LAWSON, Andrew (1800-1853), of Aldborough Lodge, Yorks.; Boroughbridge Hall, Yorks. and 26 Pall Mall, London, Mdx.

An ‘able but exceedingly reserved man’, Lawson stood six times for Knaresborough, but was returned only twice.1A.M. Stoddart, The Life of Isabella Bird (1906), 7. In the Commons, where he sat as ‘a moderate Conservative’, he was a robust defender of the corn laws and the Church, but opposed the harshness of the new poor law.2Dod’s parliamentary companion (1836), 131.

Lawson could trace his family’s Yorkshire ancestry back to the sixteenth century.3J. Burke (ed.), The Patrician (1847), iii. 584. The Lawson estates had passed to a distant relative, but the family came into ‘much superior’ property at Boroughbridge through Lawson’s mother, the niece of Rev. James Wilkinson (d. 1805). On the death of his older brother Marmaduke in 1823, Lawson became heir to these properties, to which he succeeded on his mother’s death in 1838.4Burke’s commoners (1835), ii. 247-50. Lawson’s great-uncle, Marmaduke Lawson, had made his will before the birth of Lawson’s father, and so had bequeathed the estates to a more distant kinsman. He extended his estates in 1847, when he purchased the manor of Aldborough, giving him a total of 1,500 acres in the North and West Ridings.5T.S. Turner, History of Aldborough and Boroughbridge (1853), 51; J.T. Ward, ‘West Riding landowners and the corn laws’, EHR, 81 (1966), 270. Aldborough had earlier belonged to the duke of Newcastle, who sold it in 1834 to a navigation company.6Turner, History of Aldborough, 51. This sell-off had been prompted by the disfranchisement of Aldborough and Boroughbridge, previously under Newcastle’s electoral influence, although the Lawsons had challenged his control. Lawson’s brother had sat for the latter constituency, 1818-19, 1819-20. Following his death, Lawson assumed his mantle, suggesting that the duke should concede them a seat at Boroughbridge and warning that ‘if you decide upon a war... I shall spare neither expense nor trouble to uphold our family rights’. Lawson offered at Aldborough in 1826, but did not go to the poll, and finished third when he contested Boroughbridge in 1830.7HP Commons, 1820-32, vi. 49.

Lawson canvassed for a vacancy in June 1832 at Knaresborough, where he was well-known as a magistrate, but abandoned his candidature.8Ibid., iii. 272. He stood at that year’s general election, but his prospects were considered poor in the wake of Reform.9Daily News, 29 Mar. 1849. Although he was ‘a Tory, and supported by the Tory interest’, it was alleged that he had ‘thought fit all at once to sink his former opinions, and now professes the extreme of Liberal principles, manifestly for the purpose of ensuring his election’.10Leeds Mercury, 15 Dec. 1832.­ He was said to have advocated expelling bishops from the House of Lords, the ballot and universal suffrage.11Leeds Mercury, 31 Jan. 1835. Trailing behind three Liberals, he retired from the poll at the close of the first day.12Yorkshire Gazette, 22 Dec. 1832. Undeterred, he offered again in 1835, when he was described by The Times as ‘a man of talent, and of liberal independent Conservative principles’.13The Times, 17 Dec. 1834. Not a gifted speaker, on the hustings he approvingly cited Lord Stanley’s recent pronouncements, and endorsed Sir Francis Burdett’s views that ‘the flags and watchwords under which the Whigs and Tories fought their disgraceful battles, ought to be deserted and abolished’.14York Herald, 17 Jan. 1835. He topped the poll.

Dod’s Parliamentary Companion erroneously listed Lawson in 1835 as ‘a moderate Reformer’, but corrected this in 1836 to ‘a moderate Conservative; in favour of the ballot’.15Dod’s parliamentary companion (1835), 135; (1836), 131. In fact, despite Lawson’s apparent advocacy of the ballot in 1832, he consistently divided against it.16Lawson cast votes against the ballot, 23 June 1836, 7 Mar. 1837 and 21 June 1842. This reflected his general voting habits, usually entering the lobby with the Conservatives. A moderate attender, he voted with Peel on the speakership, 19 Feb., and the address, 26 Feb., and backed him in opposition to Chandos’s motion for repeal of the malt tax, 10 Mar. 1835. However, he was in the minority for Chandos’s motion for relief to agricultural interest, 27 Apr. 1836. He opposed Russell’s motion on the Irish church, 2 Apr. 1835, and subsequently voted against Liberal ministers on that question and on Irish municipal reform. He was not afraid to take an independent line, dividing in the minority for Daniel Harvey’s motion for revision of the pension list, 19 Apr. 1836. His vote against Clay’s motion to consider a fixed duty on corn, 16 Mar. 1837, foreshadowed the hard-line position he took in future on protection.

Lawson spoke, in a fairly perfunctory manner, on just a handful of occasions in his first Parliament, where his only committee service appears to have been on the 1837 county rates bill.17PP 1837 (457), xx. 351. His maiden speech repudiated criticisms of magistrates’ powers in granting public house licences, 17 July 1835. He unsuccessfully moved to reject the second reading of a bill to compensate the Sheffield MP James Silk Buckingham for the suppression of his newspaper, the Calcutta Journal, 23 Feb. 1836, when he condemned Buckingham’s solicitations of petitions supporting the measure as ‘unparliamentary’. Lawson remained aloof from a Commons dispute between his Knaresborough colleague, John Richards, and the Radical Thomas Duncombe over whether Richards, now a Conservative, had professed Radical opinions on the hustings, ignoring their calls for him to speak, 29 Mar. 1836. His motion to prevent Sunday travelling on the Hull and Selby railway mustered only 14 votes, 30 Mar. 1836. The following month he clarified his views on excluding bishops from the Lords, stating that he would vote for Cuthbert Rippon’s motion on the subject if the archbishop of Canterbury and bishop of London could continue to attend, representing the Church and acting as proxies for the other bishops on ecclesiastical questions, a reform which he believed would strengthen the Church by ‘removing any just cause of dissatisfaction’, 26 Apr. 1836. He was subsequently charged with inconsistency, given his apparent volte face since 1832.18Leeds Mercury, 29 July 1837. Not long before the dissolution he moved to disfranchise corrupt voters in county Longford, but failed to muster any support, 9 May 1837.

Seeking re-election in 1837 Lawson gave what the Liberal press dismissed as ‘a long and tedious harangue’ on the hustings, largely in defence of his parliamentary conduct.19Ibid. He polled third behind two Liberals, being defeated by a margin of just six votes. He continued to be dogged by charges of apostasy, being greeted on the hustings at the 1841 general election with cries of ‘turn coat’. However, he asserted that he had always been ‘a moderate Tory’, ‘willing to amend but not to destroy’. He attacked Liberal plans to alter the duties on corn, sugar and timber, denouncing the proposed fixed duty on corn as ‘a sham pretext – a vile trick, to deceive the electors’. He also denied that agriculture had exclusive protection, citing the tariffs on linen, leather and shoes. He admitted that he had to some extent supported the new poor law, but wished to modify ‘its oppressive clauses’.20Leeds Mercury, 3 July 1841. In a reversal of the previous contest, he topped the poll.

A staunch defender of the corn laws, on which he presented constituency petitions, Lawson routinely opposed Villiers’ anti-corn law motions.21The Times, 26 June 1844, 30 Jan. 1846. He voted in favour of Peel’s modified sliding scale, 9 Mar., 7 Apr. 1842, but displayed his palpable sense of betrayal by the premier when he spoke against repeal, 17 Feb. 1846. Noting that ‘he might be a little more loquacious than he had hitherto been’, he bemoaned that ‘all the opinions of the leaders in whom they placed confidence had been overthrown’. He moved unsuccessfully to omit animal hides from the proposed tariff reductions, 17 Mar. 1846, when he also voiced his concern at cutting tariffs on linen, a staple Knaresborough industry. He again protested against corn law repeal on its third reading, arguing that ‘it should not be brought forward in a Parliament which had been elected upon an entirely hostile principle’, 15 May 1846. With ‘great reluctance’ but ‘with the greatest sincerity’, he seconded Lord George Bentinck’s motion to reject the second reading of amendments made to the customs duties bill, 18 May 1846, when his arguments with regard to free trade’s adverse effects on the prices fetched by Yorkshire potatoes were challenged.22Lawson’s last speech in the House was in defence of his claims on the prices of Yorkshire potatoes, 29 May 1846. Having opposed Peel on protection, Lawson abstained from the critical vote on the Irish coercion bill, 25 June 1846.

Aside from protection, Lawson intervened most often on the poor law. He divided against the second reading of the poor law amendment bill, 7 June 1842. Noting that he had protested against the law’s implementation in his neighbourhood, he attacked the poor law commissioners, ‘who seemed to consider themselves infallible’, 20 June 1842. However, he abandoned his attempt to split the bill into two parts, 24 June 1842. He denied that his hostility to the measure was ‘factious’ and regretted having to oppose Peel on the question, but nonetheless voted in the minority for Duncombe’s amendment calling for a temporary rather than a permanent measure, 27 June 1842. Although he did not speak again on the issue, he was added to the committee on Gilbert Unions, 3 Mar. 1845. However, his effort to amend its report so that it favoured the retention of these unions was defeated on the chairman’s casting vote.23PP 1845 (409), xiii. 2, 29. Lawson also served on the committee on the Cork election petition: PP 1842 (271), vi. 8. Lawson’s Tory paternalist streak was also demonstrated by his consistent votes for a ten hour factory day in the 1844 and 1847 sessions.

He continued to oppose further electoral reform, dividing against William Sharman Crawford’s motions in the 1842 and 1843 sessions. Unsurprisingly for a vicar’s son, Lawson was strongly committed to maintaining the privileged position of the Anglican Church.24He also supported various good causes connected with the Church, including the Boroughbridge Church Missionary Society and the restoration of York minster: York Herald, 4 July 1840; Bradford Observer, 13 Oct. 1842. He voted against abolition of church rates, 16 June 1842, non-denominational education, 18 May 1843, and the abolition of Anglican oaths at Oxford and Cambridge universities, 25 May 1843. He spoke and voted against the Dissenters’ chapels bill, 21 June 1844. He was in the minorities against the Maynooth grant, 8 Apr. 1843, 18 Apr., 21 May 1845, and voted against the Catholic relief bill, 24 Feb. 1847. He was not an enthusiastic committee-man, protesting after his opposition in committee to the Cheltenham and Great Western Union railway bill went unheeded that he would refuse to serve on another committee ‘unless by order of the Speaker’, 6 Apr. 1842.

Lawson sought re-election as a Protectionist Conservative at the 1847 general election.25The Times, 30 July 1847. He faced local disapprobation, however, regarding his opposition to the Leeds and Thirsk railway bill. At a local meeting in December 1844 he had been one of only four people who divided in support of the Harrogate and Ripon junction line, promoted by the North of England railway company.26Leeds Mercury, 21 Dec. 1844; Bradford Observer, 26 Dec. 1844. Despite the majority view in favour of the Leeds and Thirsk scheme, Lawson argued against it at the committee stage in 1845, even after the withdrawal of the Harrogate and Ripon project.27The Times, 24 May 1845; York Herald, 14 June 1845. He was not, however, permitted to testify against the bill on another occasion, as it was ruled that he had already given evidence on another line and that his property was too far from the proposed route: The Standard, 1 July 1845. An election placard issued in 1847 accused him of displaying greater concern about securing a railway connection for Boroughbridge – where he resided – than for Knaresborough, and claimed that ‘you so far forgot your constituency as to oppose its third reading [of the Leeds and Thirsk bill] in the House of Commons, and also in the Lords, which, had you been successful, would have deprived the town of any railway communication’.28Bradford & Wakefield Observer, 1 July 1847. Lawson does not appear to have accepted a challenge to disprove the charges against him at a public meeting.29Leeds Mercury, 3 July 1847. He polled third behind two Liberals.

Addressing the York school of design in 1848, Lawson appeared glad to be free of political strife, observing that ‘there is no meeting to me so agreeable as one where all those discordant feelings are hushed, and where all parties meet together for the common good of their countrymen’.30York Herald, 30 Dec. 1848. See also his similar comments to the Yorkshire Union of Mechanics’ Institutes: Leeds Mercury, 17 June 1848. This belied, however, his continued engagement with politics, particularly the protectionist cause. He was one of the vice-presidents of the National Association for the Protection of British Industry and Capital.31National Association for the Protection of British Industry and Capital, Report of the proceedings and the speeches of the great public meeting of this association... 25th June 1849 (1849), 45. He chaired a protectionist meeting at Boroughbridge in December 1849, when he was recovering from several weeks of ‘having been invalided’, and was that town’s delegate to a protectionist meeting at Liverpool in 1850.32The Standard, 11 Dec. 1849; Liverpool Constitutional Association, Report of the speeches delivered at the great meeting held in Liverpool Amphitheatre, Thursday, June 6, 1850, for the protection of British industry and capital (1850), 5. He also attended protectionist gatherings at Ripon, Knaresborough and Thirsk, on the last occasion railing against Richard Cobden, and accusing free traders of immorality because they would rather have cheap sugar than eliminate slavery.33The Standard, 29 Dec. 1849; Daily News, 4 Jan. 1850; York Herald, 2 Feb. 1850.

Lawson stood again at Knaresborough in curious circumstances for the vacancy created by the death of William Lascelles in July 1851. When Thomas Collins offered for the Conservatives, opposed by William Watson for the Liberals, Lawson promised not to oppose him, to avoid splitting the Conservative vote.34The Times, 19 July 1851. However, after Watson withdrew, some of his disgruntled supporters nominated Lawson in his absence rather than allow Collins a walkover.35The Times, 14 July 1851. Although Lawson had not authorised this, he subsequently became involved in the contest, addressing voters at 7 a.m. on polling day, when he declared his principles to be ‘those of moderate Conservatism’,36York Herald, 19 July 1851. although given his voting record in the 1841-7 Parliament it appeared to others that he was in fact ‘ultra-Tory and protectionist’.37Leicester Chronicle, 19 July 1851. He then departed for a prior engagement at York, and did not re-appear until the election – which he lost – was over.38York Herald, 19 July 1851. Collins attacked Lawson’s duplicity in breaking his promise, but Lawson argued that after Watson’s retirement he was ‘perfectly unfettered’.39The Times, 19 July 1851. Following his defeat he solicited support for the next election, when he would offer ‘on moderate Conservative principles as heretofore, acting independently of any other’.40Leeds Mercury, 2 August 1851. However, although he conducted what he claimed was ‘a triumphant canvass’ in 1852, he was ‘reluctantly compelled to retire’ after being advised that he would jeopardise the Conservatives’ chances of securing both seats if he persisted.41Leeds Mercury, 20 Mar. 1852. In the event the Conservatives, after a petition, secured only one seat, despite Lawson’s withdrawal.

Lawson died ‘very suddenly’ at Aldborough Manor, where he had moved from Aldborough Lodge, in February 1853.42Bradford Observer, 3 Mar. 1853. He was buried at St. Mary’s Church, Roecliffe, Aldborough,43Turner, History of Aldborough, 148. which he had constructed and endowed a decade earlier, in part from funds received when he sold his rights as patron of the living of Sheffield.44The Times, 19 Aug. 1845; Turner, History of Aldborough, 149; Sheffield & Rotherham Independent, 11 Jan. 1851. Lawson had an interest in ecclesiastical architecture and had co-chaired the first public meeting of the Yorkshire Architectural Society on the subject: York Herald, 15 Oct. 1842. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Andrew Sherlock Lawson (1824-72), who stood unsuccessfully as a Conservative at Knaresborough in 1868. Lawson was remembered as ‘a gentleman of the most agreeable manners’,45Gent. Mag. (1853), i. 658. and was praised by Rev. Thomas Collins, the father of his 1851 opponent, as ‘a considerate landlord, a good magistrate, a kind friend to the poor, and a liberal giver of his money’.46Leeds Mercury, 12 Mar. 1853. He was the main benefactor of the National Schools at Roecliffe, which were rebuilt at his expense.47Turner, History of Aldborough, 153. A ‘well read, diligent, and practical’ antiquary, he took a keen interest in the excavation on his Aldborough estate of the remains of the Roman settlement of Isurium.48Ibid., 152. Lawson hosted visits there from various bodies, including the Archaeological Institute and the Yorkshire Union of Mechanics’ Institutes: Gent. Mag. (1853), i. 658; York Herald, 12 Jan. 1850.