PHILIPS, Sir George, 1st bt. (1766-1847), of Sedgley, near Manchester, Lancashire; Weston House , near Chipping Norton, Warwickshire of 111 Mount Street, Grosvenor Square, London

The immensely wealthy Philips has been described as ‘the most important Lancashire cotton magnate in the unreformed Parliament’.A. Howe, The cotton masters, 1830-1860 (1984), 92. He sat for a further two sessions after 1832, but the passage of the Reform Act meant that Manchester and other Lancashire textile towns were now directly represented and were no longer dependent upon Philips to champion their interests in Parliament.

The impetuous Philips came from a mercantile and manufacturing Manchester family and was raised as a Wesleyan Methodist, an upbringing he rebelled against by becoming a prominent figure in the public life of the town in the 1790s, which included authoring a radical pamphlet, which he later regretted.The necessity of a speedy and effectual reform in Parliament (1792); A. Howe, ‘Philips, Sir George (1766-1847)’, www.oxforddnb.com. He inherited partnerships in two textile firms, J. and N. Philips, the family firm, and Philips and Lee, recruiting the talented G.A. Lee to manage the latter. The success of the two firms was such that Philips was able to withdraw over a quarter of a million pounds between 1807 and 1831.Ibid. Although Philips was not directly involved in the day-to-day matters of production, he possessed formidable business acumen. He exploited new markets using contacts developed through his partnerships in two merchant houses; he financed the purchase of new technology; and also put much of his private fortune into a diverse portfolio of investments, providing a steady, secure, long-term income insulated from the vicissitudes of the cotton industry.Ibid.; Brown, ‘Sir George Philips’, 64, 66-9; Howe, Cotton masters, 41.

Philips used a not inconsiderable portion of his wealth to gain entry to the Commons by sitting for a series of rotten boroughs. Unlike earlier textile manufacturers, he considered his parliamentary position important not merely for the social cachet it brought, but as a means to champion the interests of the cotton industry. This role, as unofficial ‘MP’ for Manchester, was particularly important before 1832.Howe, Cotton masters, 92-3; ‘Philips, George’, HP Commons, 1820-1832, vi. 755-9 (at 756); Brown, ‘Sir George Philips’, 75-78. A Whig in politics, Philips, who was created a baronet in 1828, supported Catholic relief and reform before retiring at the 1830 general election to his expensively built country seat, Weston House, in Warwickshire, which has been estimated to have cost in excess of £150,000.Howe, Cotton masters, 80, 265; figure given by Brown, ‘Sir George Philips’, 79. However, Philips was unexpectedly returned at the 1832 general election for the new constituency of South Warwickshire, securing second place thirteen votes ahead of a Tory, whose reactionary nomination speech, which had ‘abused all those who differed from him; in the most violent, & unmeasured terms’, had prompted local reformers to nominate Sir George as a second candidate.Sir George Philips, ‘Memoirs’, MS., i. 310, Warwickshire Record Office, MI 247; Morn. Chro., 20 Dec. 1832; Warwickshire Advertiser, 15, 22 Dec. 1832.

In Parliament, Philips continued to resist factory legislation, contending that ‘children engaged in that employment were in a high state of health and happiness’, 22 Mar. 1833.Hansard, 22 Mar. 1833, vol. 16, c. 972. However, most of his speeches were devoted to defending Lord Althorp’s financial policy. Opposing demands for the reduction or repeal of the malt duty, Philips explained that although he had ‘always been desirous to repeal taxes, … he would never do it at the expense of public credit’. Furthermore, he believed that ‘fair play was not given to the Ministers, nor did they receive sufficient credit for what they had already done’.Hansard, 15 July 1833, vol. 19, c. 641; see also 26 Apr. 1833, vol. 17, cc. 695-6; 16 July 1833, vol. 19, c. 702. As a supporter of monetary orthodoxy, Philips approved of the Bank of England charter bill, and resisted attempts to make bank notes legal tender, 1 July 1833.Hansard, 1 July 1833, vol. 18, c. 1364-6. On other issues, he expressed scepticism about the ballot, whilst complaining of the undue influence of Conservative landlords, 25 Apr. 1833, and on more than one occasion criticised the free licensing of beershops, which he believed ‘had been productive of very serious evils’.Hansard, 25 Apr. 1833, vol. 17, c. 648; 17 July 1834, vol. 25, cc. 87-8. Although he was described as a ‘free trader’ by Dod, Philips deferred to his constituents’ wishes in opposing a low fixed duty on corn, 7 Mar. 1834.Dod’s parliamentary companion (1833), 150; Hansard, 7 Mar. 1834, vol. 21, cc. 1337-8.

Philips retired at the 1835 general election, but the aged baronet remained remarkably sharp, with Richard Cobden writing in 1845 that Philips, ‘who is now in his 80^th year, is one of the most astonishing men for vigor of body & mind I ever met’.Richard Cobden to Catherine Cobden, 5 July 1845, Add. 50748, ff. 177-80, qu. in The letters of Richard Cobden, ed. A. Howe (2007), i. 393. On his death in 1847, he was succeeded by his only legitimate son, George Richard Philips (1789-1883), who although he retained a share in the family business, was essentially a landed gentleman, educated at Eton and Cambridge, and who served as Whig MP for Horsham 1818-20, Steyning 1820-32, Kidderminster 1835-37 and Poole 1837-52.