The Remarkable Lushington Family. David Taylor

in the conduct of the anti-slavery campaign, an “equal share must be awarded to Dr Lushington.”¹³ Another contemporary writer commented in 1854 “that Lushington has never been done full justice by anti-slavery writers.”¹⁴

      After the passing of the 1833 Act, the abolitionists decided that a successor organization was required to tackle slavery worldwide and, in June 1840, the first World Anti-Slavery Convention was held in London’s Exeter Hall. Both Lushington and Lady Byron attended this event and can be seen in Benjamin Hayden’s painting (figure 4). A few years earlier, in 1834, Lushington was appointed as one of the original trustees of a charity created to establish schools in the West Indies for Africans who had been released from slavery into apprenticeship.¹⁵

      After their success in the passing of the 1833 Act, the abolitionists turned their attention to slavery in the United States.¹⁶ In 1838, Lushington met the American lawyer, and later Senator, Charles Sumner, a major leader of the American anti-slavery movement, during his visit to England. The two men got on well and quickly became good friends. During a further visit to England in 1857, Sumner visited the Lushingtons at Ockham Park.¹⁷ Letters exchanged between the two between 1857 and 1859 reveal how their relationship quickly developed from the formality of “My dear Sir” to the less formal “My dear Friend”.¹⁸ Sumner was Ockham again in 1859 when another guest, Charles Buxton, described the American as “a noble fellow, with a fine vigorous original head & sweet expression.”¹⁹

      Parliamentary Reform

      As with the abolition of slavery, Lushington also played a role in the passing of the Parliamentary Reform Act in 1832. This abolished fifty-six nomination boroughs (one where Parliamentary representation was controlled by a small number of people), created new seats in populous areas, and enlarged the electorate. Lushington whole-heartedly supported the Act, arguing that “the English nation will never be contented so long as the House of Commons is not constituted by their virtual representatives.”²⁰ The Act was “a measure on which depends the safety of the country, and perhaps the stability of the throne.” Lushington described the system of nomination boroughs, by which he himself had earlier entered Parliament, as “the mockery of representation.”²¹

      

      Despite his alignment with the Whigs, Lushington was a moderate reformer. Surprisingly, he did not favour universal suffrage, although he was a great supporter of the secret ballot. His sentiments led him to support many other liberal reforms of his era including Catholic emancipation, full civil rights for Jews and Dissenters, and reform of the criminal law. In 1840, Lushington unsuccessfully brought in a Bill to abolish capital punishment.

      Lushington believed that as a Member of Parliament, on accepting government office, should resign, and stand for re-election Thus, in 1838, when offered the judgeship of the Admiralty Court, he accepted it on the basis that he would give up his parliamentary seat and stand for re-election—which he did. However, in 1841, when it was proposed that judges should be excluded from Parliament, Lushington’s political career came to an end. He was offered an opportunity to re-enter Parliament yet again ten years later as a life peer in the House of Lords, but declined despite Queen Victoria’s approval. He was re-offered a life peerage in 1851, and again in 1856, but he declined because of the political controversy he believed would ensue.

      The Law

      Lushington not only distinguished himself in Parliament he also had a noted career as a civilian lawyer. In 1828, he was appointed judge of the most important diocesan court (the Consistory Court of London). Ten years later, he became a judge of the High Court of Admiralty. In this capacity, in 1861, Lushington was drawn into a diplomatic crisis that took place between the United States and Great Britain in 1861 during the American Civil War and which might have affected the outcome of the war.

      A British mail and passenger steamer, The Trent, was stopped by a U.S. warship, and two envoys of the Southern states, Mason and Sidell, traveling to England and France to lobby for recognition of the Confederacy, were removed by force. Britain demanded reparation to the government and turned to the Admiralty Court for advice. Lushington, whose anti-slavery views made him strongly sympathetic to the Union cause, met with Prime Minister Palmerston and advised that a nation at war had the right to stop and search a neutral merchant ship if it suspected the ship of carrying enemy dispatches. It was argued that Mason and Sidell were in effect Confederate dispatches. Despite Lushington’s opinion, this violation of British neutral rights triggered an uproar in Britain and the country began preparing for war. A note was sent to Washington demanding the return of the prisoners and an apology. Abraham Lincoln chose not to push the issue and, adopting a policy of, “one war at a time,” ordered the release of the prisoners thereby adverting armed conflict with Great Britain.²²

      In 1858, Lushington was also made judge of the Court of Arches. As “dean of the arches” he became president of Doctors’ Commons only to preside over its dissolution when matrimonial and probate cases were transferred to secular courts and the profession of civil lawyer came to an end. This position was not full-time and so Lushington was able to manage court sittings with his parliamentary commitments.

      It is possible that John Ruskin’s wife consulted Lushington concerning the non-consummation of her marriage, although no papers have survived confirming this. Although Lushington’s religious beliefs did not wholly agree with the notion of marriage as a “sacrament”, he still referred it as part of “the evident design of Divine Providence” and he spoke of adultery as able to “sever the strongest ties by which God and man can consecrate.” He is said to have shown himself, on many occasions, sensitive to the plight of individual litigants, particularly women.

      In the matter of wills and probate, Lushington favored the reforms of 1837 which dealt with the way in which wills should be signed and the necessity of having two or more witnesses. Unfortunately, this legislation did not lead to the simplicity and clarity hoped for, and Lushington was often called upon to clarify issues.

      The Privy Council

      As a judge of the Admiralty Court, Lushington became a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which was established as the final court of appeal from the civilian courts. He was sworn in as a member of Queen Victoria’s Privy Council in November 1838. This was, and still is, a formal body of advisers to the Sovereign whose members mainly comprises senior politicians, who are current or former members of either the House of Commons or the House of Lords.

      Queen Victoria recorded in her Journal that she and her beloved Lord Melbourne had, “Talked of Dr Lushington who has got 10 children; He is a very good man, a clever man; I hardly ever saw such an honest man,’ said Lord Melbourne; but a little violent and eager.”²³ Once sworn in, Lushington was often in the company of the Queen and, in May 1845, she wrote, “Dr Lushington, a singular, eager man, who is of the opinion, that nothing would do such good, as to cement the union between England & France at the same time ensuring the abolition of the Slave Trade.” Lushington remained an active member of the Privy Council for twenty-nine years.

      

      The Church

      Lushington’s appointment as Dean of Arches in 1858 made him the most senior judge in the ecclesiastical courts. This was a joint appointment by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, subject to Crown approval. Lushington’s appointment coincided with a period of high controversy in the Church of England, and he found was at the center of several major disputes in which he often found himself pulled in two opposing directions. One of the most politically controversial questions was that of church rates, which were taxes levied to support the fabric of the parish church. These were opposed by those who dissented from the Church of England. Personally, Lushington had great sympathy with the dissenters but, as an ecclesiastical judge, he had a duty to enforce the law.

      In 1860 Lushington was called upon to pass judgement on one of the most important publications of the mid-nineteenth century, Essays and Reviews, a broad-church volume of seven essays on Christianity. The writers were six clergymen and one layman, all associated with a liberal view of theology and with the Broad-Church. They included Frederick Temple who later became Archbishop of Canterbury,