Hello and welcome to our London History Podcast, where we share our love of London people, places and history. This podcast is designed for you to learn things about London that most Londoners don't even know. I am Hazel Baker, a qualified London tour guide and CEO of London guidedwalks.co.uk. Our walking tours are designed for those who love London and want to make the most of their
time here. No matter whether it's for a weekend or a lifetime, we aim to deliver well prepared and insightful guided walks and private tours to make it an experience worth remembering. It's been a busy time here at London Guided Walks HQ, but don't forget our London History Podcast section on our website now includes full transcripts, photos, videos and recommended reading.
And you can find this section on our website londonguidedwalks.co.uk/podcast or simply go to our website, click on the section that says London History in the menu and then select Podcast. We've got lots of new images and also we've linked to related blog posts and other podcast episodes where appropriate. Don't forget, if you enjoy what we do then please rate and review. It warms the cockles of my heart to read your appreciation of this labour of love. Get that cup of tea, put your
feet up and enjoy. In today's episode, we are stepping back into the 18th century to meet a man whose name is both prominent and controversial, William Beckford. Born in Jamaica in 17 O 9, Beckford became one of the wealthiest commoners in Britain through the profits of sugar plantations and enslaved labour. Twice Lord Mayor of London, he built his legacy in Guildhall, on grand estates and also in Parliament. But at what cost?
With me today is Ian Mcdermid, the City of London guide who doesn't shy away from the tough subjects. And he's here to help us unpick the many threads of Beckford's life, from his influence in city politics to the uncomfortable truths behind his wealth. If we're talking about his early life and the wealth with William Beckford, what do we know about his early life in Jamaica and how did he come to inherit all
of it? Well, the the simple fact is that his father was the largest plantation owner in Jamaica and also the speaker of the Jamaica Parliament. And Beckford's inheritance is a little bit complicated. He's not the eldest son, he's the second son, but is the his elder brother dies before he does. But actually he has to engage in very long litigation with his mother. But eventually he does get the
majority of the estates. And in addition to his inheritance, he has a reputation amongst other plantation owners of being very sharp. There were economies of scale within running plantations and. There is a process whereby. The plantations in the Caribbean gradually get bigger and.
One of the ways that. Beckford took advantage of this was that he would lend other plantation owners money through a mortgage secured on their property and then when they failed to make the payments, he had the reputation for being rather too quick in foreclosing on those mortgages. So he was able to build up his position largely through his inheritance by a servo carried out in 1754. He is shown as owning some 22,000 acres on Jamaica, making him the largest landowner and 3000 slaves.
Wow, that's a huge amount. There is a very good book on William Beckford by Perry Gauche, an Oxford historian. It is the book on on the subject, and Gauchy estimates that Beckford's average income was 14 one 4000 lbs, though he Gauchy cautions that the figures were very volatile. To give some perspective on to what 14,000 lbs. Meant, about this time a junior clerk at the Bank of England
would be earning around 50 lbs. So we can think of 50 lbs as being the very bottom of the kind of respectable ladder in Georgian England. So you can just about survive on £50 a year. 14,000 is a huge amount. But in addition to this, Beckford's wealth was legendary.
There was a famous quote about him from Horace Walpole which was endlessly repeated in at the time in newspapers and the rest of it. And while Fontil, which becomes Beckford's English estate in Wiltshire, burns down and after this disaster, Walpo quotes him saying, oh, I have an odd 50,000 lbs in the. Drawer. I will build this up again so Walpole isn't always the most accurate, but this is the kind of jokey thing that rich people say about their wealth in boasting and I think the point.
About the story is we we can't necessarily rely on the. Statistics, but it was repeated, it was given. Great credence at the time. So he's there. He he's, he's born in Jamaica. He is sent to England. For his education. So firstly he goes to Westminster School and then he goes to Balliol College, Oxford. And I think that sending your son to Westminster and then to Oxford is partly about getting an. Education, but it's also partly or in large measure about.
Networking and the English universities, certainly in the 18th century. Had a rather. Poor reputation as being rather backwards and after he's been to Oxford, he's he then goes off to Leiden and studies under the physician Borjava. And we might say that in, in in the Dutch Republic, he, he got a, a proper education and he returns to Jamaica afterwards. He then makes a couple of trips to London and then he makes, goes back to Jamaica. But the final trip to Jamaica is in 1750.
And this is one of the important things about Bedford's. You said that he, he was born in 17 O 9. After 1750, he does not go back to Jamaica. He spends the rest of his life in England, and this is one of the important things about him. He is part of the plant. Up proceed the absentee planters who make their way in England.
And these planters are well known for their wealth, and they are resented for their wealth, and they are criticized for their wealth and for trying to forward the interests of the sugar columnies. They do not attract a particular degree of criticism for the slave owning, however. So I've had a little play around with the National Archives
Currency calculator. Oh. God. Now this has the often you say, you know when you're over dealing with any of this deal with a pinch of salt, but a skip worth of salt would be more realistic. So if we're looking about what 1770 are we saying? Sorry that that figure is for the 1760s. So actually you, you, you're not far out. OK. So if we do for the spending power, so this is not about wealth, this is spending power for 1760s compared to a say now issue. It's like 2017 was the last
update. Then it was worth £1,434,472.20 which meant in 1760 you could buy with 14,000 pounds, 2043 horses, 2997 cows. If you're wanting to get a few woolly jumpers then you could get 29,787 stones of of wool. You could also get 8588 quarts of wheat and you could pay a skilled tradesman for 140,000 days, which is just amazing if you think of that kind of of of that wealth that yes, I mean to have that kind of spending power.
Yes, yeah. I mean, the problem with all that is that the one and a half million just doesn't sound significant in today's terms. And I think we we'd need to compare them with with sort of billionaires today. Yes, I'd agree with that. I mean when also you're playing around the Bank of England has also got a conversion calculator has a measuring wealth and they come up with a few other little
values as well. So from a value from 1760 to now 14,000 then when you're talking the the monetary value, we've got about 28 million and that's the reflective of goods and services. However, if we thinking of economic power and influence, then this is where you're coming in in with the talking in the realms of billionaires, roughly about two to £3 billion, which is significant. Was it typical for men like Bedford to move between colonies
and London so freely? I mean, what does that say about social mobility and also the empire at large? Well, I think this plantocracy is a fairly new phenomenon and it causes a certain amount, as already mentioned, resentment. So it's a very much a phenomenon which contemporaries are aware of. And in terms of social mobility, he does use. His wealth to. Integrate into the. British.
Landed classes and I think he does this fairly successfully, but I think we also have to bear in mind that the as Tocrats as they would define themselves would slightly look down their noses at him as being new money. Not particularly worried about the origins of this new money, but the fact that it's not old money and the fact that he is like other members of the plant operacy so wealthy. So he comes to England and what he does is he does a couple of things.
One is buy property and as already mentioned, he buys this property Fonthill, which at the time of its purchase is a renovated Elizabethan mansion. It burns down, as we've said, and then he rebuilds it in the latest Palladian style and he buys a couple of other landed estates as well. What's interesting, particularly for us concerned with London history, is following Beckford around London, and his first London home is #12 Upper Brook Street.
And Brook Street is very near Grovesland Square, which was perhaps the most fashionable square at this time. And as with these other places that we're going to mention, in terms of London, there isn't much remaining from Beckford's time, but it's quite interesting to walk in his footsteps and to try and imagine the world which he inhabited. 12 Brook Street was largely remodeled after the Second World War as the high House of the Canadian High Commissioner.
I've never been inside it. From the outside, it looks one of those, to my mind, very ugly post Second World War historicizing buildings. But I've read that inside, some of the original features remain, so it'd be interesting at some stage to to go around and have a look at it. Though having described it as ugly, I don't suppose anyone's going to invite me particularly soon. But anyway, the key thing. Is that he he's.
In the most fashionable part of London, this is where a lot of the plantation owners live so he can go and chat with them. But then in 1751 he moves to 22 Soho Square. So for those people who don't know London, Soho Square is to the east of where we're talking about and it's just to the South of Oxford Street. And even today it has a rather mixed feel about it. Do you agree, Hazel? Do you agree with that? Yeah, it's got a, a story of its
own, doesn't it? It's from different eras, but it would have been a, a, a good address to reach into Westminster though, if you think about it.
This. Move to the East is is somewhat significant because although Soho Square was grand, it wasn't nearly as grand at this stage as a square was, and we can see a process by the more easterly of the squares which had developed first go downhill as the aristocratic people who had patronized them and really got them going, then progressed further out to the West. Hence the development of square
to the West and. Just a just A2 column from say who lived in Grosvenor Square as well compared to Soho Square in the 1760s. If you think of the biggest names that you could. So the Duke of Portland, who later became PM Lord Harcourt, who was a diplomat and politician and several members of the perigee Irish, Scottish and also English titles as well. They're all in Grosvenor Square at this time. And it would have been a
uniform. There would have been 5 Bay brick houses, absolutely gorgeous, top notch architecture, none of which exists anymore. And these town bit townhouses would have had the basements, the three or four storeys above ground. They weren't very high, very grand staircases, drawing rooms on the piano. Nobiley, which is a 1st floor. If you're in America, that's the second floor and then the bedrooms above that. Real restrained Georgian classicism. So that was what Grosvenor
Square was. It was synonymous with wealth and refinement and elite society. However, with Soho Square, this is at the same time associated with medical man publishers, tradespeople and even institutions. William Chambers, the architect, he was around at that time, also Doctor William Hunter. We've done an episode on him. He was at #28 and also I can never pronounce his name. Isaac Sakura, the physician for
the Portuguese embassy. He he lived on the square at the same time, as well as opera singers, French engravers, publishers, bookbinders, useful people, I suppose, that do things they were in in Soho Square rather than titled genteel folk and. Perhaps it might be worth adding in parentheses now that Grosvenor Square is a huge disappointment. Just now.
I mean it's whereas. Soho Square is interesting to be. Similarly with with with Brook Street. As I was saying, although the the original is there, it's interesting to to walk along Upper Brook. Yeah, it's interesting to walk along and let your imagination run with it. I. Had a little look at prices of Upper Brook Street and did you know that number 12 was sold in 2003? No do. You want to know how much for? Well.
I guess that gives some light, some idea of the kind of wealth that somebody like Beckford had Where? He moves to in Soho square #22 is no longer. There. There's a rather strange modern building there, but what's quite nice about Soho Square is that part of it. Is genuinely 18th century if only a small. Part of it and #1 number one Greek St. which is the House of Saint Barnabas, is still standing. And although it's number one Greek St. it's actually on the South side of Soho Square.
So Greek St. runs to the South, directly to the South leading out of leading out of the square. And this is a really grand house to stand outside. And I remember you saying, Hazel, that you've actually been inside. I never have, but it sounds a really interesting building and the importance for us is that it was leased and remodeled done up for our Beckford's younger brother. This is Richard Beckford and he My understanding is that the finest 18th century interiors in
Soho are within that building. But it's also very interesting for it's later history. So it becomes the headquarters of the Metropolitan Board of Works in the 19th century. And this is Basil Jets headquarters, the man who rebuilt sewers. And then it gets its modern name because since 1862, until a couple of years ago, it was the home of the Saint Barnabas Charity, which was a club and a charity and which worked with London's homeless. So a very diverse and interesting history.
But as I say, Hazel, can you say anything about visiting it and seeing, did you see 18th century interiors when you were in there? I don't remember seeing very much of the interiors. It was, it was the membership club was for those who worked in media, in the arts. So there were a lot of modern art, sculptures and pieces of art on the wall, which, you know, and my particular favorite of mine. So I was a bit dazzled by all of
that. I do remember some plaster work on the ceiling and of course that you've got the very nice Georgian windows on the on the ground floor. But now I don't remember very much of that. But that might have been we just didn't have access to those rooms or I just. That. Wasn't just something that I remember at the time focusing on. So then the opportunity arises. I mean, at the moment it's closed. London's changing all the time, as any modern city does.
So keep an eye on it. And it's worth reminding the listeners that the transcript is also on a website. But also we add in photos. So of these buildings that we're talking about, there'll be photos on the show notes for you to have a little look at as well. And London guardedwalks.co.uk, yes, so. Standing outside this house, looking at it from Soho Square, it really is, is, is grand and beautiful.
So I've never been inside, but it really is interesting from the from the outside and I think it gives some idea of the the the the kind. Of luxury that these these people were were used to living in. He moves to the East, which is kind of going in the against the flow of the fashionable and the extremely wealthy going the other way. But you're saying it's still
respectable. And the reason for going there is that it's a lot easier for him to get into the city from the city is his other kind of place where he operates. And in the city is where a lot of the. Merchants are so it's important for him to to. Have contact with them. And he has He opens an office.
In. Nicholas Lane. Nicholas Lane is now bland modern office blocks, but also he was along with the other a lot of other so-called W India men, somebody who frequented the Jamaica Coffee House and the Jamaica Coffee House was just off Cornhill. And this is a very important historical site. It's now occupied by the Jamaica Wine Bar, which I should emphasize has nothing to do with the earlier coffee house bar
sharing the same name. So the the wine bar is built in the 1860s, but it's built on the the coffee house. And the coffee house is important because it was the place where the West Indian merchantmen met. So these are very, very wealthy merchants. And it's important in the context of London's burgeoning financial markets because these are one small section of the mercantile elite who play a very important part in the
development of London's markets. And it's also historically important because in 1652, this is the first place where coffee is sold as a beverage in London, definitely probably the first place in England as well. So, and it's in these little narrow alleyways which quite evocative I think. And it's reasonably easy to imagine yourself back in the 18th century when you're walking around them. This is the kind of London media in which he operated.
For me, it's interesting to walk around these places and have a look where where Beckford would have walked. Do you even know where we get Nicholas Lane name from? No. Go on. Well, it. Was originally Saint Nicholas Lane which might give a little clue, and this is a street running North and South from Lombard St. to Candle Wick St. and it comes from the medieval Saint Nicholas Akon church.
So earliest recordings is 1084. However that church got destroyed in the Great Flower of London in 1666 and it was never rebuilt. So even when Beckford is walking around, that church has been gone for 100 years and we still have the name now. We've spoken a bit about his property in in London and the the estates more than the London house are about assimilating with the English landed classes. And he invites well to do people to visit him in Fontail.
And obviously being very, very rich, they're quite keen to go because you're going to get really splendid entertainment if you if you go there. The other thing that he is using his money for is to buy his way into politics and he first of all gains a seat as a Member of Parliament in Shaftesbury in 1747. And his younger brothers, Richard, who we've already mentioned becomes MP for Bristol. And I'm never quite sure how you
pronounce his brother's name. Juline's possibly becomes MP for Salisbury, but what's significant is that Beckford then shifts his political attention towards the City of London and in the 1754 election he's elected as an MP for the City. And he repeats this feat in the remaining elections in his life, which say 1761 and 1768. Now, the City is important because it's full of merchants like him, but it's also important because it is one of the most open constituencies in England.
So there are estimated to be around 6000 voters in the City of London. The other old thing about the City of London is that it returns four members of Parliament and the electorate of 6000 is only really surpassed by Westminster where there are 9000 voters. So Westminster, it's no coincidence that's the place where Wilkes the the, the the radical wins the elections and then then is denied his seat, but nevertheless standing for
the city. It's about winning over a lot of men who would be seen as relatively independent. This is a seat in which the traditional ties. Of. Aristocratic patronage are a lot weaker, and this is important. And when we're talking about aristocratic patronage in the 18th century, it might be worth mentioning that the only other seat that returns four members of Parliament is none other than Weymouth come Malcolm Regis.
And that reflects it rather dramatically, the fact that the representation of the House of Commons is very much based on how it was established in the Middle Ages, and the places that were wealthy and important in the Middle Ages still have outsize influence in the 18th century. But. This business about winning the polls in the in the cities is important for Beckford and there are four MPs. He comes fourth in 1754 but
that's fine. And then he comes third in the next two elections and he is also pursues a political career within the city itself. So he becomes an Alderman in 1752 for Billingsgate. London is divided into the City of London is divided into wards, and each of the ward returns a varying number of councillors, common Councilman, depending on the population there, but. Each of the wards returns. One Alderman. So the Alderman is kind of like the most senior post within a ward.
In 1755, he becomes a sheriff of London. This is largely A ceremonial role by this stage, but it is a crucial stepping stone because once you have become sheriff, you are then eligible to become Lord Mayor. And Beckford serves as Lord Mayor twice, once in 1762 and once in 1769. And it's this latter time of serving as Lord Mayor that's going to lead to his kind of apotheosis as a champion of. English Liberties. He. Mentioned that Beckford was Lord
Mayor of London twice. First term 1762 to 63, second term 1769 to 1770. But it is in 1770 that he makes a famous speech. Yeah, well part of the reason the speech is famous is is that he shouldn't have made it in the first place. So what happens? Is he as Lord Mayor? He presents 2 addresses to George the Third, and the first of these is in March. And in this address he calls for dissolution of Parliament and
the removal of ministers. And this is kind of fairly sailing, although, although it sounds to us very innocuous, this is kind of sailing fairly close to the wind. It's fairly controversial because he's using the language of 17th century parliamentary grievances against the King, against George the Third. And he is basically comparing George the third to the Stuarts. And the king believes that the address is extremely disrespectful.
And then political news is ratcheted up a little bit because in April there is news of the Boston Massacre. And we'll come onto a bit in the a little bit later, I'm sure the fact that one of the things that Beckford is. In. Opposition to the king about is the policy on the American colonies. He is a defender of the American colonies and doesn't want a kind of strict imperial policy imposed on them.
And in May 1770, he makes another address to the king, and this address is described as a formal remonstrance of the liberal as Lord Mayor. So again, sort of very 17th century language. And again he calls the dissolution of parliament and the removal of evil ministers. And that really should have been it. The the king gives a very cool reception and that should have been at the end of it. But then Beckford, to the amazement of everybody present, answers the king.
And his words became venerated by generations of radicals. And what he does is he assures the king of the loyalty of the city and declared that any minister who sought to drive a wedge between a wedge between the crown and the city was an
enemy of the people. And then he refers to our happy constitution as it was established at the Glorious Revolution. So this is, you know, revolution principles of 1688. And by implication that George is acting in some ways tyrannically because he is not observing those principles. Now, George I. Mean the 1760s, they were a turbulent decade in in British politics anyway. So I mean, Beckford knew what he was doing. Yes, he's being deliberately
provocative. And George the Third, I mean, there've been some very sympathetic biographies recently of George the Third, but he strikes me as being sort of very well-intentioned, but a bit out of touch and possibly out of his depth a bit. George the Third. He is so angered by what Beckford has just said that he can't even find the words to utter reply. And the opposition press immediately circulates for some accounts of Beckford's exchange. And he's encouraged to commit
his words to papers. So he's speaking extemporary before the king. But in two days, a text of what was this spontaneous speech appears in the press and the corporation that is the Council of the City of London, that they love all this because they're they're against tyranny. They rely heavily on the American colonies for trade. And they meet to vote thanks to the mayor. And then the following month, Beckford dies and he is immediately acclaimed by radical papers as a martyr to their
cause. So medals are struck commemorating him. And already there's the sort of fairly brisk market in spoons and tankards celebrating him. And Common Council, which is the the Council of the City of London, they vote for a statue of Beckford to be placed in Guildhall. And this is Julie, executed by John Francis Moore, who has already done a statue of Beckford. And the one he makes for Guildhall shows Beckford, and he's standing and he's
surrounded by two figures. One of these female figures represents the City of London. She's in mourning. She's got her Mace, her sword of state and her cap of maintenance on her head. These are all symbols of the City of London. And on the other side is a figure representing trade and navigation, who is in this drooping posture with a cornucopia representing the benefits of trade, and with a compass and an anchor.
And in the on the in the middle of the pedestal, there is engraved the the speech that Beckford had made. So here we have this funerary monument to this champion of English liberty standing in Guildhall. And of course he was the largest slave owner of the time. And what I think is very interesting is using this statue as a kind of example of the way contemporaries regarded slavery. And we earlier on did a, a podcast on slave London and, and
the slave trade. And one of the themes of that was how there's this sort of big move in the 18th, late 18th century when the anti slavery movement gets going. But before then, people aren't really exercised by slavery. They're not really bothered by it. And it's kind of like a quiet assumption. And the slave owners, like Beckford, don't need to, don't really feel the need to justify why they're earning slaves. They don't write about it, it's just property to them.
And it's only when the anti slavery movement really gets going. That they come out of the woodwork and then start talking about property rights and why it's quite right that they should own slaves. And this, this sort of absence of commentary, I think fits in with Beckford's life. So he dies in 1770. This is when the anti slavery movement is just about to get
going really. And it's two years after his death that in 1772 you have the famous Somerset case, which is a case which is taken as saying that slavery is antithetical to English common law. We're not quite sure what the, the ruling actually said. But the important thing is that people took it as meaning that. And that has two big important implications. The, the, the 1st is a practical one that you can't really have slaves in England. And the really important practical part of that is.
That if you. Are an owner of slaves in England, or black servants as you might like to call them. You cannot legally threaten them with sending them back to the sugar colonies, which was a major sort of force of coercion, a major power that you had over them. And people still did this on the after the case. You could not do it openly. It says that in English law, slavery is is is completely foreign to the rights of people
under English common law. Well, why can you not then extend those rights to parts of the British Empire? So it becomes a kind of great rallying cry for the anti slavery cause. But this this happens after his death and he he's just before then and. There. Aren't many references, as I say, from Beckford about slavery.
So occasionally he makes comments about people with dark skin being well able to bear the heat and therefore serve as soldiers in the Caribbean. Sort of fairly typical racist view of people of a different skin. We mentioned Fontil, he has black servants there and a couple of the servants are called Wilkes and Liberty. So this sounds very much like the kind of jokey names you might give to pet animals, which I think sort of expresses a lot
of his his attitude. But another really interesting thing happens shortly before he dies, and that is that Granville Sharp, who is the the great campaigner who is behind a lot of the cases, including the Somerset case. And Granville Sharp had produced this great book arguing that slavery was not compatible with with English common law. And obviously he he wins to some extent this argument, the Somerset case. But prior to that, this has been
a very contested point. And he's not a lawyer, but he he trains himself and he writes this book. And what he does is throughout he champions the causes of runaway slaves. And he sees an advert put for Beck put up by Beckford for one of his servants or slaves who's run away. And Granville Sharp writes to him, say, asking him to reconsider his attitude to slaves and. Also sends him a copy.
Of his, his, his, his, his book. And all we get from Beckford is a brusque reply and the return of the manuscript. So I think that sort of sums up Beckford's attitude towards slavery. And then? We're thinking about Sharp and what he was doing, really not just the legal but also the moral arguments framing slavery as incompatible not only to British law but also to Christian ethics, He argues. There's a particular line. He says the enslaved of fellow subjects under the king and the
law must protect them. What? Yes, I think there are a lot of things coming together at the end of the 18th century, which you just mentioned, which is the most important, which is evangelical Christianity. And it's the spread of evangelical Protestantism. And these people are absolutely up in arms. And in particular, they're they're worried about the spiritual conditions of people who are enslaved.
But also you've got the Enlightenment in the background, the idea that the relationships between people should be based on reason, difficult to reconcile with this terrible system of slavery. You've got the increasing importance of polite society, and it the the. Spread of tea. Drinking, which is ironic in a way because they're with their tea they're they're, they're
consuming sugar. But that again is quite awkward because if you've got this kind of genteel society and yet your sugar is made by these people living these, these, these absolutely appalling conditions. And one of the aspects of anti slavery is that they, they, they champion the cause of sugar that
is not produced by slaves. And then finally also at the end of the 18th century, and this is kind of like the really radical and minority wing of it. You also have the growing idea of rights that men in men and women to some extent implicitly have rights just by being humans and that they should not be treated in degrading way. So all of these things come together. But Beckford is kind of on the hinge of that development. And he is able to live his life.
And to our eyes, it's it's it's an immense irony that he is seen as a champion of English liberty. It wasn't totally an irony free zone for him because at the time when he becomes Lord Mayor, in 1769, when you become Lord Mayor, you throw a big dinner, it costs a huge amount of money. If you're Beckford, it costs a really big amount. And somebody wrote an anonymous little verse that circulated and circulated in large numbers and the verse went for Beckford.
He was chosen mayor, a white of high renown to see a slave he could not bear unless it were his own. So some people at least were alive to the contradictions in appearing as this kind of great champion who has this funerary statue erected to him and yet was a big slave owner. And of course, that irony goes down to the present time, because. The City of London has been left with this rather awkward inheritance in Guild hall of this statue to this big slaveholder.
Not not only his statue, but kind of heralding him as a a champion of English liberty. And a couple of years ago they had a debate about what to do with it and one of the council's wanted it removed. In the end, they decided to keep it in situ and to put a plaque up explaining. That he was. A slave owner. One is that unfortunately since COVID, Guildhall has no longer been open to the public, which is a big shame because it it's,
it's a fascinating building. The other thing is people must make up their own minds on this. It was his statue that originally got me interested in Beckford because I was wondering around Guildhall and I actually saw this statue and I, I think it's sort of described by people in the know as being a, a fine piece of 18th century carving. But I don't think anybody would say it's a kind of work of art. It's just it's just one of these sort of funeral monuments to another 18th century grandy,
but. You. Read it and I thought, hang on, didn't wasn't this guy the the big slave owner? And of course, it just makes the statue immensely interesting once you once you sort of realise that here is this man who's being celebrated as a champion of English liberty and yet he was the biggest slave
owner of of the day. You think there's only thing in it about him dying in 1770 is that he he died before the big change where he could have said something that was not of the time, you know, not going with the flow of the abolition of slavery. And then he would have like inevitably kind of been cancelled. Do you think he died early enough to, to stop him putting
his his foot in it? Yeah, I. Think that had he died 10 years later, the erection of a statue to him might well have been a lot more controversial. I mean, we're talking about people in the city who are fairly are there in commercial, but also the anti slavery movement certainly had its strong supporters in the City of London. A lot of the activity occurs in London. So yes, I think that's absolutely right that it was. I mean, it's astonishing that
his reputation was what it was. But I think what you're saying is absolutely right. Had he died a bit later on, it probably wouldn't have happened. Anybody wanting to learn more about the transatlantic slave trade and London Episode 126 is when Ian and I discussed that. So have a little listen to that to try and, you know, build a bigger picture of what's what's
going on here. So, Ian, you were talking about, you know, his immense wealth and how he had not so much of an interest into the, the welfare or even the human element of slave people. Is there anywhere else other than Guildhall, can we see anything of of Beckford and his legacy? Well, I. Mentioned earlier that the, the, the man who does the statue in Guildhall does another statue of him that's in one of the London
guildhalls. And I think that this is the Ironmongers and Beckford was a member of the Ironmongers Guild. And I think that I've not been there myself, but I think that they, they put up an explanation again saying who he was. So that's part of his inheritance. Otherwise, I don't think there is a great deal. I mean, Fonthill was famously remodeled by his son and perhaps people will probably know the Beckford name from the son more
than the father. The son was very famous as well, the romantic novelist, but also for rebuilding Fonthill in a neo Gothic style at immense expense with enormous towers, really, really tall, which was destroyed by wind eventually. And he's also very famous because he was homosexual and he I don't think that anybody he sort of championing gay rights ever mentions him because of the connection with slavery.
But he was forced to live in exile and became marginalized when Fontil, he entertained people like Horatio Nelson and Lady Hamilton, who were similarly put aside because of the scandalous nature of of their relationship. But nothing survives, unfortunately, of the Font hills, the Palladium or, or, or or the Neo Gothic. So it's a question really, as we were saying earlier, of walking around these places in London and trying to use your historical imagination to recreate what it was like.
One of the things that follows on from the enormous controversy over statues to slave owners and the controversy concerning monuments is that people are very reluctant to admit to slaving history, which in a way is a shame simply because the historical roots are so interesting.
I think that it's, it's incumbent upon modern society in Britain to recognize the importance of the slave trade in early modern Britain, and we should be remembering the importance of the slave trade and the places associated with somebody like Beckford. Is it worth circling back to what you were mentioning about relationships with key Members of Parliament, including Wilkes? Yes. That's, I think, worth connecting it.
So in episode 91, we do an episode about the radical MP John Wilkes. But they had an interesting relationship, didn't they? Yeah. Well, this is one of the interesting things about Beckford and reflects the fact that we've been talking about the very end of his career when he undergoes his apotheosis as this champion of English liberty. But also the fact that he stands as an MP for the city is that he is in of radical politics would be too strong a word for it.
But he's he's on the sort of he's on the kind of spectrum towards radicalism. And one of the things that he does in Parliament is he stands up and he defends Wilkes. And we've, we've already mentioned the fact that he has two slaves on his estate, which he calls Wilkes and Liberty. Wilkes and Liberty being the rallying call of many radicals
at this period. Yeah, and it's worth pointing out that Wilkes is imprisoned in 1768, so riots were broken out in London and they're called the The Wilkes and Liberty protests. Beckford publicly supports Wilkes's right to free speech and also to trial. And he also champions of various other causes which are certainly anti monarchical to some extent. So he is very much against aristocratic corruption which feeds into his championship of Wilt.
Wilt wins the election to Westminster 3 or 4 times and is doesn't denied his seat. And this is what enrages a lot of people. And he, Beckford is very much against sort of aristocratic corruption. And there's a debate in the late 1760s on the civil list, which is the money granted to George the Third. And he stands up and makes a speech saying no, we, we need to have proper scrutiny of where this money is going. It's far too much money. And he's also.
Key. Thing in his politics is that he is an ally of Pitt the Elder. So Pitt the Elder in the 1750s is advocating an imperial policy. This is important. This is something that the the the Beckford likes. But Pitt is somebody who is disliked by the King, and he comes to power and Beckford is a key ally of him. One other thing that Beckford champions ever already mentioned is the cause of the American
colonies. Now this is largely, I suspect, because the people who own plantations in the Caribbean do not want to be treated like colonialists themselves. They, they do not want troops billeted on them. They, they want proper rights and they're frightened to some extent by the attempts of the British government to impose or reimpose greater control on on North America.
So he is very much For these reasons a champion of liberty who might say in quote marks, but he also uses his politics to argue for policies which he is in favour of partly because of his plantation interests. So one of the things that Pitt considers doing is introducing a sugar tax to help pay for the the war against the French. And then he waters this down and it was made into a sort of general tax. And behind this can be seen the influence of of Beckford.
But the key thing about Pitt is advocating a forward imperial policy of aggression. And this is something that Beckford supports. And I think as plantation owners, they're all worried about the French being able to sail into the the West Indies and simply take their their islands from them. But their attitude is a bit ambivalent because they don't really want the British taking over the French sugar colonies because that would mean more
sugar coming onto the market. So it's a little bit double edged. Beckford achieves great power in the second Pitt administration, which is in 1768. Pitt returns to power, and he, perhaps rather hypocritically, accepts a place in the House of Lords. And accepting a place in the House of Lords means that he can't manage the House of Commons himself. And also Pity's always I'll, so he's not really politically active and he relies on left tenants to carry out the.
Business in the Commons for him and one of these people is Beckford. But. During the really important. Time. Of Pitt in power, which is in the late 1750s and early 1760s, Beckford although he doesn't have that degree of influence, he's always writing letters to Pitt and this is the key period in which. Pitt champions a more aggressive war against the French, so the Seven Years War breaks out in 1756. He begins badly. Pitt comes to power. He loses power.
He then comes power again. The war continues on. In in a bad way for the British. But then in 1759, under Pitt's direction, the British win this great series of victories. So they drive the French out of Canada, they drive the French out of India, they destroy the French fleet and this is the Annis Mirabilis. And it's all done under Pitt and Beckford is there really supporting Pitt in this. And then the following period, Pitt loses power and. 2.
Things happen. 1 is that the King's favorite boot comes to power. And a lot of people, including Beckford, hate this. And he hates it partly because it's aristocratic influence. It's the king, in his eyes, acting tyrannically in in appointing his his favorite, the man who'd been his chooser as his Prime Minister. But also in 1763, the British signed a peace with the French pit, who is out of power. Hates. This treaty as being too soft on the French and and Beckford
joins in with him. So we can see Pitt. Using his influence as a member of power to forward the influence of the plantation owners in the West Indies, plus this kind of agenda of English liberty. And it's the pursuit of West Indian interests, as mentioned earlier, that incurs the contempt to some extent of
critics of the time. That's the thing that really bothers them, not the fact that he is this massive owner of slaves in Jamaica. Now, if we're talking about friendships and linking John Wilkes, but also with, with with Beckford, but also with Horace Walpole as well. So Horace Walpole describes Backford as a vast, rich, tawdry man. And for Walt Poulter to say that Beckford's rich, you know, he really is.
And what I love is in April 1770, so just weeks before Beckford's death of death, there he is, 22, Soho Square. And he famously hangs a huge banner across his house in Soho Square emblazoned with the word liberty. Yeah, a quick gesture of support for Wilkes, who has just been recently released. And it is Horace Walpole who sedonically notes that the banner stayed intact because the weather was bad and that no one went out. But the symbolism was, you know, unmistakable.
Do like that. All of these pens, letters that Beckford's doing and all the money he has. And really, the only power that he feels that he has is to put this banner in front of his own house. Interesting that Walpole describes him as tawdry. When we're talking about Beckford, we're coming to the conclusion, really, that his story complicates our understanding of London. History is not simple.
It's not black and white. There's multiple layers through multiple lenses, and it's hard to read their acceptance or knowledge of things. And even when we read a quote, we don't know exactly if that is their verbatim and also in the context in which they were spoken or written and who they were directed to. But I do think it highlights a really interesting story of how we can't just take down a statue and pretend that something didn't happen.
Yeah. And. Just to reiterate, the, the key thing about the slave owners, including Beckford at this time is their relative silence on slavery. And it's a, it's a bit of an odd thing to talk about really, a sort of absence of, of discourse. But this is a big contrast to, for example, with the classical period, because the Romans wrote quite extensively on, on slavery and they would write treatises on, for example, how you should treat your slaves, IE how you
should treat your slaves well. And the British in the earlier part of the 18th century are conspicuous for, for not doing this. And I guess though there, there are a couple of important things in play there. One of them is that Roman slavery lacks this later racial element, which is, is so crucial. And what you do see in Rome is occasional sympathy for slaves. So under the Emperor Nero tells us about a senator who is murdered by one of his household slaves.
And under Roman law, if that happens, all of the household slaves are to be executed. And there is a huge demonstration in favour of the slaves so that there's rioting amongst the pleds. But also there's a debate in the Senate about the rights and wrongs of this. And a lot of the senators stand up and say, well, look, you can't do this. You're going to be murdering a
lot of innocent people. And you could say, well, this Roman law is incredibly harsh that the Senate in the end decides that no, we need to keep this law because we we need to discourage slaves from murdering their their owners. But nevertheless, it it's hard to imagine that kind of massive.
Degree of popular. Sympathy for slaves who are going to be executed in 18th century Britain and in addition to the racial element, I think the fact that it's it's a long way away that it's it's tucked into the Caribbean also is important. But there's also, it's a positive aspect to Roman culture here that there is this kind of classicizing civilized idea of how a man in particular should
behave in a correct way. And then finally, we begin to see that coming into the late 18th century discourse in Britain. So as always, difficult to argue from an absence of evidence, but the the the the absence of slave owners justifying what they're doing in a way in itself speaks volumes. Well, that brings us to the end of today's journey into the extraordinary life and legacy of William Backford, a man of immense wealth, bold convictions
and larger than life ambition. From the halls of Parliament to Soho Square, Beckford left a mark on 18th century London that still echoes in politics, architecture and the ongoing conversation about Liberty. Complex, controversial and undeniably influential, his story reminds us of how power, principles and public spectacle can collide in the making and
rewriting of history. If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe, leave us a review and share it with someone who loves and told stories from the past. As I mentioned. For sources, images, more context, links to the other episodes that I've mentioned, then check the show notes on londonguidedwalks.co.uk/podcast until next time.