William Pleydell Bouverie, 3rd Earl of Radnor 166
- Born: 11 May 1779, 4 Grafton Street, Marylebone, Middlesex
- Marriage (1): Catherine Pelham-Clinton on 2 October 1800
- Marriage (2): Anne Judith St. John-Mildmay on 24 May 1814
- Died: 9 April 1869, Coleshill House, Berkshire aged 89
- Buried: 15 April 1869, Britford, Wiltshire
General Notes:
From The Times, April 12, 1869
It seems strange at this long interval of time we should be announcing the decease of a man who entered Parliament four years before the deaths of Pitt and Fox, and scarcely a year after the Union with Ireland. Yet such is the case. The late Earl of Radnor, who died at his family seat, Coleshill-house, last Saturday morning, not only took his seat in Parliament in 1801, but, as Lord Folkestone (the courtesy title by which he was then known), he took an active and prominent part in opposition to the Tory Administration of which Mr. Addington, afterwards Lord Sidmouth, was the head. This was eight years before the name of Henry Brougham had been heard of either in Parliament or in the English law courts, and while the late Lord Lyndhurst was a student of Lincoln's-inn, hoping in the course of some two or three years' time to be called to the Bar. William Pleydell Bouverie, third Earl of Radnor, Viscount Folkestone, of Folkestone, Kent, Lord Pleydell Bouverie, of Coleshill, Berks, and Lord Longford, of Longford Castle, Wilts, and a baronet, was the eldest of the four sons of Jacob, second Earl of Radnor, by the Hon. Anne Duncombe, daughter and coheir of Anthony, last Lord Feversham, of an earlier creation than the present Peer of that name. He was born in London on the 11th of May, 1779, so that he had nearly completed his 90th year. His early education was in France, and while a boy he was presented to Louis XVI. and his Queen Marie Antionette at Versailles, and was taken through the cells of the Bastile the day after its capture by the Parisian mob in July, 1789. As we have already mentioned, it was not long after he came of age that he entered on Parliamentary life, the retirement of Sir William Scott (afterwards Lord Stowell) from the representation of Downton having made a vacancy in his favour in March or April, 1801. At the following general election he was returned for Salisbury, of which borough his father was joint patron; and in January, 1802, he brought before the House a complaint against the True Briton for the insertion of scurrilous paragraphs involving a breach of Privilege. Soon after he supported the claims of the Prince of Wales to the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, and in the following May we find him advocating Sir Henry Mildmay's unsuccessful proposal of a vote of thanks to Pitt "for his eminent services to the country", a vote which, if carried, would have been in effect a vote of want of confidence in Mr. Addington. Still, Lord Folkestone was no servile adherent of Pitt, for in 1805 we find him in the majority of 216 to 217 who voted for censuring Pitt's right-hand man and ablest lieutenant, Lord Melville; and when, shortly afterwards, that nobleman was impeached, Lord Folkestone was one of the committee of 21 who were chosen to draw up the articles. In May, 1802, when Mr. Windham moved vote of censure on Mr. Addington for the Peace of Amiens, then recently concluded with Napoleon, Lord Folkestone seconded the motion in a speech of considerable length and of great promise. It may be added that one of his earliest votes in Parliament was recorded against the proposal to pay Mr. Pitt's debts out of the revenues of the nation. It would be impossible within the limits of an article like this to give a complete history of Lord Folkestone's career in the House of Commons, extended as it was over nearly seven-and-twenty years, without a break; it is sufficient to say that both by vote and by voice he uniformly opposed the measures of Mr. Perceval and Lord Liverpool; that he was an advanced Reformer and supporter of Roman Catholic Emancipation at a time when neither "Reform" nor "Emancipation" was popular, and that on such questions as taxation, the education of the people, and the abolition of slavery, he spoke frequently and powerfully, and showed large and liberal views which were far in advance of his age. An eloquent and aristocratic Liberal, especially with a prospective seat in the House of Peers, was a rare sight within the walls of the unreformed House of Commons; but Lord Folkestone went straight at his mark, caring little whether he were in a minority or not; for he had faith in Liberal principles, and he knew and felt that in the long run they would and must prevail, though he might not live to witness that day. It was naturally expected that when that day arrived, as it did arrive, in part at least, on Lord Grey's accession to power in 1830, the Whigs would have bestowed office on one who had been so long conspicuous in Parliament for his advocacy of all measures of a liberal and progressive character, and especially of the rights of the unrepresented classes-an advocacy in his case all the more generous and unselfish because his family were able to nominate one member for the city of Salisbury, and he returned two members for the borough of Downton. With reference to the borough of Downton there is an authentic anecdote which is strongly characteristic of the man. At the dissolution of Parliament in 1831 Lord Radnor sent for Mr. Charles Lefevre, now Lord Eversley, and proposed to him to enter the House of Commons as one of the members for Downton. Mr. Lefevre, while gratefully accepting the offer, said he should be glad to know if there were any political questions on which Lord Radnor might wish him to vote in accordance with his Lordship's views. Lord Radnor's reply was, "I wish you to judge for yourself, and to vote exactly as you may think right, except on one point, and as to that I must make it my particular request to you that you will on every occasion give your vote for the total disfranchisement of the borough of Downton." It is not publicly know whether office was ever offered by Lord Grey or Lord Melbourne to Lord Radnor, who had succeeded to the earldom and the other family honours in January, 1828, just when the Catholic Queen was absorbing public attention: but the fact of his never having held political office when his party were in power has often been made the subject of observation and comment in those Liberal circles where hsi name has ever been regarded as a tower of strength. It was thought, and with good reason, that if he ever was ambitious of a seat in a Liberal Cabinet he should not have identified himself so largely as he did with the opinions of William Cobbett, to whom he contributed 50 . on one occasion in order to help him to a seat in Parliament. Indeed, for some years after his accession to the title Lord Radnor may be said to have been the most perfect specimen of a real Radical in the Upper House; and Cobbett, no bad judge of a matter from the popular point of view, used to say that "he was the only man that wore a coronet who understood the first principles of politics, and that his speeches were the only speeches in the Upper House that were worth the trouble of listening to". His talents were certainly far above mediocrity, and though he never rose to any high flights of oratory his speeches were always original and his language forcible and correct. He felt strongly on political questions, and therefore he always spoke strongly - so strongly and earnestly, indeed, at times as quite to forget himself in his subject, but he never wandered from his point or indulged in common-place platitudes. The family of Bouverie, which Lord Radnor represented in England, is one of those which the religious persecutions of France and the Low Countries have driven to take shelter in Great Britain, to enrich us and our commerce at the cost of their fatherland. The Bouveries descend from on Lawrence des Bouveries, a native of Flanders, who married the daughter of a silk manufacturer at Frankfort, and settled in Canterbury just 300 years ago. This Lawrence's grandson, a Turkey merchant in London, was the father of William des Bouveries or Bouverie, who was also a wealthy merchant, and was created a baronet in 1714. His son Jacob, who was raised to the peerage in 1747, as Lord Longford and Viscount Folkestone, was the father of William, second Viscount Folkestone, who was advanced to the earldom of Radnor in 1765. He largely increased the family fortunes by his marriage with Harriet, only daughter and heir of Sir Mark Pleydell, of Coleshill House, Berkshire, whose name the Bouveries (of the house of Radnor) have since joined to their own; but still it must be owned that, like the Coventries, the Wards, and the Barings, so the Bouveries also laid the foundations of their coronet in the city of London, where Bouverie-street and Pleydell-street still commemorate their name. It may not be out of place to mention here the fact that the celebrated Dr. Pusey, of Christ Church, is not really a Pusey, but a Bouverie, being a grandson of the first Lord Folkestone and a nephew of the first Earl of Radnor; and it is not a little singular that the leader of High Churchmanship and Anglo-Catholicism at Oxford should be descended from a family of Protestant refugees. The late Lord Radnor's seat near Salisbury, Longford Castle, is chiefly remarkable for its magnificent gallery of pictures, especially rich in specimens of Holbein. Of late years, however, his lordship had given up Longford to his eldest son, and had resided almost entirely on his Berkshire property, devoting his attention to agriculture and horticulture, and rarely attending in the House of Lords. Some 20 or 30 years ago, when he was in full health and strength, his handsome figure and honest and pleasant face were familiar enough to his brother Peers, who were often amused at the strong denunciations hurled at him by such men as Lord Roden and the late Earl of Winchilsea, on account of his bitter invectives against what he considered the corruptions of the Established Church, and the exclusion of Dissenters from our Universities. It is remarkable that the late lord and his father between them held a seat in the Upper House for more than 90 years, and that they sat in the Upper and Lower House altogether during upwards of 97 years. The Earl was twice married; firstly in 1801 to Lady Catherine, only daughter of Henry, Earl of Lincoln, and granddaughter of Henry, second Duke of Newcastle, by whom he had an only daughter, the wife of General Buckley, formerly M.P. for Salisbury; and secondly, in 1814, to Anne Judith, third daughter of the late Sir Henry St. John Mildmay, by whom he had two daughters and also two sons. He is succeeded in the family title and estates by his elder son Jacob, Viscount Folkestone, who was born in 1815, and who married in 1840 Lady Mary Augusta Frederica Grimston, daughter of the late Earl of Verumlam, by whom he has a numerous family.
Brasenose College, Oxford, matriculated 1 December 1795.
William married Catherine Pelham-Clinton, daughter of Henry Fiennes Pelham-Clinton and Lady Frances Seymour-Conway, on 2 October 1800. (Catherine Pelham-Clinton was born on 6 April 1776 and died on 17 May 1804.)
William next married Anne Judith St. John-Mildmay, daughter of Sir Henry Paulet St. John, 3rd Baronet and Jane Mildmay, on 24 May 1814. (Anne Judith St. John-Mildmay was born on 2 April 1790 and died on 27 April 1851.)
|