Courtenay, who was in possession of a sinecure worth £855 per annum before he left the cradle, belonged to one of the oldest families in Devon. His father held the valuable rectory of St. George’s, Hanover Square in London for 20 years, was appointed bishop of Bristol in 1794 and translated to Exeter in 1797. Courtenay eventually stood heir to his second cousin and namesake, the 3rd Viscount Courtenay, who had considerable property in Devon around his seat at Powderham Castle and large estates in Ireland, which were said in 1809 to bring in £90,000 a year.
Bred to the bar, he practised as a bankruptcy commissioner and equity draughtsman on the western circuit until he became a master in Chancery, at £3,000 a year, in 1817. He unsuccessfully contested the venal borough of Honiton, where Lord Courtenay had a minor interest, on a vacancy in March 1805, but a year later, when he was invited to stand for the borough on a new vacancy, he told William Dacres Adams that ‘I do not feel any inclination now to be in Parliament, which I cannot do without feeling more dependence somewhere than I choose to owe to anyone’. In the event a Mr Courtenay went to Honiton, but it is not clear whether it was William or his brother Thomas. Whoever it was, his politics were described as being ‘diametrically opposite’ to those of the ‘Talents’ and he did not go to the poll.
The radical memoirist John Colman Rashleigh described Courtenay as a Canningite
Lady Holland, writing to Lord Lansdowne, 30 July 1813, of the reactions of some of Canning’s followers to their ‘recent manumission’ by their leader, reported that Courtenay was ‘considered as much aggrieved’.
Courtenay has (as you know) no political views. I have however recommended him in the strongest terms to Liverpool, with the expression of my good opinion and good wishes, and am happy to find that in doing so, I have done what is not disagreeable to him, and at the same time all he would have liked.
Harewood mss.
For the rest of this period Courtenay, an active and conscientious backbencher, showed a basic inclination to support the Liverpool government, but he remained prepared to take an independent line on specific issues, particularly on legal matters and some questions of economy.
Having presented a petition from Exeter against alteration of the Corn Laws, 6 June 1814, he expressed willingness to support the proposed new measure ‘on the principle of general utility’, 27 Feb. 1815, but was not averse to a reduction of the price below which imports were to be prohibited. He accordingly supported the attempted substitution of 74s. for 80s., 6 Mar., and in the end he voted against the third reading of the bill, 10 Mar. Courtenay voted with government on the question of the Spanish Liberals, 1 Mar., and the civil list, 14 Apr., but against them on the Duke of Cumberland’s marriage establishment, 28, 30 June and 3 July 1815. He supported the army estimates, 6 and 8 Mar. 1816, though on the second occasion, now speaking from the ministerial side of the House, he paid lip service to the need for economy. His vote for the continuance of the property tax, 18 Mar. 1816, gave a handle to the radical who later in the year came forward for Exeter and who denounced Courtenay as a servile placeman.
Courtenay voted with government on the composition of the finance committee, 7 Feb., and against Admiralty economies, 25 Feb. On 26 Feb. he supported the suspension of habeas corpus, professing his belief in ‘the existence of extensive associations for the purpose of undermining the principles on which the fabric of society was founded’. He backed the renewed suspension, 23 June, but also spoke and voted for Romilly’s motion criticizing Lord Sidmouth’s circular letter, 25 June. He voted with ministers in defence of repression and the use of spies, 10, 11 Feb. and 5 Mar. 1818, when he spoke at length in their support, but on 13 Apr. he spoke ‘very strongly’ against the royal marriage grants and voted for Brougham’s hostile amendment.
On the hustings at Exeter in 1818 Courtenay refused to repent his more unpopular votes and insisted on a Member’s right to exercise his own judgment, regardless of constituency opinion.
Courtenay took a strong line against popular unrest in the emergency session of 1819. On 30 Nov. he condemned the Manchester meeting of August as having been ‘inconsistent with every form of government in the civilised world’ and called for legislation to ‘repress the torrent of sedition and blasphemy’. He conceded that Devon was tranquil, 8 Dec., but supported the seditious meetings bill to protect the county against the incursions of ‘itinerant agitators’. He drew the attention of the House to the pamphlet, A trifling mistake, 9 Dec., pronounced it an outrageous and dangerous breach of privilege the following day and on 13 Dec. successfully proposed the committal of its author, John Cam Hobhouse, to Newgate. He died 19 Mar. 1859.
