Robert Jenkinson, Second Earl of Liverpool

Prime minister of Great Britain (1812-1827)

• Born: June 7, 1770
• Birthplace: London, England
• Died: December 4, 1828
• Place of death: London, England

As prime minister of Great Britain from 1812 to 1827, Liverpool led his nation to victory over Napoleonic France, rode out the domestic strife of the postwar years, and directed the economic recovery and liberal legislation of the 1820’s.

Early Life

Robert Banks Jenkinson, who would become the second earl of Liverpool, was reared by his father, Charles Jenkinson, first Baron Hawkesbury and first earl of Liverpool. His mother, née Amelia Watts, the daughter of an ex-governor of Fort William in Bengal, died a month after he was born. His father was an adviser to George III, secretary at war under Lord North, and president of the Board of Trade under William Pitt the Younger.

Jenkinson was educated at Charterhouse and Christ Church, Oxford, emerging as an excellent classicist and historian, well versed in international affairs and political economy. While on the Grand Tour in 1789, he witnessed the storming of the Bastille, an experience that bred in him a lifelong distrust of mobs.

In 1790, Jenkinson was elected to Parliament at the age of twenty. However, he declined to sit as a minor and waited until 1792 to deliver his maiden speech, a well-received defense of Great Britain’s handling of the Oczakov crisis. In 1793, his usefulness to the Tory government was demonstrated further by speeches answering Whig criticisms of the French war and demands for parliamentary reform, and Pitt rewarded him by appointment to the Indian Board of Control. For some years, he attended Parliament irregularly because of obligations in the Kentish militia, which he joined at the outbreak of war, and affairs of the heart. In 1795, he married the earl of Bristol’s daughter, Louisa Theodosia Hervey, to whom he remained utterly devoted until her death. Despite his absences, Lord Hawkesbury (the courtesy title he assumed when his father received an earldom in 1796) was a valued supporter of the government. In 1799, he was made Master of the Mint, an appointment that gave membership of the Privy Council and a clear signal that Pitt had marked him out for further advancement.

Portraits of Hawkesbury reveal an ungainly figure with a long neck, awkward posture, and untidy appearance. He was a shy, sensitive man, respected in political circles for his modesty, integrity, and sound judgment. Although not a scintillating orator, his speeches were typically clear, well prepared, and effective, and it is understandable that Pitt, whose front bench was short of able speakers, should view him with favor. Nevertheless, appointment to the cabinet came unexpectedly early. After resigning over the Catholic question in 1801, Pitt persuaded Hawkesbury to support Henry Addington, who, desperate for the assistance of another minister in the Commons, gave him the Foreign Office at the age of thirty.

Life’s Work

In the decade after joining the cabinet, Hawkesbury occupied all three secretaryships of state. As foreign secretary between 1801 and 1804, he negotiated the abortive Peace of Amiens (1802), a policy that was vehemently criticized by his predecessor, William Wyndham Grenville. In 1803, to help counter such attacks, he was raised to the House of Lords, where he led the Tories—initially as Baron Hawkesbury and, after his father’s death in 1808, as earl of Liverpool—until retiring from politics. From 1804 to 1806, he was Pitt’s home secretary and, after the latter’s death, rejected a royal offer of the premiership because the cabinet had decided not to continue without its leader. Subsequently, he served as home secretary under the duke of Portland and secretary of war under Spencer Perceval, acquiring a reputation as a conciliator and a skilled administrator. By 1812, he was far more experienced than any of his ministerial colleagues, who elected him leader when Perceval was assassinated. The prince regent, after approaching a number of other politicians, endorsed this decision by making Liverpool prime minister on June 8, 1812.

At the time of its formation, there was little reason to expect Liverpool’s administration to prove more resilient than any of its five predecessors in the previous eleven years. The most immediate threat was the issue of Catholic emancipation. Although personally opposed to the proposal that political rights be given to Catholics, Liverpool adopted a position of government neutrality on the question. This device maintained cabinet unity in 1812 and became a permanent feature of his policies. In the following three years, the government won immense popularity as a result of its contributions to Napoleon’s defeat and the subsequent peace negotiations, and in 1814, Liverpool was made Knight of the Garter for his services to the country.

The period from 1815 to 1821 was the most difficult of Liverpool’s career. During these years, he grappled with economic and social problems brought on by the end of the war; the government experienced continuous budgetary problems resulting from its reluctant abandonment of the wartime income tax. More obviously, the ministry’s responsibility was the Corn Law of 1815, prohibiting importation until the domestic price reached eighty shillings a quarter. Viewed by Liverpool as a temporary measure to facilitate the agricultural sector’s transition to peacetime conditions and reduce dependence upon foreign supply, the act provoked widespread outbursts against a self-interested landowning Parliament. Discontent was aggravated by economic distress, itself popularly attributed to the government’s extravagance, and produced unprecedented calls for parliamentary reform, which culminated in the unfortunate “Peterloo Massacre” of 1819.

Lacking adequate information, Liverpool believed that there was an organized revolutionary movement and determined upon decisive action to maintain order. In 1817, habeas corpus was suspended, in 1819 the notorious Six Acts increased magistrates’ powers against sedition, and a small number of suspects was jailed. These relatively mild measures silenced the radicals briefly but intensified their bitterness. After the accession of George IV in 1820, opposition rose to fever pitch around the figure of his adulterous wife, Caroline, whose return from the Continent obliged Liverpool to introduce a divorce bill and severely compromised him.

On one hand, Liverpool was vilified as the lackey of a licentious husband brutally attacking an innocent woman. On the other, his inability to carry the bill almost led to dismissal by the disgruntled monarch. By the time the affair was ended by Caroline’s death in 1821, it appears to have taken a considerable personal toll of Liverpool, for afterward his characteristic good temper gave way increasingly to testiness and intolerance. His spirits were lowered further in 1821 by the death of Louisa, a devastating loss only partly cushioned by marriage to her close friend, Mary Chester, niece of Lord Bagot, in 1822.

Liverpool’s public life took a favorable turn during the early 1820’s as economic recovery dispelled social unrest and facilitated more constructive policies. In conjunction with able colleagues such as William Huskisson, Sir Robert Peel, and Frederick Robinson, he sought to eradicate discontent by reducing economic instability and implementing moderate liberal reforms. In 1821, the Bank of England resumed cash payments, which had been suspended with inflationary consequences since 1797.

In 1826, the volatility of provincial credit was tackled by a statute prohibiting country bank notes under five pounds and permitting the erection of large joint-stock banks and Bank of England branches outside London. Similarly, to meet the population’s need for steadier food supply and employment, the government attempted to regularize commerce by loosening trade restrictions and lowering duties on a broad range of imports. In addition, it passed a series of law reforms, including statutes that repealed the combination acts, halved the number of capital offenses, regulated judicial incomes, and improved provincial prisons. The government’s liberalism was reflected also in its foreign policy, conducted until 1822 by Lord Castlereagh and afterward by George Canning . While pursuing the national interest, both vehemently opposed the efforts of the reactionary European powers to suppress revolutionary activity, and Canning in particular stirred patriotic spirit when he supported liberal and nationalist movements in Greece, Portugal, and South America.

By the mid-1820’s, the government had regained its popularity but was seriously threatened by the perennial corn and Catholic questions. In 1826, in defiance of the agriculturalists, Liverpool prepared a corn bill replacing import prohibition below eighty shillings a quarter with a sliding scale of duties that would decline as the price rose. This was passed in a slightly altered form in 1828 and remained in force until 1846. The Catholic issue had become urgent because of Irish agitation and growing cabinet opposition to governmental neutrality. Liverpool believed that pro-Catholic aggression might destroy his ministry during the 1827 session. He suffered a cerebral hemorrhage on February 17 of that year, however, and played no further part in politics before his death on December 4, 1828. As he died without issue, he was succeeded as earl of Liverpool by his half brother, Charles Cecil Cope Jenkinson.

Significance

As prime minister for fifteen years, a period exceeded only by Robert Walpole and William Pitt, the second earl of Liverpool exerted a profound influence on the development of British politics and public policy. Determined to enhance the authority of his office, he resisted both royal interference with the cabinet and the independent leanings of its members. After appointment by the premier, ministers were given considerable administrative scope, but general policy and major decisions were formulated in conjunction with him. Government was conducted in accordance with Liverpool’s own moral code, a fact that helped to raise the public image of politicians and their expected standards of behavior. It also reflected his personal views, which represented, to a remarkable degree, the contradictory currents of early nineteenth century opinion and made him acceptable to both conservative and liberal wings of his party.

Liverpool’s reverence for the traditional constitution was shared by the large, influential group of orthodox Tories. After he was replaced by the pro-Catholic Canning in 1827, their defection threw the party into chaos, and within five years the legislature had enacted Catholic emancipation and parliamentary reform. In contrast, Liverpool was progressive on other issues. Guided by the principles of political economy, he sought to promote industry and commerce, if necessary at the expense of the landed interest.

Liverpool’s ministry’s tariff policies inaugurated the Free Trade movement, which, after a hiatus under the Whigs during the 1830’s, was resumed by Peel and came to be viewed as the basis of mid-Victorian prosperity. Similarly, the banking legislation laid the groundwork for Peel’s later measures, and the law reforms paved the way for the radical work of Henry Brougham during the 1830’s. In sum, although Liverpool is a little-known historical figure, his achievements were diverse and substantial. After leading Great Britain to victory over Napoleon and through the postwar troubles, he implemented constructive reforms that were to have important, long-term consequences.

Bibliography

Brady, Alexander. William Huskisson and Liberal Reform. London: Oxford University Press, 1928. Dated but still useful essay on the nature and purposes of economic reforms. Particularly helpful on commercial legislation.

Brock, William Ranuf. Lord Liverpool and Liberal Toryism, 1820 to 1827. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1941. 2d ed. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1967. Stimulating analysis of Liverpool’s final years, especially valuable on his ideas and administrative methods. The second edition eliminates factual errors in the original.

Cookson, J. E. Lord Liverpool’s Administration: The Crucial Years, 1815-1822. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1975. Excellent narrative of the government’s reactions to events in the troubled years after Waterloo. Exposes the increasing influence of public opinion on policy and contains suggestive comments on Liverpool’s administration as a whole.

Derry, John W. Politics in the Age of Fox, Pitt, and Liverpool. Rev. ed. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Describes how the British political system met the challenges of war, the French Revolution, and social and economic change during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.

Gash, Norman. Lord Liverpool. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1984. A brilliant, superbly written portrait, good on all aspects of Liverpool’s life, particularly his character and personal relations. Skillfully traces continuities between Liverpool’s policies and those of Peel during the 1840’s. Essential reading.

Hilton, Boyd. Corn, Cash, Commerce: The Economic Policies of the Tory Governments, 1815-1830. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1977. Penetrating, controversial account of leading politicians’ views on economic policy, based on parliamentary debates and private papers. Stresses the influence of pragmatic rather than doctrinal considerations.

Petrie, Sir Charles. Lord Liverpool and His Times. London: James Barrie, 1954. The only modern biography before that by Gash, this book provides an outline of Liverpool’s career. Dwells excessively on background events and largely neglects economic matters.

Plowright, John. Regency England: The Age of Lord Liverpool. London: Routledge, 1996. Covers the period prior to the adoption of the Great Reform Act of 1832, describing the political issues of the time and how Liverpool’s ministry responded to these issues.

Yonge, Charles Duke. The Life and Administration of the Second Earl of Liverpool. London: Macmillan, 1868. A three-volume biography with little analysis, but extensive quotations from Liverpool’s papers reveal his reactions to specific events.