Blessed with the ‘sagacity of the elephant, as well as the form’, Hunt, who measured 6 foot 4 inches and weighed over 25 stone, represented Northamptonshire North as a Conservative between 1857 and 1877, after failing to get elected for Northampton in 1852 and 1857. His eye for detail and practical legal experience, especially in electoral matters, rather than his flair for debate, prompted his speedy ascent through the ranks of the Conservative party. He became financial secretary to the treasury under Derby in 1866, and served as chancellor of the exchequer in the first Disraeli government. His inability to locate his dispatch box in 1868 is often cited as historical precedent for the custom of the chancellor holding up their red box outside 11 Downing Street on budget day.
A distant descendant of Colonel Thomas Hunt (1599-1699), who had sat as a parliamentarian for Shrewsbury between 1645 and 1653, and the only son of a ‘well connected country clergymen’, Hunt was educated at Eton and Christchurch, before being called to the bar at Inner Temple in 1851.
He decided not to contest an 1855 by-election in the borough, but promised local Conservatives that he would come forward again at the next general election. While Hunt was holidaying in Egypt in 1857, the general election was called and his absence from the town during canvassing prompted rumours that he had fallen ill. His supporters insisted he was in rude health, and that he would return in time for the nomination.
Hunt came forward for a by-election at Northamptonshire North later that year, his selection reportedly startling Northamptonshire’s established gentry – ‘what, a parson’s son and a lawyer represent Northamptonshire!’
Hunt wasted little time in getting involved in the Commons, speaking within days of being sworn in to express his opposition, on legal grounds, to Palmerston’s conspiracy to murder motion, which he also voted against, 9 Feb. 1858. He subsequently voted with the Conservative leadership in the majority that defeated the conspiracy to murder bill and brought down the Liberal government, 19 Feb. 1858. Aside from voting with anti-Catholics for Spooner’s anti-Maynooth motion, 29 Apr. 1858, he divided with the Conservative administration on most issues, including Derby’s reform bill, 31 Mar. 1859.
His attendance of the division lobbies was around average for the parliament, but when present he proved a feisty backbencher. In April 1858 he was a member of a deputation that called on Derby to oppose the abolition of church rates.
He came forward on a joint ticket with his fellow Conservative incumbent in 1859, and his address to electors promised to consider any reform bill ‘conceived in a moderate and constitutional spirit’.
Hunt made a significant contribution to parliamentary debate, legislative drafting and select committee work during the subsequent parliament, which, by August 1863, had brought him to the attention of the Conservative leadership.
While Hunt did not err from his moderate stance over franchise reform during the parliament, he introduced and supported several measures intended to increase the efficiency of the electoral system. He contributed regularly to debate over the 1860 corrupt practices bill, which he supported, and sought to move an instruction for increased facilities for polling during committee debate on that year’s failed reform bill, 4 June 1860. In 1861 he was an active member of the select committee on university elections, and to the annoyance of the government moved a number of successful minor amendments to the proxy voting clauses of that year’s successful university elections bill, 12 July 1861.
His legalistic outlook was also reflected in his regular involvement in debate over the practicalities of law enforcement, and he frequently sought to reduce any impact that proposed legislation might have on law officers and the courts. For example, he sought clarity on how justices might implement legislation that proposed to regulate the sale of alcohol, 17 May 1860, the selection of jury lists, 28 May 1862, and the technical processes surrounding the declaration of insane prisoners, 15 Feb 1864. He was also an active member of the 1862 select committee on prosecution expenses and the 1865 select committee on the prisons bill.
Religion provided another motivating factor for Hunt, although by the end of the parliament he had evidently moderated his earlier stance as a ‘Churchman’. He led the successful opposition to the 1861 marriage law amendment bill, which sought to allow men to marry their deceased wife’s sisters, and accused proponents of the similar 1862 marriages of affinity bill of seeking to ‘turn back the tide of civilization’ to a time when ‘“wild in woods the naked savage ran” and intercourse was promiscuous’, 12 Mar. 1862. He took an active interest in ecclesiastical affairs during 1863 and was keen to prevent any legislation that might weaken the parish. Significantly, he was a member of that year’s select committees on the ecclesiastical commission and Church Building and New Parishes Acts amendment bill, and successfully moved to postpone the 1863 burials bill, which he argued ‘would virtually disestablish the Church of England’ by giving dissenting ministers equal powers to their Anglican counterparts, 15 Apr. 1863.
His first major parliamentary intervention on the public finances came in 1862 when he accused Gladstone of encouraging surveyors of taxes to overcharge inhabitants in Northamptonshire, 19 May 1862.
Hunt was returned without a contest at the 1865 election, where his previous support for the Roman Catholic Oath Act prompted heckles of ‘he’s half a Liberal already’. He defended his vote on the basis that it would have no bearing on the future fortunes of the Church. What mattered more, he argued, was the continued work of hospitable and active ministers at parish level. He also confirmed his continued support for moderate parliamentary, church rate and poor law reform.
A severe outbreak of cattle plague, which had infected 73,549 animals by the end of 1865, provided Hunt with his sole focus during the first part of the subsequent parliament. He was the parliamentary lead for a cross-party group that blamed the Liberal government’s inaction, and inability to comprehend the severity of the outbreak during the latter half of 1865, for exacerbating the outbreak.
Hunt also paid close attention to the £14 county franchise clause in the Liberal government’s 1866 reform bill, questioning why such an arbitrary level had been selected. His motion to restrict the franchise to a £14 poor rating failed by seven votes, but he later moved a successful amendment to restrict the franchise to those who had paid their rates in the previous registration year, 11 June, 14 June 1866. He consequently voted with the opposition in favour of Lord Dunkellin’s amendment for a rateable borough franchise, 18 June 1866, which prompted the resignation of Russell’s ministry.
On the basis of his parliamentary record he was appointed financial secretary to the treasury in the subsequent Derby administration. In post he attended diligently to the duties of his office, earning Disraeli’s endorsement as ‘our best man’ by March 1867.
Hunt’s excellent performance as financial secretary prompted Disraeli to appoint him as chancellor of the exchequer when he succeeded to the premiership in February 1868. Preparing the Queen for her meeting with Hunt, Disraeli warned her of his ‘remarkable’ appearance: ‘he is more than six feet 4 in stature, but does not look so tall from his proportionate breadth – like St Peters, no one is at first aware of his dimensions’. But, he continued, ‘he has the sagacity of the elephant, as well as the form … simple, straightforward & truthful … & of a very pleasing & amiable expression of countenance’. Disraeli then revealed that Hunt had ‘gained golden opinions in the execution of his office as Sec[retary] of the Treasury, & is so popular … that the opposition even intimated recently that if a new Speaker were required, they were not disinclined to consider Mr Ward Hunt’s claims’.
Hunt’s sole budget speech was a ‘business-like proposal for meeting the deficit’ that lasted 1½ hours and increased the income tax from 4d. to 6d., 23 Apr. 1868.
‘The conservative whips rushed about distractedly, anxiously inquiring everywhere, “Have you seen Hunt? Have you seen Hunt?” The members enjoyed the joke vastly. The suspense, however, did not last long. Not more than five minutes expired when the door swung open and the ponderous form of the Chancellor of the Exchequer appeared. A burst of cheering and laugher greeted him as he walked up the House. “But where’s my box?” said he, as he looked at the table. Alas! There was no box. … But here again the suspense was soon ended … a messenger rushed across the lobby with the all-important box in his hand. … Mr Hunt, who, smiling at it lovingly, as a father would at a rescued child, unlocked it, opened it, and began his work’.
W. White, The Inner Life of the House of Commons (1904), ii. 97-8.
Hunt’s late arrival, and his subsequent inability to locate his budget box, provides a plausible explanation (though unconfirmed) for the custom in subsequent years of the chancellor being asked to display his red box to a crowd outside Downing Street ahead of his budget.
The majority of Hunt’s short tenure as chancellor was spent defending the government’s reform legislation and responding to his departmental responsibilities. His only additional legislative achievement of substance was the Electric Telegraphs Act (31 & 32 Vict. c. 110), which allowed the state to place telegraph networks under public ownership. In future years the legislation failed to raise the level of revenue Hunt had expected due to sustained public pressure for the maintenance of cheap telegraph rates, and the high prices paid to private companies for the acquisition of their networks.
Hunt continued to represent Northamptonshire North until his death 1877 and returned to office in Disraeli’s second government as first lord of the admiralty – inadvertently causing a ‘navy scare’ after exaggerating his Liberal predecessor’s inattention to naval development, 20 Apr. 1874, 30 Apr. 1874.
