Aligned with the Suffolk Whigs at the county meeting of 16 Mar. 1821, which petitioned for reform and measures to combat distress. But support for reform tempered by sympathy for the West Indian planters, based on his confidence that the Arcedeckne slaves were well treated and fear of the damaging consequences of sudden emancipation. (Address to Yeomanry of Suff. (Ipswich, 1821); The Times, 23 Feb. 1821.)
Arcedeckne: lax attender; made no major Commons speeches.
1827: voted for Catholic relief and Emancipation, 1829
1830: voted for Grey’s Reform Bill, November 1830.
His ‘friends’ canvassed the Whig aristocracy with a view to returning him for the proposed East Suffolk constituency 1831; but his position as a West India proprietor was expected to count strongly against him.
Arcedeckne prominent county figure in the 1830s (e.g. in East Suffolk Agricultural Society) but his support for free trade and his engagement with slavery weakened his standing.
Fisher (ed.), House of Commons 1820-1832, vol. IV.
Elections / Constituences |
Dunwich Suffolk1826 - 1831
|
1787 - 1835
Daughter of "free Mulatto" lodging-house-keeper Jane Charlotte Beckford (c. 1759-1825); possibly the daughter of George Ffrench, Clerk to the Jamaica Assembly. Spinster; independently wealthy slave-owner.
Document comprises 4 parts, written recto and verso across 5 folios: 1. An inventory and valuation of enslaved persons at Windsor Estate, St Elizabeth parish, Jamaica, 1814. 2. An inventory and valuation of enslaved persons at Williamsfield settlement, St Elisabeth parish, Jamaica, 1814. 3. An inventory of animals at Windsor Estate, St Elizabeth parish, Jamaica, 1814. 4. A cover note outlining the contents of the document.
