Disappointed of an attorney’s partnership in his native Exeter, Gifford turned to the bar and practised on the western circuit. He was ‘in his sphere’ at Exeter, ‘where he got much business through his plodding attention’. He was the ‘great favourite’ of his compatriot Vicary Gibbs, who in 1816 attempted to procure a silk gown for him; but was well regarded by other judges, too, for his technical competence, clear argument and quick apprehension, not to speak of his ‘respectful demeanour’ in court. There was, however, some surprise when at the age of 38 he was appointed solicitor-general in the Liverpool administration in May 1817. ‘His ignorance was astounding. It seemed as if he had never read anything but a brief in his life.’ Sir William Scott’s reactions were charted thus by Lord Sidmouth:
‘No London practice’—symptoms of chagrin. ‘No eminence at the bar’—stronger marks of disapproval. ‘No university education’—lament the last and loudest.
Redding, Fifty Years’ Recollections, 2nd ed. (1858), i. 162; Dorset RO, Bond mss D367, Jekyll to Bond, 29 Jan., 4 Mar. 1816; Twiss, Eldon, ii. 506-9; Geo. IV Letters, ii. 757; Pellew, Sidmouth, iii. 201-2.
Gifford obtained a seat at the premier’s recommendation from the 2nd Marquess Cornwallis. It was generally acknowledged that he did not appear to advantage in debate: ‘he was pushed forward too rapidly, not having had the advantage of a liberal education’. By one account it was his total failure in Parliament that necessitated the introduction of John Singleton Copley to remedy it.
Gifford refused the chief justiceship of the common pleas in November 1818. His speeches in the House had met with a mixed reception hitherto, but there was general applause on the ministerial side for his defence of the Windsor establishment, 22 Feb. 1819.