1918 Finsbury East by-election

The by-election was caused by the death on 3 July 1918 of the sitting Liberal Party MP Joseph Allen Baker, who had held the seat since himself winning it in a by-election on 29 June 1905.The Times, 30 June 1905 p12

{{Election box begin |

|title=General election December 1910: Finsbury, East

}}

{{Election box winning candidate with party link|

|party = Liberal Party (UK)

|candidate = Joseph Allen Baker

|votes = 2,023

|percentage = 51.6

|change =

}}

{{Election box candidate with party link|

|party = Conservative Party (UK)

|candidate = William Mason

|votes = 1,900

|percentage = 48.4

|change =

}}

{{Election box majority|

|votes = 123

|percentage = 3.2

|change =

}}

{{Election box turnout|

|votes = 3,923

|percentage =

|change =

}}

{{Election box hold with party link|

|winner = Liberal Party (UK)

|swing = +0.6

}}

{{Election box end}}

File:Evan Cotton.jpg

Finsbury Liberal Association adopted Evan Cotton as their candidate to replace Baker.The Times, 10 July 1918 p6 Cotton was born in India, the son of Henry John Stedman Cotton, a colonial administrator and himself a Liberal MP who sat for Nottingham East from 1906 to 1910. H. E. A. Cotton was then aged 50 years and had been Progressive Party member of the London County Council for East Finsbury since 1910.The Times, 13 July 1918 p3 He was a barrister, having been called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn in 1893 and a journalist.Who was Who, OUP 2007

As participants in the wartime coalition with Prime Minister David Lloyd George, the Conservatives chose not to contest the by-election and endorsed Cotton as the government candidate.

Even though the Labour party had withdrawn from the wartime electoral truce, they too chose not to contest the election.

Mr Charles Lamble, the Chairman of the Government Temporary Clerks' Association, announced he would be standing in the election. He said he would stand as a supporter of the government but that he would be pressing for the redress of existing grievances in the Civil Service and the immediate implementation of the Whitley ReportThe Times, 6 July 1918 p3 – an inquiry into the feasibility of setting up Industrial Councils in industry and administration to improve industrial relations and increase efficiency.{{Cite web|url=http://archive.org/details/industrialcounci00greauoft|title=Industrial councils; the Whitley report, together with the letter of the Minister of Labour, explaining the government's view of its proposals|date=May 29, 1917|publisher=[London, H.M. Stationery Off.|via=Internet Archive}} However, in the end, Lamble decided not to fight the election.

There were however two Independents who did contest the by-election. Mr A S Belsher was a solicitor's managing clerk and Chairman of the London Licensed Victuallers Central Protection Board. Belsher had obtained the support of the Merchant Seamen's League. The League had resolved to boycott German goods after the war in retaliation for the U-Boat attacks on merchant shipping. They could not get Cotton to support their cause so switched allegiance to Belsher.The Times, 13 July 1918 p3

The second Independent was H S Spencer, an honorary Captain in the Royal Irish Fusiliers and an examiner in the Aeronautical Inspection Directorate of the Royal Air Force. Spencer was said to have the support of the Vigilante Society, an extreme right-wing group which campaigned against enemy aliens and what they described as 'naturalised enemies' in Britain. They wanted the British Empire to be reserved for what they called British people.The Times, 17 June 1918 p5

The only real issue seems to have been the prosecution of the war and the nationalistic atmosphere the war was stirring up against the Germans. The candidates were all competing to see who would come across toughest on measures such as the Defence of the Realm Act, internment of enemy aliens or boycotting of goods and services from those who were German or believed to have German ancestry.The Times, 15 July 1918 p3 This mood continued right up until polling day with the two Independent candidates' supporters engaged in rowdyism and violence against each other.16 July 1918 p3

In a wartime contest on a clearly out of date electoral register Cotton easily retained the seat for the government with a majority of 580 votes over Spencer. Turnout was only 38.7%.F W S Craig, British Parliamentary Election Results 1885-1918; Macmillan Press, 1974 p14

{{Election box begin |

|title=Finsbury East by-election, 1918: 16 July 1918

}}

{{Election box winning candidate with party link|

|party = Liberal Party (UK)

|candidate = Evan Cotton

|votes = 1,156

|percentage = 59.9

|change = +8.3

}}

{{Election box candidate with party link|

|party = Independent politician

|candidate = H. S. Spencer

|votes = 576

|percentage = 29.8

|change = New

}}

{{Election box candidate with party link|

|party = Independent politician

|candidate = A. S. Belsher

|votes = 199

|percentage = 10.3

|change = New

}}

{{Election box majority|

|votes = 580

|percentage = 30.1

|change = +26.9

}}

{{Election box turnout|

|votes = 1,931

|percentage = 38.7

|change =

}}

{{Election box hold with party link|

|winner = Liberal Party (UK)

|swing = N/A

}}

{{Election box end}}

The result was an endorsement by the electorate for the government's handling of the war effort, both in military terms and on the home front. Cotton's vote was also seen as a rejection of the kind of political violence which had marred the by-election and which was chiefly associated with the campaigns of Spencer and Belsher.The Times, 17 July 1918 p6

The Times newspaper reported that Cotton had not been a good candidate, a weak campaigner and inconsistent on the German boycott. They reported that although he was selected to represent the government under the party truce it was likely on his record that he would gravitate to the opposition, i.e. to the rival wing of the Liberal Party led by H H Asquith.The Times, 18 July 1918 p7 The message The Times believed the government should take from the election was to have 'stout-hearted and patriotic candidates' in the field come the general election.

As far as East Finsbury and Cotton were concerned, however, the election was an academic exercise. The constituency disappeared in boundary changes at the 1918 general election just a few months later. Cotton, contested the successor seat of Finsbury but he was not awarded the Coupon which went to Lt-Col. Martin Archer-Shee DSO.The Times House of Commons 1919; Politico's Publishing 2004 p19 Archer-Shee had been MP for Finsbury Central since 1910. Clearly the government whips felt Archer-Shee fitted that description better than Cotton, who was defeated;

{{Election box begin |

|title=Finsbury General Election, 1918

Electorate 34,873

}}

{{Election box winning candidate with party link|

|party = Unionist Party (UK)

|candidate = Martin Archer-Shee

|votes = 8,732

|percentage = 63.8

|change = N/A

}}

{{Election box candidate with party link|

|party = Liberal Party (UK)

|candidate = Evan Cotton

|votes = 4,981

|percentage = 36.2

|change = N/A

}}

{{Election box majority|

|votes = 3,801

|percentage = 27.6

|change = N/A

}}

{{Election box turnout|

|votes = 13,763

|percentage = 39.5

|change = +0.8

}}

{{Election box gain with party link|

|winner = Unionist Party (UK)

|loser = Liberal Party (UK)

|swing = N/A

}}

{{Election box end}}

Cotton continued his career in London government, becoming an Alderman of the LCC. He then went back to India where he served as President of the Bengal Legislature from 1922 to 1925.

{{Reflist|2}}

• List of United Kingdom by-elections
• United Kingdom by-election records

{{By-elections to the 30th UK Parliament}}

Finsbury East by-election

Finsbury East,1918

Finsbury East,1918

Finsbury East by-election

Category:July 1918 in the United Kingdom