DOWDESWELL, William Edward (1841-1893), of Pull Court, Upton-upon-Severn, Worcs.

One of ‘the oldest families in Worcestershire’, the Dowdeswells had represented Tewkesbury since the mid-seventeenth century, Dowdeswell’s father sitting for the borough from 1835-47.1Birmingham Daily Post, 19 July 1893. At the 1865 general election Dowdeswell came forward as ‘a staunch Conservative’ and undertook a vigorous canvass.2Birmingham Daily Post, 1, 19 July 1893; Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 8 July 1865. He admitted to being ‘untried and inexperienced in public life’, but cited instead his ‘honesty of purpose’ and traded heavily on his family’s long association with the borough. Stressing his education ‘in a Political School’, he promised to support ‘a lateral extension of the suffrage’ based on ‘personal property and partial occupation’, so as to create ‘an educational franchise’ encompassing those fit to exercise ‘so important and responsible a trust’. An advocate of ‘Peace and Non-intervention’ and military efficiency, he condemned Lord John Russell’s ‘meddling and muddling’ in foreign affairs. He also opposed ‘centralization’, and promised to ‘uphold the right of Corporate and Local Self-Government’.3Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 1, 15 July 1865. At the general election he was returned at the head of the poll alongside a second Conservative, the first time that two members of that party had sat for the seat since the Reform Act.4The Times, 27 June 1865.

At his election Dowdeswell had declared that although he was an ‘ardent supporter of the Church of England’, he would accept ‘any well-digested measure’ for the reform of church rates. He nevertheless opposed the second reading of the church rates abolition bill, 7 Mar. 1866. Soon afterwards, at the urging of his party, he resigned his seat at Tewkesbury to contest the West Worcestershire seat made vacant by the death of the earl of Beauchamp.5Morning Post, 7 Mar. 1866; Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 10 Mar. 1865. Dependent on the tacit support of the county’s Liberal landowners, he declared himself to be ‘a Liberal-Conservative’ and emphasised his belief ‘that independence of action that is due to every Country Gentleman’.6Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 10, 31 Mar. 1866. He was, however, highly critical of the Liberal reform bill, being staunchly opposed to any reduction in the borough franchise, and spoke out in favour of retaining the game laws.7Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 31 Mar. 1866. He was returned unopposed.

Like his father, Dowdeswell appears to have been a silent member who did not introduce any bills. He served on a committee on Scottish railway bills in May 1866 and sat on one private bill committee in 1867.8PP 1866 (0.108) lvi. 583; PP 1867-68 (481) lvi. 1. He opposed the second reading of the reform bill, 27 Apr. 1866, and voted for a string of Conservative amendments to the measure. In spite of telling electors that he was ‘not afraid’ of proposals to reduce the county franchise, he voted to increase the qualification from £14 to £20, 7 June, and backed a motion to replace the £14 rental qualification with a £14 rated value, 14 June.9Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 31 Mar. 1866; Birmingham Daily Post, 21 June 1866. On the question of the malt tax he had promised electors that he would support its abolition if it could be proved to be of benefit to the country at large, and voted in the minority for Sir Fitzroy Kelly’s motion for the tax’s ‘immediate reduction and ultimate repeal’, 17 Apr. 1866.10Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 31 Mar. 1866. In 1867 he voted against several amendments to the Conservative reform bill, opposing Gladstone’s plan to enfranchise compound ratepayers, 12 Apr. 1867, McCullagh Torrens’ amendment to enfranchise lodgers, 13 May, Laing’s proposal to give a third member to six boroughs with populations over 150,000, 17 June, Lowe’s amendment to allow electors to distribute their votes cumulatively, 5 July, and voted against rejecting the Lords’ amendments, 8 Aug. He divided in favour of a reduction of the residency qualification, 2 May, and for Laing’s amendment that no borough with a population of less than 10,000 should return more than one member, 31 May 1867, but otherwise gave the measure his support.

Dowdeswell had been presented to electors as ‘the friend to the poor’ and, being a generous donor to the restoration of Tewkesbury Abbey, was said to have been ‘exceedingly popular among all classes’.11Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 6 June, 15 July 1865; Jackson’s Oxford Journal, 27 May 1865; Birmingham Daily Post, 19 July 1893. Having voted against Gladstone’s resolutions on the Irish church, 3 Apr. 1868, and the subsequent bill to suspend new appointments to the body, 22 May, he was came forward at the 1868 general election as a staunch opponent of Gladstonian reform and a proponent of the revision of local taxation, speaking in favour of the establishment of county financial boards.12The Times, 19 Nov. 1868. Having scotched rumours that he intended to resign his seat in the event of Sir John Pakington being defeated at Droitwich, he was returned without opposition.13The Times, 18 Nov. 1868; Berrow’s Worcester Journal, 21 Nov. 1868.

Dowdeswell took the Chiltern Hundreds in June 1876 on grounds of ill health and succeeded to his father’s 4,000 acre estate in Worcestershire in 1887.14Stenton, Who’s Who of British MPs, i. 113; Leeds Mercury, 10 June 1887. For some time prior to this he had held a portion of the estate worth £1,832 per annum: J. Bateman, The Great Landowners of Great Britain (4th edn., 1883), 137. He died at Sarnhill Grange, Worcestershire in July 1893 and was buried at Bushley church-yard. He bequeathed his effects, valued at £2,877 to his wife, and was succeeded in his estates by his brother, the Rev. Edmund Richard Dowdeswell (1845-1915), the vicar of Bushley, 1881-98.15Birmingham Daily Post, 19 July 1893; Nat. Probate Calendar, Index of Wills, 1861-1941 (18 Nov. 1893); E. Walford, County Families of the United Kingdom (49th edn., 1909), 326.