BASKERVILLE, Thomas Baskerville Mynors (1790-1864), of Treago, Herefordshire and Clyro Court, Radnorshire

A landed gentleman, Baskerville, like many Conservative county members, shifted from being a loyal supporter to an outright opponent of Sir Robert Peel during the course of the 1841 parliament. Although he was silent in debate at Westminster, he was eloquent in explaining his conduct to his Herefordshire constituents, offering revealing insights into Conservative backbench thinking at this time. Like some, but not all of Peel’s backbench critics, Baskerville’s paternalist and protectionist sympathies made him hostile to the new poor law. He declared in 1841 that had the framers of the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act been ‘guided by the scriptural precept of doing unto all men as we would have them do to us, these measures would never have been adopted’.1Hereford Journal, 21 Apr. 1841.

Born into the Mynors family, of Herefordshire, he assumed the name Baskerville on succeeding to the estates of his cousin in 1817, and two years later his grandfather’s seat at Clyro Court also passed to him.2His elder brother Peter Richards Mynors succeeded to their father’s Treago estate. Although Baskerville was present at Conservative meetings in Herefordshire during the 1830s, he was better known as the steward of Hereford, and later Leominster, races.3Hereford Times, 1 Oct. 1836; Hereford Journal, 5 Sept. 1838, 16 Aug. 1843. In 1840 he was adopted as one of the Conservative candidates for Herefordshire at the next general election, and he was returned unopposed the following year after speaking against the ‘wanton and profuse expenditure’ of the Melbourne ministry and promising to oppose ‘any alteration’ in the corn laws.4Hereford Times, 3 Oct. 1840; Hereford Journal, 21 Apr. 1841, 7 July 1841. He sharply criticised the clauses in the new poor law that separated families in the workhouse, which he described as ‘contrary to every feeling of nature and humanity’.5Hereford Journal, 21 Apr. 1841.

Baskerville’s first vote was in the majority that ousted the Whig administration, 27 Aug. 1841, a satisfying introduction to Parliament, he later recalled.6Hereford Journal, 6 Apr. 1842. In 1842 Baskerville supported Peel’s revised sliding scale on corn and the reintroduction of income tax. He is not known to have spoken in debate, but expressed his anxieties about these alterations to local partisans in April 1842. He did not ‘fully approve of the alteration now contemplated’ and would have preferred a ‘greater protection to be given to the farmer with respect to barley and oats’. Yet Baskerville had complete confidence in Peel’s leadership at this time, reflecting that ‘all men saw that the government was wielded by a master hand, and one that was fit to guide the vessel through the storm’. Supporters needed to remain loyal to Peel’s leadership, Baskerville argued, because dissatisfaction would ultimately lead to the Whigs resuming the helm, who could not be trusted to maintain the corn laws or the country’s institutions.7Ibid.

Baskerville did diverge from Peel over the new poor law, however. He consistently voted to curtail the powers of the commission, to restore outdoor relief and protect the autonomy of Gilbert’s unions, 12, 19, 20 July 1842. He was also among the minority that voted for a revision of the poor law ‘as shall make it conformable to Christianity, sound policy, and the ancient constitution of the realm’, 23 Feb. 1843. Baskerville naturally divided against the free trade motions of Charles Villiers, yet having viewed the 1842 tariff as a settlement of the corn laws question, he was alarmed by the government’s 1843 Canadian corn bill. He was part of a deputation that sought reassurance from the colonial secretary Lord Stanley about the measure, which facilitated the importation of American corn to Britain through Canada, but was left unconvinced by the minister’s words.8Hereford Journal, 21 Jan. 1846.

Baskerville was among the paternalist Conservatives who backed a ten hour day for factory workers, 22 May 1844. However, he voted with Peel against Miles’ amendments to lower the duties on colonial sugar, 14, 17 June 1844. He was among the minority of eight that favoured abolishing the poor law commission, 25 July 1844. Baskerville parted company with Peel over the 1845 Maynooth college bill, dividing against the first and second readings. A founder member of the Herefordshire Agricultural Protection Society established in 1844, Baskerville declared his opposition to Peel’s planned repeal of the corn laws before the 1846 session.9Hereford Times, 17 Feb. 1844. He reflected that ‘when he first entered the House of Commons he had great faith in the prime minister − much greater faith than at the present time, as regarded agricultural matters’, and condemned Peel’s conduct as ‘extraordinary’.10Hereford Journal, 21 Jan. 1846. He opposed the corn importation bill at every stage, but abstained on the division on the Irish coercion bill which ejected Peel from office, 25 June 1846.

Baskerville reaffirmed his support for a ten hour day in the next session before retiring at the 1847 general election, when local Conservatives noted approvingly that he had ‘served them well and faithfully’.11Hereford Journal, 11 Aug. 1847.

There is no record of Baskerville seeking a return to the Commons, although he continued to be active in county affairs. On his death in 1864, Baskerville’s estates in Radnorshire and Herefordshire, and a personalty sworn under £14,000 passed to his eldest son Walter Thomas Mynors Baskerville (1839-97).12J. Bateman, The great landowners of Great Britain and Ireland, ed. D. Spring (1971), 28; National Probate Calendar, 17 Dec. 1864. The Baskerville family papers are held by Powys County Archives Office and Herefordshire Record Office.13R/D/JGW/37, Powys County Archives Office; M5B/14, NRA 32445 Stooke, Herefordshire RO.