of Parliament in Scotland’ before the election.31

[1802] A list of Scots Members compiled by Henry Dundas.32 There are four categories: 26 ‘invariably attached as partisans to the politics of Mr Pitt and Mr Dundas’; 5 ‘supporters of the present government’; 5 ‘opposition at heart’; and 9 ‘certainly supporters of the present government, but if a question was to arise, the plain purport of which was, who shall be the minister of this country, they would decidedly vote Mr Pitt against every person whatever’.

[early 1806] ‘State of the Scotch Counties etc.’, in the hand of William Adam, in the Holland House mss.33 This contrasts in each constituency the ‘Dundas etc. interest’ with the ‘Whig interest’ and comments on Members’ conduct in some cases.

May 1806. State of the Scottish constituencies with regard to the next general election.34 This guide for the Home secretary also contains ‘general remarks’ involving Members’ conduct. Complementary to it is an analysis of Earl Spencer’s interest in Scotland, in the same source, which distinguishes Members ‘attached to his lordship and not likely to lose their seats at a general election’, and comments on the remainder.

7 Feb. 1807. William Adam’s enclosure to Viscount Howick of ‘the whole of the Scotch representation— dissected’.35 He lists 22 Members as ‘Friends of govt. unconnected with Lord Melville’, 14 ‘upon whom Lord Melville may absolutely depend’, four ‘relations of Lord Melville who declare themselves supporters of govt.’, four ‘doubtful’ and one ‘to be got when Mr Wortley vacates Bute’.

30 May 1807. A letter from William Adam to Lord Grenville in the Fortescue mss36 encloses ‘ my compte rendue of Scotch elections’, stating the performance of the Whig opposition, successes and disappointments only.

11 June [1807]. A letter from William Maxwell of Carriden to Viscount Howick37 lists ‘Scotch Members in opposition’ for purposes of muster. Twelve names are listed.

[c.1810]. A list of Scots peers and commoners in the Melville mss38 confined to those who ‘from obligations or personal attachments would most, if not all of them probably support any line of politics Lord Melville might decidedly adopt, but he has never wished nor courted a personal party’. Appended to it is a list of allied interests of Melville’s in the constituencies. The list doubtless has a bearing on Melville’s claims to attention from Perceval’s administration.

Nov. 1810. ‘Sketch of the political interest in Scotland’ in the Melville mss.39 This lists the electoral interests and prospects in all constituencies, with occasional comments on politics.

IRISH LISTS

Mar. 1801. Alphabetical list of Irish Members ‘with circumstances’.40

25 Mar. 1801. List of Irish Members who had not yet taken their seats in the Imperial Parliament.41

Nov. 1801. ‘Members applied to by me [Charles Abbot] to go to Parliament in November 1801’.42

1801/2. ‘List of Irish Members who have appeared this session’.43

5 Feb. 1803. Marsden’s list of Irish Members ‘gone or going’ to England, ‘not going’ or queried.44

9 Mar. 1803. Marsden’s list of Irish Members ‘in England’, ‘not going’ or ‘doubtful’.45

[Apr. 1804]. List of Irish Members and their circumstances.46

29 Dec. 1804. Parliamentary list of Irish Members with comments on their likely conduct, in the Hardwicke mss.47

27 Apr.-6 June 1805. Marsden’s five lists of Irish Members and their attendance for Secretary Vansittart’s benefit.48

May 1806. List of Irish Members and their circumstances by constituency, in the Spencer mss. There is a copy annotated by Secretary Elliot in the Minto mss.49

1 June 1806. List of 11 Irish opponents of the government in a letter from Sir John Newport to Secretary Elliot.50

[late 1806]. List of Irish ‘parliamentary interests’ describing Members as ‘for’ or ‘against’ the government, with comments.51

[1807]. List of Irish parliamentary interests with reference to the general election, comparing political allegiances of Members chosen in 1806 with those of Members chosen in 1807.52 There is a draft in the same source,53 addressed to Portland’s secretary William Dacres Adams, of the anticipated behaviour of Members chosen in 1807. The symbols on it correspond to three categories on the first mentioned list, namely supporters of government, opponents of government, and ‘feeble enemies and may perhaps be had’.

11 June 1807. The Dublin Evening Post listed Irish Members ‘who stood upon the popular interest’; reproduced with one alteration by the Morning Chronicle, 26 June.

Mar. 1808. State of the Irish Members compiled by Sir Arthur Wellesley, chief secretary.54

1818/1820. Irish Members elected July 1818 and April 1820, listed by constituency, with comments on their political behaviour and circumstances.55

Long before the Union, the Dublin Castle administration had vetted and analyzed the conduct of Irish Members. Chief secretaries continued to do this after the Union. The viceroy’s audience books and chief secretaries’ application books, as well as their correspondence, have many references to Members’ political expectations and behaviour. More details may therefore be gleaned about the parliamentary conduct and attendance of Irish Members in general than about that of British Members.

DIVISION LISTS

Division lists were unofficial until 1836, but by then the practice of publishing them occasionally in collected reports of parliamentary debates was well established. It predated this period, during which there was a steady increase in the number of divisions published. The criterion for selection was clearly the relative importance of the issue on which a division took place. During the second decade of the 19th century, however, the habit extended to minor issues. With few exceptions the division lists first appeared in the newspapers, and were until 1810 confined to the opposition minority. The Whig opposition used the Morning Chronicle as their medium, and it is the prime source; other newspapers, without the same political slant, were more selective. This is true of The Times, the Courier, the Sun, the Oracle, the Gazetteer, the Star, the Whitehall Evening Post, the Telegraph, the Public Advertiser, the Morning Post, the Evening Mail, etc. The Morning Chronicle version of a division was sometimes subsequently corrected by itself, sometimes challenged by other newspapers. Members sensitive to their constituents’ opinions of them saw to it that their votes were correctly reported; local newspapers, in turn, sometimes reported the local Members’ votes, without publishing the whole division. In some cases, pamphlets on a given debate appeared with a minority list. The divisions published in Debrett’s Parliamentary Register, in Senator, in Woodfall’s Debates and in Cobbett’s Parliamentary Debates were usually, but not always, inspired by those in the newspapers: they normally— though there are exceptions— incorporated the corrections made. Very little evidence survives about the compilation of these lists: the two tellers on either side would be the most obvious source of information. Their names, together with the figures on any division, can be found in the Commons Journals, which outline the proceedings of the House.

The list of surviving divisions that follows owes its comprehensiveness to Professor Donald E. Ginter, who has made a survey of them as a preliminary to analysis. Unless otherwise stated, they are lists of the minorities which first appeared in the Morning Chronicle; those asterisked are not known to have been reproduced elsewhere, either in publications of the debates or in other newspapers or pamphlets. No attempt is made here to list other sources unless they are the only ones. Fragmentary lists are indicated. Several lists were never published and are derived from manuscript sources, which, incidentally, also supply further evidence on individual Members’ votes.

Reports of Members’ pairs and absences from divisions also appeared in newspapers and sometimes in collected reports of debates, especially from 1810 onwards. Grants of leave of absence were reported in the Commons Journals. The grounds stated ranged from personal illness, convalescence, illness of a near relative, bereavement or private business to professional commitments (judges, barristers and magistrates, jury or witness service, lawsuits; military or militia duties and naval service). Leave was granted for up to two months.

Ref Volumes: 1790-1820

Author: R. G. Thorne

End Notes

• 1. NLS 11203, ff. 161-76, published by G. M. Ditchfield, Bull. IHR, lvi (May) 1983.
• 2. NLS 11196, f. 76.
• 3. Cartwright Corresp. i. 346-7.
• 4. Add. 37873, ff. 201-2.
• 5. NLS 11196, ff. 93-100.
• 6. Add. 34448, f. 296.
• 7. Minto mss, NLS 11196, ff. 101-2.
• 8. Kent AO, U1590/749/12.
• 9. PRO 30/8/197, ff. 98, 247, 248.
• 10. Colchester mss, PRO 30/9/32.
• 11. Colchester, i. 411-12.
• 12. Add. 38833, f. 149.
• 13. Pub. Geo. III Corresp. iv. 2752n.
• 14. PRO 30/8/197, ff. 272-4.
• 15. PRO 30/8/234, ff. 50-56.
• 16. PRO 30/8/234, ff. 60-75.
• 17. Ibid. f. 271.
• 18. Liverpool mss, Add. 38359, ff. 5-13.
• 19. Add. 51917.
• 20. Joshua Wilson, Biog. Index (1808), App. ix.
• 21. Grey mss, Tierney to Grey, 19 Jan.
• 22. PRO T64/331.
• 23. Add. 38363, f. 64.
• 24. Greville Mems. ed. Strachey and Fulford, i. 91-3.
• 25. Northumb. RO, Butler (Ewart) mss C. 1/8/9.
• 26. BL 10817c22(4).
• 27. Add. 38366, f. 133.
• 28. Add. 38366, f. 135.
• 29. Hants RO, Tierney mss 31M 70/23e.
• 30. Add. 33049, f. 350.
• 31. Add. 33049, f. 354.
• 32. NLS mss 9370, f. 197.
• 33. Add. 51917.
• 34. Spencer mss.
• 35. Grey mss.
• 36. BL.
• 37. Grey mss.
• 38. SRO GD51/1/198/29/7.
• 39. NLS mss 1, ff. 206-9.
• 40. Colchester mss, PRO 30/9/13, pt. 2.
• 41. PRO 30/9/13, pt. 2.
• 42. PRO 30/9/13, pt. 1.
• 43. PRO 30/9/13, pt. 2.
• 44. Wickham mss, Hants RO 38M49/5/31.
• 45. Ibid.
• 46. Stanhope mss, Kent AO U1590 763/2.
• 47. Add. 35754, f. 296.
• 48. Add. 31229, ff. 156, 191, 256; 31230, ff.1, 8, 18, 20.
• 49. Minto mss, NLS 12925.
• 50. Ibid. 12917.
• 51. Ibid. 12925.
• 52. Portland mss, PwF10522.
• 53. PwF10520.
• 54. Pub. in English Hist. Docs. 1783-1832, pp. 265 71, from Add. 40221, ff. 15-42.
• 55. Peel mss, Add. 40298, ff. 1-45.
• 56. T. Clarkson, Hist. Abolition of Slave Trade (1808), ii. 388.
• 57. There are discrepancies between the Morning Chronicle list and Sir Gilbert Elliot’s (NLS 11203, f. 159).
• 58. Majority list, Irish Members only, in Add. 35766, f. 321 and Wickham mss, Hants RO 38 M49/5/19, Wickham to Marsden, 5 Mar. 1803.
• 59. The Speaker’s diary, PRO 30/9/34, has another version and lists eight of the majority.
• 60. Speaker’s diary only, PRO 30/9/34.