Dissent and the Composition of Lordship

Those who amassed fortunes in trade, especially the clothiers of the region, often established landed estates and even acquired the lordship of manors.^[51] The Sheppherd family acquired the manor

of Minchinhampton-Avening in the seventeenth century after amassing a fortune in the cloth trade. When bankruptcy forced the sale and division of the manor in 1814, David Ricardo, political economist and banker, as we have seen, acquired the lordship of Minchinhampton, while William Playne, gentleman-clothier, acquired the lordship of Avening. The lordship of Horsley manor possessed greater continuity of occupation by one family, although its pedigree possessed no more of an authentically aristocratic origin. The manor of Horsley had descended to the Stephens family of Eastington in the reign of Elizabeth; in 1676 Richard Stephens built the mansion house at Chavenage that remained in the possession of his direct line until 1795. Richard Stephens had settled Chavenage Farm on his wife, Anne, one of the daughters of John Stone, a London haberdasher,^[52] and like the Sheppherds and Ricardos, the Stephens family maintained connections with substantial clothier familes. The tithes of Horsley parish, for instance, had been held in trust from 1686 as a result of the negotiated marriage settlement of Ralph Willet, the younger, and Elizabeth Phillips, the daughter of John Phillips of Minchinhampton, both of whom came from substantial clothier families. One trustee was Thomas Davies of Stroud parish, gentleman, whose only daughter had married John Stephens of Chavenage, and on the basis of this connection Henry Stephens, the lord of the manor in the late eighteenth century, claimed possession of Horsley's tithes.^[53]

The Ducies of Tortworth Court, furthermore, were the largest nonresident landlords at Nailsworth, with a 272-acre estate in Horsley.^[54] The Ducies were the most prominent Whig family in Gloucestershire and were peers of the realm since the Conquest. Tortworth was seven miles from Nailsworth, and at this distance it was unlikely that Lord Ducie would have sustained any regular relations with the community. His influence in the Stroud region, however, was considerable. In 1820 he led the Countywide protest on behalf of Queen Caroline, whose cause had been taken up by the parliamentary Whigs.^[55] The Ducies were prominent during the agitation for parliamentary reform, and in 1832 Henry Moreton, the future Lord Ducie, stood as the Whig candidate for the East Gloucestershire seat in the reformed House of Commons.^[56] In 1846, as Lord Ducie, he led the agitation for repeal of the Corn Laws,^[57] which drew the support of Stroudwater clothiers. The

Ducies's political activities epitomized the Whig social and political alliance, which enabled the landed aristocracy to retain its traditional leadership during an epoch of rapid change.^[58] By acting as spokesmen for the "popular classes," the Whigs appealed successfully to Anglicans and Dissenters alike.

In what manner did this alliance manifest itself locally? Although Dissenters could not legally hold parochial office, they participated routinely in parochial affairs and often established amicable relations with Anglican landlords. Joseph Browning, a Nailsworth maltster, revealed his Congregationalist credentials by bequeathing £6 to the Forest Green Church, yet was able to bequeath 20s. to Horsley's churchwardens and overseers of the poor.^[59] John Blackwell, a Baptist deacon and clothier, resided at Winsoredge near Nailsworth^[60] and leased 73 percent of his 182-acre Avening estate from Edward Sheppherd, the lord of the manor.^[61] Nor did religious differences prevent him from participating in parochial affairs. The vestry had overvalued his cloth mill at £52 but corrected the error willingly. All agreed that "Mr. Blackwell shall be charged only £45 as Mr. Tombs being present have declared that it is a mistake in the charge."^[62] Dissenters may have objected in principle to the payment of church rates and tithes, but members of the largest Nonconformist churches failed to articulate their grievances sufficiently until the 1830s, when agitation for reform became commonplace.^[63]

The Quakers remained the great exception. They had protested against church rates and tithes throughout the eighteenth century and, by the early nineteenth century, had been exempted informally from paying these taxes. Anthony Fewster, a leading Quaker, was exempted in 1838 from paying tithe charges of £3. 3s. 10d. on lands owned and occupied in Avening. Fewster also leased twenty-seven acres (including the parsonage) from Revd. Samuel Lloyd, the Anglican vicar of Horsley and as an additional mark of tolerance governing the neighborhood was elected in 1836 to represent Horsley on the Board of Guardians of Stroud's Poor Law Union.^[64]

The examples of Blackwell and Fewster were hardly isolated instances. In 1800 James Thomas, deacon of the Forest Green Congregationalist Church, had been one of those gentlemen to propose the new plan for regulating the Minchinhampton poor.

He appeared again in 1816 as a subscriber to the scheme for setting Minchinhampton's unemployed to work; so did John Blackwell and John Heskins, who, like Blackwell, served as a Short-wood Baptist deacon.^[65] David Ricardo, political economist and lord of the manor, moreover, headed the list of subscribers. The joint appearance of these four men epitomized the Whig social and political alliance. Not only did Anglican and Dissenter share the same assumptions about paternalism, deference, and individualism; Dissenters, by appearing under the auspices of the vestry, demonstrated loyalty to a sphere of local community led by the Establishment.

The Whig social and political alliance became manifest most explicitly during the postwar years when agitation for reform became widespread. The Queen Caroline Affair (ca. 1820), although formally concerned with the King's efforts to dissolve his marriage, gave rise to popular protests that enabled the Whigs to emerge as a genuine political opposition.^[66] The affair reverberated as much in the provinces as in London. At a Countywide meeting held at Gloucester's shire hall, B. W. Guise, Baronet and M.P., excoriated the Government for proceeding against the Queen, denouncing them for the "ill-advised and impolitic measures . . . which had reduced the country to its present situation of difficulty and distress." David Ricardo congratulated Lords Ducie and Sherbourne for their "manly and independent conduct" in defending Caroline and called for a reform of Parliament to effect "a perfect harmony between the people and their representatives."^[67]

Ricardo's ideal of social harmony, as we have seen, already operated informally at the local level, but the Whig-dominated protest gave it further symbolic expression. At the close of the affair, a "demonstration of gladness" held at Stroud sealed the social and political solidarity, forged during the crisis, through the ritualized exploitation of popular emotion.^[68] "A fine Ox intended to regale the poor," the Gloucester Journal reported, "was led through the town, decorated with laurels and ribbands [sic ], bearing appropriate inscriptions; and a large green bag, the symbols of ministerial abasement, was suspended at [its] tail." As a result of pelting by the populace, "its outside soon became a striking emblem of the labours of the disgraceful Milan Commission." This public display clearly discharged much pent-up psychic

energy. In addition to circuses, however, the demonstration's sponsors also offered "bread" to the poor: "Wednesday was occupied in preparing for the feast intended for the poor on the following day; and on Thursday the Ox and four sheep were distributed, with four hogsheads of strong beer, to the great satisfaction of the poor inhabitants, by whom the day will be long remembered." At a complementary feast held two days later in the George Inn, the gentry celebrated the triumph of their liberal union with such toasts as: "Prosperity to the town & vicinity of Stroud. . . . [To] Religion, Law and Loyalty, which have alike been violated in the persecution of our great Queen."

Liberal opinion soon took up Ricardo's linkage of the Queen Caroline Affair and parliamentary reform,^[69] although reform agitation nationwide did not begin in earnest until 1830. When it did, Stroud emerged as one of its principal centers.^[70] Following passage of the Great Reform Act, and subsequently the creation of the parliamentary borough of Stroud, elections were held to the new House of Commons. Analysis of this election reveals the formal structure of politics at Stroud; its character underscores more definitively the borough's Whiggish complexion and the persistence of a "deference community"^[71] in Nailsworth's hinterland.

The three candidates for Stroud's two parliamentary seats belonged to the same political party.^[72] W. H. Hyett stood above all factions and was unanimously selected M.P. He was a country gentleman without personal or family ties to commercial interests but had been an active parliamentary reformer.^[73] Poulet Scrope was an outsider from Castle Combe, Wiltshire, who came from a commercial family.^[74] His support was concentrated in the town of Stroud and its immediate neighborhood, and he enjoyed the backing of "the greater part of the clothing interests."^[75] David Ricardo, son of the now deceased political economist, was lord of the manor of Minchinhampton. He drew support mainly from his own neighborhood but enjoyed the backing of only "a few manufacturers."^[76] Scrope was the more cosmopolitan figure and clearly received wide support because of his connections with government and the City.^[77] Ricardo, despite the association of his father's great name with banking and the City, cultivated the life of a local squire and made this attribute the cutting edge of his campaign.^[78]

Scrope and Ricardo fought bitterly and with the kind of theatrics reminiscent of the Queen Caroline Affair. Theater on the hustings, however, sometimes assumed an unsavory quality:

A stupid attempt to ridicule one of the candidates [Ricardo] by dressing up a fellow in the garb and with the beard of a Jew Peddler was treated with the contempt it deserved. But a country-gentleman who personated [sic ] a Wiltshire moon-raker [Scrope] met with very rough reception—his rake was broken in pieces and the moon was eclipsed in a cloud of missiles.^[79]

Evidently, the crowd was far more exercised by the innocuous attempt to ridicule Scrope than by the anti-Semitism of his supporters.

Ricardo emerged victorious in any case, but by a narrow margin due entirely to his local strength. His support at Minchinhampton, Avening, Horsley, and Woodchester outweighed overwhelmingly his failure to carry the town and environs of Stroud, as well as the several industrial parishes of Stroud's hinterland. The election returns,^[80] depicted in table 23, illustrate the persistence of parochialism and deference, traditionally accorded a lord of the manor, despite the growth of regionalism.

Given the extent of regional economic integration, the clothiers' candidate, although a "foreigner," should have stood the best chance of winning. Ricardo's victory was in this sense anachronistic, and perhaps for this reason his tenure as M.P. proved embarrassingly short; he resigned in 1833, allegedly for personal reasons, and was promptly replaced by his former rival, Poulet Scrope.^[81]

Nevertheless, the political differences between the two men were more matters of style than substance. Each combined a vigorous commitment to free-market principles with a utilitarian paternalist sensibility. Ricardo engaged himself in a wide range of local efforts to help the "deserving poor," from parochial sponsorship of emigration during trade depressions to the formation of the Nails-worth Loan Society, which helped the poor acquire property.^[82] Scrope also believed in "property doing its duty" but, unlike Ricardo, focused much of his attention on the development of a "paternal [national] Government."^[83]

As M.P. for Stroud, Scrope sponsored legislation on savings

banks, government annuities and life insurance, and "friendly" societies, each designed to give the working classes economic security while promoting a spirit of independence among them.^[84] His savings bank bill required government to assume liability for deposits in order to safeguard from bank failures "these (almost sacred) savings of the poor and working classes." His annuity scheme facilitated the purchase of deferred annuities; these seemed "preferable for guarding against old age since [they are] not subject to the vagaries of sickness, accident or trade depression the way payment by instalment is." Scrope complained, too, that friendly societies had received little or no protection from the state, leaving many with defective accounts and open to fraud. He thought, nonetheless, that the fact of their existence "speaks loudly the general prevalence among these classes of the virtues of forethought, of the desire of self-support and of economy with a view to that end." Liberal paternalism aimed at promoting such habits, a fact to which Scrope indirectly attested in correspondence with Edwin Chadwick. "I think you will be quite right," Scrope wrote consolingly, "in claiming for yourself the merit that is due you in so much of all that is good in the P[oor] L[aw] Acts & administrative improvements of the last fourteen years."^[85]

Despite the growth of collectivist public policy, evident in Scrope's legislative initiatives, by the 1830s a critical shift had occurred within the Whig synthesis of paternalism, deference, and individualism. Whig-Radicals began to accord free-market principles greater legitimacy than previously. In 1816 Minchinhampton's paternalists had acted freely against depression induced unemployment and generally treated the poor more generously. By the 1830s, efforts at amelioration had assumed the less direct form of preventive adjustments to market conditions, while concern for the growth of autonomy among the working classes, already evident in 1816, had fully blossomed, a change in emphasis symbolizing the emergence of a liberal-industrial society throughout Stroudwater.