John Baker Holroyd, 1st Earl of Sheffield facts for kids
John Baker Holroyd, 1st Earl of Sheffield (born December 21, 1735 – died May 30, 1821) was an important English politician. He came from a family in Yorkshire, England, but some of his relatives had moved to Ireland.
Contents
About John Baker Holroyd
John Baker Holroyd's grandfather, Isaac Holroyd, was a merchant who moved to Ireland. John's father, also named Isaac Holroyd, lived in a place called Dunamore in County Meath. John was the oldest son.
In 1768, John took the name Baker. This happened when he inherited land from his uncle, Rev. James Baker. Later, in 1778, he added Holroyd to his name after his own father passed away.
Early Life and Friends
John served in the British Army until 1763. After leaving the army, he traveled around Europe. During his travels, he became very good friends with Edward Gibbon. Gibbon was a famous writer and historian. He wrote a well-known book called The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
When John returned home, he used the money he inherited. In 1769, he bought a large country house called Sheffield Hall in Sussex. He paid £31,000 for it, which was a huge amount of money back then!
Political Career
In 1780, John was chosen to represent Coventry in the British House of Commons. This is like being a Member of Parliament today. He was known for standing up against Lord George Gordon and the Gordon rioters. These rioters were protesting against Catholics.
In 1781, he was given a special title in Ireland: Baron Sheffield, of Dunamore. In 1783, he received another Irish title: Baron Sheffield, of Roscommon. These Irish titles were special because they did not stop him from being a Member of Parliament in Britain. He was re-elected for Coventry in 1781 and for Bristol in 1790.
However, his time in the British Parliament ended in 1802. This was because he was given a new title in the United Kingdom: Baron Sheffield, of Sheffield. This new title meant he became a member of the House of Lords. In 1816, he received even higher titles in Ireland: Viscount Pevensey and Earl of Sheffield.
In 1783, he was also chosen to be a Fellow of the Royal Society. This is a very old and respected group of scientists.
Family Life
John Baker Holroyd married three times. His first wife was Abigail Way. They had one son and two daughters. Abigail passed away in 1793.
In 1795, he married Lucy Pelham. She was the daughter of Sir Thomas Pelham. Sadly, Lucy died in 1797.
His third marriage was to Lady Anne North in 1798. Anne was the daughter of Lord North, who used to be the Prime Minister.
Later Years and Legacy
The Earl of Sheffield died in 1821. He was buried in his family's special burial place. This mausoleum is attached to the Church of St Mary and St Andrew in Fletching, East Sussex. When his friend Edward Gibbon died in 1794, he was also buried there. This showed how much respect the Earl had for him.
John's son and grandson later became the second and third Earls of Sheffield. The third Earl was very famous for supporting cricket. When he died, the title of Earl ended.
One of the 1st Earl's daughters, Maria Josepha, married John Stanley, 1st Baron Stanley of Alderley. Because of a special rule, the Irish barony title later passed to Edward Stanley, 4th Baron Stanley of Alderley. He then became the fourth Baron Sheffield.
Army Service
When John Baker Holroyd joined the army in 1760, he led a special group of soldiers. They were called the Royal Foresters. This was a mounted light infantry regiment, meaning they rode horses and were quick. They served under a commander named John Manners, Marquess of Granby. After that war, John was promoted to the rank of captain.
It was almost 20 years before he was called to serve in the army again. This was during a war involving several European countries. He started as a major and quickly became a colonel. He even created his own cavalry unit, called the 22nd Regiment of Light Dragoons. These were also soldiers who rode horses.
Works and Publications
John Baker Holroyd was not just a politician and soldier. He also wrote many important papers and books. These often shared his ideas on trade, farming, and other big topics.
Trade and America
In 1783, he wrote about trade between Great Britain and its former colonies in America. This paper was called Observations on the Commerce of the American States. It was very popular and was printed six times. In it, he compared how much goods were bought and sold between the two countries. He looked at good years and bad years for trade.
He wrote this paper to argue against a plan by William Pitt. Pitt wanted to make the trade rules with America less strict. John Baker Holroyd believed that Britain's trade laws, especially the Navigation Acts, were very important. He thought they protected Britain's economy. Edward Gibbon, his friend, even said that John's writing helped save these important laws.
Views on Slavery
In 1790, he published Observations on the Project for Abolishing the Slave Trade. In this work, he shared his views on ending the slave trade. He was against quickly stopping slavery. He worried about the rights of slave owners and their "property," meaning the enslaved people. He believed that the British government could not just suddenly end slavery. He also praised the efforts of those in the West Indies who he thought were trying to improve the lives of enslaved people.
It's important to remember that these views are now seen as wrong and outdated. Today, we understand that slavery was a terrible injustice.
Trade with Ireland
He also wrote about trade with Ireland. In his book Observations on the Manufactures, Trade, and Present State of Ireland (1785), he discussed free trade. He argued that Ireland and Great Britain should not have high taxes on each other's products. He thought they should trade freely in things like wool, cattle, and other goods.
Farming and Food
When it came to farming, he had different ideas. He thought that farming was extremely important for a country to be strong and stable. He did not want Britain to rely too much on importing food like corn and wheat from other countries.
He wrote several papers about how the government should support food production. In On Observations on the Corn Bill (1791), he suggested keeping corn prices high but steady. He also thought that farmers should use less fertile land for growing crops instead of just for animals. He believed that higher corn prices could actually help manufacturers.
In another paper, Remarks on the Deficiency of the Grain (1800), he defended farmers. He was unhappy that people suspected farmers of keeping the best flour for themselves. He argued that wealthy farmers were good for society. He believed they improved farming and kept enough grain stored without causing problems for the public.
In 1801, he gave a speech in the House of Commons. He criticized the large amount of money Britain spent on importing grain. He worried this could lead to a "dangerous policy of feeding the people at the public expense."
In 1803, he became the President of the Board of Agriculture. Since he was a farmer himself, he was seen as an expert on farming.
Wool and Shipping
He also cared a lot about the wool trade. He wrote about wool and woolen goods. In 1800, he argued against stopping the export of raw wool from Britain to Ireland. Later, from 1809 to 1812, he wrote more papers about the wool trade. He noticed that wool exports to America were getting weaker. He suggested bringing sheep from Spain to breed in Britain. He repeated these ideas at wool fairs between 1818 and 1820.
His interest in the local economy also included the shipping industry. In his book Strictures on the necessity of inviolably maintaining the Navigation and Colonial System of Great Britain (1804), he argued that suspending the Navigation Laws hurt British shipping. He believed that opening up ports too much was bad for sailors, shipbuilders, and the navy.
While many of his ideas were considered advanced for his time, some were seen as narrow-minded. His views on slavery, for example, were very conservative. He focused on the financial losses of slave owners rather than the human rights of enslaved people.
