Spencer Churchill, whose profligate and impoverished father had succeeded as 5th duke of Marlborough in 1817 (when Spencer Churchill masqueraded as a clergyman to officiate at the mock marriage of his elder brother Lord Blandford to a young ingenue), was always short of money.
While he was in Paris in 1819 he had attracted the attention of the snobbish Mrs. Trelawny Brereton (soon to be widowed), who saw him as a socially desirable catch for her daughter Charlotte. Despite his pleas of poverty and his languid courtship during the next few years, she continued to construct fantasies:
Every person gives him the character of being amiable and very good tempered, steady and prudent in his expenditure. I have never heard of his gaming, and am pretty certain he is a very sober man. As a soldier his character stands well. His being near thirty I believe ... [Charlotte] likes.
A. Hill, Trelawny’s Strange Relations, 17.
Reality intruded when Spencer Churchill was hauled before the insolvent debtors court in the autumn of 1823. He was granted two extensions of time to file his schedule. At the final hearing, 9 Apr. 1824, it was revealed that he had paid off £3,000 of his St. Albans debts by borrowing from one Simpson, had contracted several other debts in London and had as his only income his captain’s half-pay of 7s. a day and a discretionary allowance of £400 a year under the will of his late grandfather, the 4th duke, which had been occasionally withheld and latterly ‘suspended’ by the trustees. Counsel for his creditors complained that with such a modest income he had ‘speculated with the property of others’ to obtain a seat in Parliament, and called for a significant portion of his half-pay to be assigned for their benefit. On his behalf it was submitted that while his debts were large, their having been inflated by the notorious rapacity of St. Albans electors entitled him to lenient treatment. He was discharged without penalty.
At the general election of 1830 he stood for Woodstock with Blandford, who, outraged by the concession of Catholic emancipation, had espoused parliamentary reform and gone into opposition. In his own address, Spencer Churchill promised to ‘maintain ... inviolate’ the ‘British constitution in church and state’. They were unopposed.
Honesty and independence have ever been their motto. I have been, from the earliest period of my life, a reformer; but I cannot bring myself to think there is any necessity of going to such lengths as ... [Russell] has proposed to go in his plan. I should be very willing to give the large manufacturing towns representatives, but not at the expense of those boroughs, which derive their right of franchise from ancient charters. I am not ... one of those who would rob Peter to pay Paul.
He voted to postpone considering the partial disfranchisement of Chippenham, 27 July, and to preserve the voting rights of non-resident freemen, 30 Aug. He divided against the passage of the bill, 21 Sept. Next day he was given a week’s leave on account of illness in his family. At about this time opposition leaders persuaded his father to take his seat in the Lords and leave his proxy for use against the reform bill.
At the dissolution of 1832 he made way at Woodstock for Blandford. On the formation of Peel’s first ministry two years later he pledged his support, in concert with his father and brother, but was an unsuccessful applicant for gainful employment.
