Bedford was first represented in the Model Parliament of 1295. The constituency was originally a parliamentary borough electing two Members of Parliament (MPs) to the House of Commons, and consisted of the five parishes making up the town of Bedford.
Before the Reform Act 1832, the right to vote was exercised by all freemen and burgesses of the town (whether or not they lived within the borough boundaries) and by all householders who were not receiving alms. This was a fairly wide franchise for the period, but potentially subject to abuse since the Corporation of the borough had unlimited power to create freemen. The corporation was usually under the influence of the Dukes of Bedford, but their influence usually fell well short of making Bedford a pocket borough.
In 1768, a majority of the corporation apparently fell out with the Duke at the time, and decided to free the borough from his influence. They elected a Huntingdonshire squire, [n 3] Sir Robert Bernard, as recorder of the borough, and made 500 new freemen, mostly Bernard's Huntingdonshire neighbours or tenants. [4] As there were only 540 householders, this gave him the effective power to choose Bedford's MPs; at the next election the defeated candidates petitioned against the result, attempting to establish that so many non-residents should not be allowed to vote, but the Commons dismissed the petition and confirmed the right of all the freemen, however created, to vote.
Bernard cemented his control with the creation of hundreds of further freemen in the next few years; at around the same period he lent the Corporation £950, and it is not unreasonable to assume this was payment for services rendered. However, in 1789, the young Duke of Bedford managed to regain the corporation's loyalty, and had 350 of his own retainers made freemen.
Even at other periods, the influence of the Dukes seems sometimes to have been more nominal than real. In the 1750s and 1760s, before Bernard's intervention, a frequent compromise was that the Duke nominated one MP and the corporation (representing the interests of the town) the other; but it seems that on occasion the Duke had to be flexible to retain the semblance of local deference towards him, and that his "nominee" had in reality been imposed upon him. Nor was the outcome invariably successfully predetermined: at the 1830 election the result swung on one individual's vote – the defeated candidate being Lord John Russell, who was not only one of the Whig leaders but The Duke of Bedford's son.
In 1831, the population of the borough was 6,959, and contained 1,491 houses. This was sufficient for Bedford to retain both its MPs under the Great Reform Act, with its boundaries unaltered. The reformed franchise introduced in 1832 gave the borough 1,572 inhabitants qualified to vote.
1832–1983
The town was growing, and Bedford retained its borough status until the 1918 general election, although under the Redistribution of Seats Act 1885, its representation was reduced to a single MP. On the eve of the First World War, its population was just under 40,000, of whom 6,500 people were eligible to vote.
Under the Representation of the People Act 1918, the parliamentary borough was abolished; but the town gave its name to a new county constituency (formally The Bedford division of Bedfordshire). As well as the town of Bedford, it covered the northern end of the county and included Kempston and Eaton Socon together with surrounding rural areas.
Under the Representation of the People Act 1948, a boundary change which came into effect at the 1950 election reduced its size somewhat, and under the Third Review of Westminster Constituencies in 1983, the constituency was abolished.
1997 onwards
Under the Fourth Review, effective from the 1997 general election, Bedford was restored as a borough constituency, comprising the towns of Bedford and Kempston.
In the latest boundary changes under the Fifth Review, effective from the 2010 general election, there were marginal changes due to the revision of local authority wards.
The 2017 general election saw the Labour Party win the seat despite coming second in the election. This was significant as it was the first time the party had won the seat at an election where it had not won a comfortable national majority. This was repeated at the 2019 general election, where the seat was narrowly held by the Labour incumbent, despite the party suffering a heavy national defeat. [5]
