The younger son of an impoverished branch of the Dundas family, Lawrence on leaving his father’s drapery shop in the Luckenbooths set up in business as a merchant contractor.
In 1754 he again contested Linlithgow Burghs against the combined interests of Pelham, Argyll, and Hyndford, and early began ‘his work of treating and bribing’.
In the seven years’ war Dundas recouped his losses by contracts and commissariat appointments for supplying the troops in Germany. Despite disputes with Thomas Orby Hunter,
Disappointed of a seat at the 1761 election, he approached Shelburne, whom he had known in Germany, through his Scots military friends, James Edgar
I have had a letter from Lawrie Dundas to say that he is very desirous of coming into Parliament under your Lordship’s protection ... he submits the terms to your Lordship, his object is to get in.
Dundas followed this up by a letter to Shelburne from Bremen, 28 Oct.:
Col. Masterton wrote me lately he had taken the liberty to inform your Lordship of the disappointment I had met with about my seat in Parliament, and acquainted me how ready you was in offering your assistance with your friends to bring me in upon the first vacancy.
Expense being no object, Dundas preferred to be under obligation to Shelburne rather than ‘to people he did not know’, and on his return home in 1762, discussions took place during which Shelburne ‘gave him the confidence’ of his financial affairs and accepted a substantial loan.
I have just now seen Mr. Calcraft who informed me what had been determined concerning my coming into Parliament, and that Lord Gower was to call upon me this forenoon and settle everything, I am afraid my Lord, that you have made a point of this in a stronger manner than I have any pretensions to or reason to expected [sic].
His ‘German pillage’, his extravagance and his gambling were the subject of much comment.
About this time he sold out Government stock: of his subscription to the loan of 1760 he had retained £25,000, of 1761 nearly £50,000, and of October 1762, £50,000
Having loyally supported Grenville’s Administration and come from a sickbed ‘brought in on men’s shoulders’ to vote, 18 Feb. 1764, on general warrants, he was bitterly offended when on 12 Apr. the Treasury approved, despite his protest, the steps taken by the German commissioners to make ‘a hypothetical charge’ against him.
His interests were now concentrated, according to his critics, on achieving power in Scotland comparable to the former Argyll dictatorship. In July 1766 he purchased the Orkneys and Shetlands from the Earl of Morton for £63,000, thereby obtaining control of the county representation and a leading interest in Tain Burghs. He had long been nursing Stirlingshire for his son Thomas. Lavish expenditure would secure Stirling Burghs which he intended for his friend Robert Haldane. He still maintained an interest in Linlithgow Burghs and Linlithgowshire. In Fife he had considerable influence which he gave to James Wemyss of Wemyss. For himself he reserved the representation of the city of Edinburgh.
During the Chatham Administration he remained in opposition, closely associated with the Bedfords and Grenvilles. He voted with them on the land tax, 27 Feb. 1767, and on 8 Mar. spent the entire day negotiating with Rockingham, Rigby, and Grenville on the organization of a united opposition to the proposal to print the East India papers.
Sir Lawrence was now about to reap his reward. At the general election, his brother Thomas was returned for Orkney, his son Thomas for Stirlingshire, his friend Masterton (in place of the deceased Robert Haldane) for Stirling Burghs. He himself having been returned for both Richmond and Edinburgh, vacated his English seat in favour of William Norton. The other Richmond Member was Alexander Wedderburn, brought in, it was said, as ‘an able and well tongued friend’ to act as spokesman for the Dundas group.
By the autumn Dundas had still not decided whether to join Grenville in opposition, or Bedford and the court. Whately wrote to Grenville, 14 Oct. 1768:
I have a letter from Wedderburn who asks whether you have written lately to Sir Lawrence Dundas. Though he is more satisfied than ever with his language yet he wishes a civility were now and then thrown in to prevent any impression by the great attention paid him from another quarter.
On 5 Nov. Rigby wrote to Bedford:
It remains still doubtful whether I shall prevail with my friend Sir Lawrence to be steady with Government and to-night he will determine with Sir Fletcher Norton and Wedderburn whether to be friends or foes. I think them a material set of people at this juncture and have taken great pains to secure them. The Duke of Grafton will give no promise to Sir Lawrence’s favourite point and without that, if Sir Lawrence determines to give his support to the Administration, he declares he does it for no other reason but the personal regard he bears to your Grace. Grenville and Lord George Sackville try heaven and earth to get him but I think I parted with him just now favourably disposed.
Dundas’s ‘favourite point’ was a peerage. The King refused, but Dundas, despite his disappointment, from the beginning of 1769 consistently voted with Administration, parting company with Wedderburn on 8 May 1769 over Luttrell and the Middlesex election. Wedderburn vacated his seat, and the loss of ‘the ablest man in Britain’ was long remembered in Scotland as a blow to the parliamentary influence of Dundas with his ‘eight or nine dead votes at his heels’.
On the formation of the North Government Dundas once more asked for his reward, presumably a peerage, which was again refused. ‘I wish to know’ wrote the King, 16 Feb. 1770, ‘in what manner Sir Lawrence Dundas has received the answer I authorized you to give him in consequence of his very unreasonable and unseasonable application.’
He was still neither liked nor trusted, the Scottish nobility in particular resenting the extension of the ‘upstart’s’ influence. Argyll’s interest in the west of Scotland was a principal object of attack by Dundas, who in 1774 opposed the Glasgow and Clyde navigation bill not on its merits but because it was supported by Argyll. John Craufurd (whom Dundas had offered to bring into Parliament if he failed in Renfrewshire) told William Mure
In the constituencies Dundas had acquired new allies. Argyll wrote to Mure, 24 Feb. 1774:
I hope that you ... will not come under any engagement with Sir Lawrence Dundas as to the new Hamilton votes in Stirlingshire being neutral; Sir Lawrence Dundas has found means to have such influence with the Elphinstones, that if you do not keep him in order with these votes, he will have them [the Elphinstones] against Duke Hamilton and me both in Dunbartonshire and Clydesdale ... I don’t see that you have anything to fear in Linlithgow as Sir James Cockburn is ready to meet Sir Lawrence there with his own weapons without putting Duke Hamilton to any expense.
In Edinburgh Dundas’s popularity had waned. He was criticized for neglecting the city’s affairs,
Sir Lawrence now had to face the rivalry of his distant connexion Henry Dundas, with whose family he had long been on bad terms, and who in alliance with the Duke of Buccleuch openly challenged his interest. From 1776 violent struggles took place for control of the Edinburgh town council, scores of vituperative handbills appeared attacking ‘the stout Earl of the German Plains’, ridiculing his origins, his ostentation, his pretensions to a coronet. Although Sir Lawrence gained prestige in 1778 by presenting Edinburgh’s loyal address and promoting the raising of the Edinburgh Regiment,
By 1779 his loyalty began to be suspect. All his group were absent from the division on the contractors bill, 12 Feb. 1779, and their support was no longer taken for granted. Reporting to the King on the Keppel debates of 3 Mar., Sandwich particularly mentioned that Sir Lawrence ‘with all his friends’ had voted with Administration, and subsequently told Jenkinson ‘that Sir Lawrence Dundas and his connexion would attend on every question in which he [Sandwich] was personally concerned’.
Listed ‘contra’ in Robinson’s survey of 1780, Sir Lawrence had to face contests in almost every part of his ‘empire’. ‘The court’, wrote Rockingham, ‘have been most alert and violent against him, not only in Edinburgh but wherever they could in boroughs and counties where he was concerned.’
I shall not condole with you that you are become an object of the malice and the intrigues of a time serving court party in Scotland ... I have heard that my friend Dempster and you have been deemed traitors in Scotland for having voted that the influence of the Crown was increased, was increasing and ought to be diminished.
Sir Lawrence was defeated in extraordinary circumstances, but promptly petitioned against William Miller’s return.
During the contest James Boswell, formerly an opponent of Sir Lawrence, but now united with him in antagonism to Henry Dundas, met him for the first time.
It was adding a new distinguished character to my collection. He appeared to me not a cunning shrewd man of the world as I had imagined, but a comely jovial Scotch gentleman of good address but not bright parts ... I liked him much. I even felt for him as a man ungratefully used in his old age.
In March 1781 Sir Lawrence won his petition but, crippled with gout, died 21 Sept. 1781, leaving an estate worth £16,000 p.a. and a fortune of £900,000 in personal and landed property.
When Sir Lawrence Dundas laid out twenty thousand pounds to build a house in Edinburgh and submitted for these fifteen years to every species of disagreeable meanness to establish an interest in the town of Edinburgh, did he ever imagine that he would not only die without a coronet but that within a few months of his breath being out there should not remain in any of his family the vestige of that interest which cost him so much? And yet in truth that will be the case.
