The Duke of Devonshire becomes Prime Minister?

Spencer Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington and later the 8th Duke of Devonshire, was an influential British statesman and played an important role in the Liberal Party and was the leader of the Liberal Unionist for several years. Devonshire turned down the role of PM on no less than three occasions, each of which are listed below.

Hartington became leader of the Liberals in the Commons after Gladstone, but soon Gladstone returned to the public eye in the campaign against the Bulgarian atrocities. The Midlothian Campaign put Gladstone at the forefront of the party once again, and when the Liberals recieved a majority in 1880, Hartington was asked to form a government, but declined, as Gladstone stated he would refuse to serve under anyone.

In 1886, Hartington, now a Liberal Unionist, once again refused to serve as Prime Minister. He would instead provide support for Salisbury and the Conservative government in the Commons.

The final offer was in 1887, following Lord Randolph Churchill's resignation. Salisbury offered to serve in a government lead by Hartington, but the latter refused.

What would have been result of Devonshire accepting any of the three invitations?

I'm tagging @pipisme - any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
These are interesting scenarios. When Hartington became leader of the Liberal Party in the House of Commons in 1875 he proposed that there were three leaders - Whig, Radical and Irish. "Hartington saw that it was necessary for the Whigs to acquiesce in Gladstone's becoming Prime Minister in 1880 because of the probable dangerous consequences of the 'constant pressure' to which, if out of office, he would be subjected 'from the more extreme section of the party'. Sooner or later, wrote Hartington, Gladstone would criticize or even oppose what the Whig-led government was doing, and such was his hold over Liberal opinion that this would suffice to bring it down." [1] But if he became Prime Minister I don't know how much his policies would differ from those of Gladstone.

In 1886 Hartington was tempted to become Prime Minister, but 'he feared that acceptance would split the Liberal Unionists and encourage Chamberlain and others to revert to the Gladstonian fold, imperilling the Union'. In January 1887 he again rejected Salisbury's proposal for the same reason. For the next five years he hoped that the Liberals might abandon home rule. [2]

But if he had become Prime Minister in 1886 or 1887 I don't know if there would have been the social reforms of the 1886-92 government, such as free elementary education, the provision of allotments and the establishment of county councils.

In June 1895 Salisbury offered the Duke of Devonshire the post of foreign secretary which he refused. Instead he became Lord President of the Council. [2]

[1] See Liberal Politics in the Age of Gladstone and Rosebery: A Study in Leadership in Policy by D.A.Hamer, Oxford University Press, 1972.

[2] See his entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
 
Last edited:
These are interesting scenarios. When Hartington became leader of the Liberal Party in the House of Commons in 1875 he proposed that there were three leaders - Whig, Radical and Irish. "Hartington saw that it was necessary for the Whigs to acquiesce in Gladstone's becoming Prime Minister in 1880 because of the probable dangerous consequences of the 'constant pressure' to which, if out of office, he would be subjected 'from the more extreme section of the party'. Sooner or later, wrote Hartington, Gladstone would criticize or even oppose what the Whig-led government was doing, and such was his hold over Liberal opinion that this would suffice to bring it down." [1] But if he became Prime Minister I don't know how much his policies would differ from those of Gladstone.

In 1886 Hartington was tempted to become Prime Minister, but 'he feared that acceptance would split the Liberal Unionists and encourage Chamberlain and others to revert to the Gladstonian fold, imperilling the Union'. In January 1887 he again rejected Salisbury's proposal for the same reason. For the next five years he hoped that the Liberals might abandon home rule. [2]

But if he had become Prime Minister in 1886 or 1887 I don't know if there would have been the social reforms of the 1886-92 government, such as free elementary education, the provision of allotments and the establishment of county councils.

In June 1895 Salisbury offered the Duke of Devonshire the post of foreign secretary which he refused. Instead he became Lord President of the Council. [2]

[1] See Liberal Politics in the Age of Gladstone and Rosebery: A Study in Leadership in Policy by D.A.Hamer, Oxford University Press, 1972.

[2] See his entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
If Hartington's brother isn't murdered, is there a chance Hartington could agree to Chamberlain's Central Board scheme?
 
The entry for Hartington in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography states that the murder of his brother
strengthened his view that it would at present be 'madness' for Britain to diminish her responsibility for order in Ireland by granting significant power to locally elected bodies. In 1885 Hartington and his cabinet allies successfully resisted Chamberlain's scheme for a central board and elected county boards throughout Ireland.

If his brother had not been murdered I would say it would have been unlikely, though perhaps possible, that Hartington would have agreed to Chamberlain's scheme.
 
The entry for Hartington in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography states that the murder of his brother

If his brother had not been murdered I would say it would have been unlikely, though perhaps possible, that Hartington would have agreed to Chamberlain's scheme.
This is a bit of a tricky question to answer, but do you think Chamberlain's scheme had a chance of success? "Success" in this case meaning Ireland remains in the Union with a minimum of violence.

Do we know what Hartington's views on foreign policy were, so we can have an idea what his government will do here? This is assuming Gladstone doesn't speak out over the Balkan atrocities.
 
I think it is possible that Chamberlain's scheme had a chance of success, but it would have to be accepted by the prime minister and cabinet. 'At the beginning of 1885.... Chamberlain had offered Parnell a central board scheme....But when, in the middle of the year, Conservatives indicated that they might be willing to make a more substantial bid for Irish nationalist support, Parnell turned Chamberlain down...' [1]

Hartington did not object to Disraeli's foreign policy goals of strengthening imperial sentiment at home and British prestige abroad. 'However he did not approve of Disraeli's presentation of imperial policy, which he thought placed too much emphasis on empty pomp and display.'

'On the Eastern question....Hartington criticized Disraeli's pursuit of grandeur,taking the view that Britain should have co-operated with the European powers in order to force through reforms in Ottoman administration of her European provinces, rather than ostentatiously breaking ranks and so bolstering Constantinople's intransigence.' [2]

[1] Quotation taken from the entry for Joseph Chamberlain in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

[2] Quotations taken from the entry for Hartington in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
 
Top