Read on Twitter
Interesting: a decade after the Reform Act, a petition from Woodstock complaining that the Duke of Marlborough still had undue influence over the seat. Wonder how common petitions like this were?
This was 4 April 1845; the sitting MP was the Marquess of Blandford... the eldest son of the Duke of Marlborough, who had himself represented the seat until he succeeded to the title in 1840. So, you know, fair point.
Their point was then proven quite dramatically a couple of weeks later: Marlborough sacked his son.
Beginning to suspect their grievances were not, in fact, redressed.
I looked at the other Woodstock elections, just out of curiosity. In the fourteen from 1832-59, ten returned a son of the Duke, and three another of his nominees. Only two of fourteen were actually contested at all.
Of those, one was contested between *two different* sons of the Duke (one Whig, one Conservative) - the older one won, and the younger inevitably brought a petition against it (unsuccessfully). Harsh words at family dinners for a while, no doubt.
Delightfully, they ran on party platforms - the elder a Conservative, his younger brother a Liberal. This is ... not something that happens so much any more. But at least the family seat was safely controlled, whatever happened.
The previous election had been even more dramatic - an actual outsider appeared, and defeated the Duke's brother! (Not his son - I got confused earlier. Too many titles.) Except, of course, it was more complicated than that.
