Parliamentary Constituencies and Their Registers Since 1832

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Parliamentary Constituencies and Their Registers Since 1832 PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES AND THEIR REGISTERS SINCE 1832 www.bl.uk/subjects/national-and-international-government-publications A list of constituencies from the Great Reform Act with the British Library's holdings of electoral registers together with the Library's holdings of burgess rolls, poll books and other registers BY RICHARD H. A. CHEFFINS REVISED BY JACQUIE CARTER, ANDREW CLEVELAND, JENNIE GRIMSHAW AND MIKE STANBRIDGE CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 The British Library’s collection......................................................................... 1 Other sources................................................................................................. 4 Parliamentary representation.......................................................................... 7 The Franchise ................................................................................................. 8 Constituencies.............................................................................................. 12 The contents of registers .............................................................................. 18 Dates of registers.......................................................................................... 20 A summary of recent developments ............................................................. 23 HOW TO FIND ELECTORAL REGISTERS IN THE BRITISH LIBRARY ................. 28 Examples of different searches...................................................................... 31 ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................. 33 PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES AND THEIR REGISTERS SINCE 1832 ..... 34 APPENDICES.................................................................................................. 340 Pre-1832 constituencies ............................................................................. 340 Pre-partition Irish registers.......................................................................... 342 Irish, Manx and Channel Island registers..................................................... 344 University parliamentary registers............................................................... 346 Non-parliamentary registers....................................................................... 347 Poll books...................................................................................................357 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................. 368 Legislation.................................................................................................. 368 Parliamentary Orders.................................................................................. 370 Standard Notes........................................................................................... 371 Boundary Commission reports.................................................................... 371 Reference works consulted......................................................................... 373 Parliamentary constituencies INTRODUCTION The British Library’s collection The British Library has a unique collection of printed British electoral registers (their formal name is ‘Registers of Electors’) from 1832 to date. This collection occupies some 2.25 miles (ca 3.62 km) of shelves. If the collection continues to grow at the current rate (c. 41-42m per year) by 2024 they will be spread over more than 4 km. Under the Representation of the people (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2002 and 2006 (SI 2002 No. 1871 and SI 2006 No. 752), Representation of the people (Scotland) (Amendment) Regulations 2002 and 2006 (SI 2002 No. 1872 and SI 2006 No. 834), Representation of the people (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002 No.1873), Representation of the People (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2008 (SI 2008 No. 1741) and under earlier legislation going back to 1947, the Library has received for over 67 years and retains a complete set of printed registers for the whole of the United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland). This applies to no other institution. The National Libraries of Scotland and Wales like the British Libray both have a patchy collection prior to 1946 but only for their respective countries. Their collections are then more or less complete from then on but again for their own countries only. Under the current legislation there are a limited number of other deposited sets. Since 2006 the British Library has been entitled to receive both print and data copies of registers from England, Scotland and Wales. Current legislation covering the registers for Northern Ireland does not contain an entitlement for the British Library to obtain a copy in data format. The National Library of Wales although acquiring both print and data copies for Wales is not able to make the data copy available for access at the current time. The situation in Scotland is different as some registers for Scotland continue to be supplied and made available in print whereas others are provided in data form. There is no access to these data copies at the National Library of Scotland. The collection at the National Library of Scotland is therefore less complete after 2006 than it was between 1946 and 2006. If you are planning to visit either of these libraries to look at a specific register it is strongly recommended that you first contAct the relevant library in advance of your visit. It might be thought that, as published works, copies of electoral registers should have been deposited under the Copyright Act 1911 (1&2 Geo.5, cap.46) not only with the British Library but with the other legal deposit or copyright libraries - the Bodleian Library, Oxford University, Cambridge University Library, the National Libraries of Scotland and Wales, and Trinity College, Dublin - but this has not happened. Firstly, there was doubt as to the legal status of registers; whether or not they were truly ‘published’ within the meaning of the Act. True, current and 1 Parliamentary constituencies earlier legislation refers to the registers having to be published but this in the context means only that they must be made available for inspection by the public at council offices and, usually, public libraries during normal opening hours. For the British Museum Library (the predecessor of the British Library) and, by implication for the other copyright libraries, the doubt was resolved by the Regulations dated October 12, 1932 made by the British Museum under the British Museum Act 1932 as to publications not required, belatedly published in 1935 as SR&O 1935 No.278. This set out a list of publications excluded from the requirement of legal deposit and, among excluded ephemera like calendars and local railway timetables, were electoral registers. Much of the material formally excluded by these regulations had, in practice, never been deposited or claimed and, for electoral registers, deposit at the British Museum had been patchy at best. As for the other copyright libraries, their entitlement to British publications was not automatic as with the British Museum or British Library but only ‘on demand’ and, in practice, they have never demanded electoral registers, the National Libraries of Scotland and Wales being partial exceptions as noted above. The British Library, therefore, has the only comprehensive nationwide collection of non-current electoral registers received since 1947 under electoral legislation, initially the Electoral registration regulations 1947 (SR&O 1947 No.1646), rather than copyright legislation. It also has earlier registers which, though far from complete, are nevertheless extensive, some 25,000 registers in total. The story of their acquisition is curious. In 1832, when registration began, a handful of registers were received by the British Museum and these were duly catalogued and added to the general stock of the library; and their records can still be found in the General catalogue of printed books and its online successor, Explore the British Library. The authorities that supplied these few registers generally did not continue so to do and the 1832 registers that the Library holds are usually the only ones for the constituencies concerned. Over the next few decades a handful more of isolated registers were supplied; others have been acquired by purchase or donation. These too were catalogued and added to the general stock of the Library. Together they number a few dozen out of potentially several thousand electoral registers. It would seem that, at this time, registers were seldom deposited and never claimed by the British Museum. This changed in the autumn of 1863 when, it is clear, a concerted effort was made to rectify the matter and a circular was obviously dispatched to the appropriate authorities requesting not only copies of the then current registers but also back runs of earlier ones. The evidence for this is that all registers prior to 1864 in the electoral register collection (i.e. excluding the few in the general collection) bear a receipt stamp dated ‘1864’ (some dated quite early in the year which suggests the chasing began late in the previous year) and, for any given constituency, the stamped date is all the same. A few registers then supplied go back unbroken to 1832 but most are less complete and a few bear a pasted-in letter apologising for the gaps in the holdings.
Recommended publications
  • THE LONDON GAZETTE, 3 JUNE, 1924. 4447 in the County of Lancaster
    THE LONDON GAZETTE, 3 JUNE, 1924. 4447 In the county of Lancaster. 8. An Area comprising: — The county boroughs of St. Helens and In the county of Gloucester. Warrington. The borough of Leigh. The petty sessional division of Campden. The petty sessional division of Warrington, In the county of Oxford. and The parishes of Claydon, Clattercote, The parishes of Bold, Ashton-in-Makerfield, Mollington, Copredy, Bourton, Hamwell, Abram, Lowton, Kenyon, and Culcheth. Horley, Hornton, Wroxton, Dray ton, North Newington, East Shutford, West Shutford, In the county of Salop. Swalcliffe, Sibford Ferris, Sibford Gower, The borough of Oswestry. Epwell, Shenington, and Alkerton. The petty sessional division of Oswestry, and In the county of Northampton. The parishes of Ellesmere Rural, Bllesmere The borough of Daventry. Urban, Welshampton, Whitchurch Rural, Whitchurch Urban, Ightfield, and Ruyton of The petty sessional division of Daventry, the Eleven Towns. and The parishes of Upper Boddington, Lower In the county of Denbigh. Boddington, Bugbrooke, Kislingbury, Upton, The borough of Wrexham, and Harpole, Upper Heyford, Nether Hey ford, The petty sessional divisions of Bromfield, Floore, Brington, Althorp, Harlestone, Church liuabon, and Brampton, Chapel Brampton, Spratton, Holdenby, East Haddon, Ravensthorpe, The parish of Chirk. Teeton, Great Creaton, Cottesbrooke, Hollo- In the county of Flint. well, Coton, Guilsborough, Thornby, Cold The petty sessional divisions of Hope, and Ashby, Welford, Sulby, Hothorpe, Marston Overton, and the detached part of the petty Trussell, Sibertoft, Olipston, Naseby, Hasel- sessional division of Hawarden. bech, Kelmarsh, and Maidwell. 6. An Area comprising: — In the county of Worcester. In the couniy of Stafford. The borough of Stourbridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Abercrombie's Green-Wedge Vision for London: the County of London Plan 1943 and the Greater London Plan 1944
    Abercrombie’s green-wedge vision for London: the County of London Plan 1943 and the Greater London Plan 1944 Abstract This paper analyses the role that the green wedges idea played in the main official reconstruction plans for London, namely the County of London Plan 1943 and the Greater London Plan 1944. Green wedges were theorised in the first decade of the twentieth century and discussed in multifaceted ways up to the end of the Second World War. Despite having been prominent in many plans for London, they have been largely overlooked in planning history. This paper argues that green wedges were instrumental in these plans to the formulation of a more modern, sociable, healthier and greener peacetime London. Keywords: Green wedges, green belt, reconstruction, London, planning Introduction Green wedges have been theorised as an essential part of planning debates since the beginning of the twentieth century. Their prominent position in texts and plans rivalled that of the green belt, despite the comparatively disproportionate attention given to the latter by planning historians (see, for example, Purdom, 1945, 151; Freestone, 2003, 67–98; Ward, 2002, 172; Sutcliffe, 1981a; Amati and Yokohari, 1997, 311–37). From the mid-nineteenth century, the provision of green spaces became a fundamental aspect of modern town planning (Dümpelmann, 2005, 75; Dal Co, 1980, 141–293). In this context, the green wedges idea emerged as a solution to the need to provide open spaces for growing urban areas, as well as to establish a direct 1 connection to the countryside for inner city dwellers. Green wedges would also funnel fresh air, greenery and sunlight into the urban core.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Review Portfolio Holders
    Appendix Title: Local Government Re-organisation – Judicial Review Portfolio Holders: Cllr Graham Payne, Leader Cllr Rod Eaton, Change and Integration Portfolio Holder Reporting Officer: Nicola Mathiason - Head of Legal and Democratic Services Andrew Pate - Chief Executive Key Decision: No ______________________________________________________________ Purpose • To decide whether to redirect the Council's legal efforts and resources, from a separate judicial review, to support for the Shrewsbury and Atcham and Congleton appeal. Background • On 8 August 2007 Cabinet agreed that the Council should commence legal proceedings for Judicial Review against the Secretary of State’s decision about Local Government Reorganisation in Wiltshire. The Council’s case has been ‘on hold’ until the result of the Shrewsbury and Congleton Judicial Review was known. The judgement in this case has now been delivered. The judicial review was unsuccessful. The High Court Judge held that the Secretary of State had common law powers available to her to carry out the process, that she did not have to be satisfied that a proposal met the criteria at the time of the assessment and that she had not acted irrationally. Key Issues • Advice has been taken from our Counsel (who also acts for Shrewsbury and Congleton) on whether we should now continue with our case in the light of the Shrewsbury judgement. We have been advised that unless the Shrewsbury judgement is appealed successfully we cannot effectively progress our case. The grounds of our case are similar and the arguments we would raise are much the same as Shrewsbury raised. We have been advised that we should focus on supporting an appeal by Shrewsbury and Congleton.
    [Show full text]
  • Place Marketing As a Planning Tool
    PLACE MARKETING AS A PLANNING TOOL JANE GOODENOUGH MPHIL TOWN PLANNING UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON ProQuest Number: 10044386 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest 10044386 Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON LIBRARY ABSTRACT This study examines place marketing as a planning tool for local authorities, focusing on the type of marketing designed to attract jobs and investment to an area. Two strands of research emerge from a literature review. Firstly a need to update a 1984 study of local authority marketing activity as place marketing has evolved and escalated since then, and secondly, a need to determine the outcomes from place marketing. A survey of local authorities revealed a 96.5 per cent involvement in place marketing activities in 1995 and an analysis of the same local authorities’ marketing brochures demonstrates both innovative and common approaches. These brochures also show that although many local authorities are operating an equal opportunities policy, these ideals are not filtering through to all aspects of their work.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeology of Wales
    Hydrogeology of Wales N S Robins and J Davies Contributors D A Jones, Natural Resources Wales and G Farr, British Geological Survey This report was compiled from articles published in Earthwise on 11 February 2016 http://earthwise.bgs.ac.uk/index.php/Category:Hydrogeology_of_Wales BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY The National Grid and other Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database rights 2015. Hydrogeology of Wales Ordnance Survey Licence No. 100021290 EUL. N S Robins and J Davies Bibliographical reference Contributors ROBINS N S, DAVIES, J. 2015. D A Jones, Natural Rsources Wales and Hydrogeology of Wales. British G Farr, British Geological Survey Geological Survey Copyright in materials derived from the British Geological Survey’s work is owned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) and/or the authority that commissioned the work. You may not copy or adapt this publication without first obtaining permission. Contact the BGS Intellectual Property Rights Section, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, e-mail [email protected]. You may quote extracts of a reasonable length without prior permission, provided a full acknowledgement is given of the source of the extract. Maps and diagrams in this book use topography based on Ordnance Survey mapping. Cover photo: Llandberis Slate Quarry, P802416 © NERC 2015. All rights reserved KEYWORTH, NOTTINGHAM BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 2015 BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY The full range of our publications is available from BGS British Geological Survey offices shops at Nottingham, Edinburgh, London and Cardiff (Welsh publications only) see contact details below or BGS Central Enquiries Desk shop online at www.geologyshop.com Tel 0115 936 3143 Fax 0115 936 3276 email [email protected] The London Information Office also maintains a reference collection of BGS publications, including Environmental Science Centre, Keyworth, maps, for consultation.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 No. 3211 LOCAL GOVERNMENT, ENGLAND The
    STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2004 No. 3211 LOCAL GOVERNMENT, ENGLAND The Local Authorities (Categorisation) (England) (No. 2) Order 2004 Made - - - - 6th December 2004 Laid before Parliament 10th December 2004 Coming into force - - 31st December 2004 The First Secretary of State, having received a report from the Audit Commission(a) produced under section 99(1) of the Local Government Act 2003(b), in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by section 99(4) of that Act, hereby makes the following Order: Citation, commencement and application 1.—(1) This Order may be cited as the Local Authorities (Categorisation) (England) (No.2) Order 2004 and shall come into force on 31st December 2004. (2) This Order applies in relation to English local authorities(c). Categorisation report 2. The English local authorities, to which the report of the Audit Commission dated 8th November 2004 relates, are, by this Order, categorised in accordance with their categorisation in that report. Excellent authorities 3. The local authorities listed in Schedule 1 to this Order are categorised as excellent. Good authorities 4. The local authorities listed in Schedule 2 to this Order are categorised as good. Fair authorities 5. The local authorities listed in Schedule 3 to this Order are categorised as fair. (a) For the definition of “the Audit Commission”, see section 99(7) of the Local Government Act 2003. (b) 2003 c.26. The report of the Audit Commission consists of a letter from the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission to the Minister for Local and Regional Government dated 8th November 2004 with the attached list of local authorities categorised by the Audit Commission as of that date.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Handbook
    Media Handbook Scottish Parliament election Thursday 5 May 2016 Media contacts and resources Electoral Commission press office Scotland: Sarah Mackie 0131 225 0211 [email protected] Out of office hours press office: 07789 920 414 Follow us on Twitter (UK) / Twitter (Wales) Like us on Facebook Read our Blog Websites www.electoralcommission.org.uk The Commission’s website has a dedicated section for journalists featuring the Electoral Commission’s news and views – including our press releases and statements. Our website has information on political party donations in the run-up to the election and has a ‘Guidance’ area with information for candidates and those administering the election. There is also information on organisations that the Commission is working in partnership with to raise public awareness of voter registration. www.gov.uk/register-to-vote This website is where the public can register to vote online. It’s quick and easy to use. Since its launch in June 2014, millions of applications to register to vote have been submitted. We would encourage you to use this website address in as many articles about the election as possible so that your readers know where they can register. www.aboutmyvote.co.uk This website provides information for the public on how to register and vote and forms they can print off to apply to vote by post or proxy. It includes a postcode search facility allowing people to find out where elections are taking place and resources showing people how to successfully complete ballot paper(s) at different elections. Contents 1. What elections are taking place on Thursday 5 May 2016? 2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Four Health Systems of the United Kingdom: How Do They Compare?
    The four health systems of the United Kingdom: how do they compare? Gwyn Bevan, Marina Karanikolos, Jo Exley, Ellen Nolte, Sheelah Connolly and Nicholas Mays Source report April 2014 About this research This report is the fourth in a series dating back to 1999 which looks at how the publicly financed health care systems in the four countries of the UK have fared before and after devolution. The report was commissioned jointly by The Health Foundation and the Nuffield Trust. The research team was led by Nicholas Mays at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The research looks at how the four national health systems compare and how they have performed in terms of quality and productivity before and after devolution. The research also examines performance in North East England, which is acknowledged to be the region that is most comparable to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland in terms of socioeconomic and other indicators. This report, along with an accompanying summary report, data appendices, digital outputs and a short report on the history of devolution (to be published later in 2014), are available to download free of charge at www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/compare-uk-health www.health.org.uk/compareUKhealth. Acknowledgements We are grateful: to government statisticians in the four countries for guidance on sources of data, highlighting problems of comparability and for checking the data we have used; for comments on the draft report from anonymous referees and from Vernon Bogdanor, Alec Morton and Laura Schang; and for guidance on national clinical audits from Nick Black and on nursing data from Jim Buchan.
    [Show full text]
  • Participatory Evaluation of the Inspire Public Art Project
    Participatory Evaluation of the Inspire Public Art Project Four Case Studies: Newbiggin Sailing Club, Second Avenue Home Zone, Wildspace Network, Young People’s Perception of the Project Prepared by: Barefoot Research and Evaluation [email protected] September 2005 Table of Contents Page Number Summary 2 Introduction 4 Case Studies Newbiggin Sailing Club 7 Second Avenue Home Zone 15 Wildspace Network 26 Research With Young People 37 Conclusion 45 Appendix 1: Methodology 49 Appendix 2: People and Organisations Interviewed 51 Appendix 3: Timeline for the Consultation for the Second Avenue Home Zone 52 List of Abbreviations Acronym Description BVBC Blyth Valley Borough Council CAA Cramlington Area Assembly CAP Community Area Partnership CVS Council for Voluntary Services EADT East Ashington Development Trust LSP Local Strategic Partnership NCC Northumberland County Council NOF New Opportunities Fund PE Participatory Evaluation SVA Seaton Valley Assembly WDC Wansbeck District Council WI Wansbeck Initiative 1 Summary This evaluation was commissioned to contribute to the assessment of several of Inspire’s objectives. The first of these was Objective 2: Increase the attractiveness of the environment to: local communities; stakeholder organisations; visitors; and businesses. The indicators or evidence for judging whether this objective has been achieved was the level of support for public art within local communities and stakeholder organisations. Based on the research evidence, we can conclude that there has been support from local communities and stakeholder organisations and the programme has increased the attractiveness of the environment to local communities, stakeholder organisations and visitors (no businesses were consulted). The research indicates that the programme has made every effort to consult with, and include stakeholders, within its remit for the development of public art.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EDINBURGH GAZETTE, 23Rd OCTOBER 1964
    672 THE EDINBURGH GAZETTE, 23rd OCTOBER 1964 DUNBARTONSHIRE Edinburgh Leith Burgh Constituency East Dunbartonshire County Constituency James Hutchison Hoy, Esquire. Cyril Raymond Bence, Esquire. Edinburgh North Burgh Constituency West Dunbartonshire County Constituency Walter Francis John Montagu Douglas Scott, Esquire Thomas Steele, Esquire. (commonly called Earl of Dalkeith). Edinburgh Pentlands Burgh Constituency FIFE Norman Russell Wylie, Esquire, Q.C. East Fife County Constituency Edinburgh South Burgh Constituency Sir John Edward GilmouTj Baronet. Alan Michael Clark Hutchison, Esquire. West Fife County Constituency Edinburgh West Burgh Constituency Captain William Winter Hamilton. James Anthony Stodart, Esquire. Dunfermline burghs Burgh Constituency MORAY AND NAIRNSHIRE Adam Hunter, Esquire. Moray and Nairn County Constituency Kirkcaldy burghs Burgh Constituency Gordon Thomas Calthrop Campbell, Esquire, M.C Harry Philp Heggie Gourlay, Esquire. ORKNEY AND ZETLAND INVERNESS-SHIRE AND Ross AND CROMARTY Orkney and Zetland County Constituency Inverness County Constituency The Right Honourable Joseph Grimond. David Russell Johnston, Esquire. Ross and Cromarty County Constituency PERTHSHIRE AND KINROSS-SHIRE Alasdair Roderick Mackenzie, Esquire. Kinross and West Perthshire County Constituency Western Isles County Constituency The Right Honourable Sir Alexander Frederick Douglas- Malcolm Kenneth Macmillan3 Esquire. Home, K.T. Perth and East Perthshire County Constituency KIRKCUDBRIGHTSHIRE AND WIGTOWNSHIRE Ian MacArthur, Esquire. Galloway
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England
    If LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REVIEW OF NON-METROPOLITAN COUNTIES FURTHER REVIEW OF THE COUNTY OF HUMBERSIDE NORTH YORKSHIRE EAST YORKSHIRE HUMBERSIDE EAST YORKSHIRE _J \\HOLDERNESS BOROUGH OF BEVERLEY ^KINGSTON UPON HU SOUTH YORKSHIRE LINCOLNSHIRE REPORT NO. 604 I I I I I I I • LOCAL GOVERNMENT I BOUNDARY COMMISSION I FOR ENGLAND iI REPORT NO. 604 i i i i i i i i i I I I • LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND I I CHAIRMAN MR G J ELLERTON I MEMBERS MR K F J ENNALS MR G R PRENTICE I MRS H R V SARKANY I MR C W SMITH I PROFESSOR K YOUNG I I I I I I I I I I I CONTENTS The Making of Numberside The Progress of the Humberside Reviews 2.1 The Commission's Initial Review i 2.2 The Secretary of State's Direction 2.3 The Commission's Further Review 2.4 The Commission's Interim Decision 2.5 The Commission's Draft Proposal i 2.6 The Response to the Commission's Draft Proposal i The Commission's Approach to the Further Review and its Consideration of the Case For and Against Change i 3.1 The Criteria for Boundary Changes 3.2 The Wishes of the People 3.3 The Pattern of Community Life 3.4 The Effective Operation of Local Government and i Associated Services i The Commission's Conclusions and Final Proposal 4.1 The Commission's Conclusions 4.2 The Commission's Final Proposal i 4.3 Electoral Consequences 4.4 Second Order Boundary Issues 4.5 Unitary Authorities i 4.6 Publication i i Annexes 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The London Gazette, August 30, 1898
    5216 THE LONDON GAZETTE, AUGUST 30, 1898. DISEASES OF ANIMALS ACTS, 1894 AND 1896. RETURN of OUTBREAKS of the undermentioned DISEASES for the Week ended August 27th, 1898, distinguishing Counties fincluding Boroughs*). ANTHRAX. GLANDERS (INCLUDING FARCY). County. Outbreaks Animals Animals reported. Attacked. which Animals remainec reported Oui^ Diseased during ENGLAND. No. No. County. breaks at the the reported. end of Week Northampton 2 6 the pre- as At- Notts 1 1 vious tacked. Somerset 1 1 week. Wilts 1 1 WALES. ENGLAND. No. No. No. 1 Carmarthen 1 1 London 0 15 Middlesex 1 • *• 1 Norfolk 1 SCOTLAND. Kirkcudbright 1 1 SCOTLAND. Wigtown . ... 1 1 1 1 TOTAL 8 " 12 TOTAL 10 3 17 * For convenience Berwick-upon-Tweed is considered to be in Northumberland, Dudley is con- sidered to be in Worcestershire, Stockport is considered to be in Cheshire, and the city of London ia considered to be in the county of London. ORDERS AS TO MUZZLING DOGS, Southampton. Boroughs of Portsmouth, and THE Board of Agriculture have by Order pre- Winchester (15 October, 1897). scribed, as from the dates mentioned, the Kent.—(1.) The petty sessional divisions of Muzzling of Dogs in the districts and parts of Rochester, Bearstead, Mailing, Cranbrook, Tun- districts of Local Authorities, as follows :—• bridge Wells, Tunbridge, Sevenoaks, Bromley, Berkshire.—The petty sessional divisions of and Dartford (except such portions of the petty Reading, Wokinghana, Maidenhead, and sessional divisions of Bromley and Dartford as Windsor, and the municipal borough of are subject to the provisions of the City and Maidenhead, m the county of Berks.
    [Show full text]