This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of UK Parliament constituencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UK Parliament constituenciesWikipedia:WikiProject UK Parliament constituenciesTemplate:WikiProject UK Parliament constituenciesUK Parliament constituencies
The Times 8 Dec 1923, The Labour Year Book 1924, The Constitutional Year Book 1924, The Liberal Year Book 1924, Sunday Post, Lanarkshire 19 Oct 1924, Edinburgh Evening News 29 Oct 1924 gives the votes as 8,583, 6,738 and 3,583, majority 1,845. The Times House of Commons 1929 gives the majority as 1,845.
The Constitutional Year Book 1929 and The Liberal Year Book 1929 give 8,570, 6,731 and 3,578, majority 1,839.
I think the votes reported in The Times on 8 December 1923 were used by the respective party yearbooks for 1924. I think the local papers in previewing the 1924 elections used the same Times source. The 1929 party yearbook's make the same change, that logically can only have been triggered by the same event. That event I suspect to have been a correction to the original figures. It is possible that local papers in 1924 did not pick up on the correction.
On balance, I am going with my hunch that the figures sourced from 1929 are the right ones.16:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
