Throckmorton came from a very old Catholic family, originating in Worcestershire, who had acquired the Warwickshire estate of Coughton by marriage in the first half of the fifteenth century. A later generation obtained the Olney property at Weston Underwood, Buckinghamshire by the same means.
On his death without issue in January 1819 he was succeeded as 6th baronet by his next brother George, who had been born in 1754 and had a childless marriage, as did the next in line for the baronetcy, his brother Charles, now aged 61. Their nephew, Robert George Throckmorton, eldest son of their youngest brother William, was therefore the heir presumptive. William Throckmorton, who was born in 1762, entered Lincoln’s Inn in 1786 and appears to have practised as a certificated conveyancer. He was in Paris in the company of other English Catholics in November 1802. Like Sir John, he was a member of the Catholic Board, which replaced the Committee in 1808.
It is not known where Robert George Throckmorton received his education, but the Rev. Joseph Berrington, chaplain at Buckland, may have had a hand in it. In the summer of 1821 he travelled from France to Italy, where he spent the following winter, staying first in Naples and then in Rome. His travelling companions included the widow and children of Sir John Francis Edward Acton, 6th baronet (1736-1811), formerly commander-in-chief and prime minister of Naples, who in 1800 had been given papal dispensation to marry his brother’s teenage daughter, his junior by almost 50 years. Throckmorton spent the winter of 1823-4 in Italy.
At the general election of 1830 Robert Smith, the Whig Member for Buckinghamshire, solicited his support in case he was threatened with a ‘No Popery’ opposition.
You cannot serve the cause of reform, or to speak more properly the great cause of liberty, better, than by watching your own friends and keeping them firm in the popular principles of their party ... In my long life I have seen the Whigs three times called into power, and at each time losing their character and their strength by too great sacrifices to aristocratic feelings. From reproach on this head the present ministry are not free. But it would be invidious to mention particulars. Their conduct, however, deserves your serious attention. The abolition of sinecures, and undeserved pensions, the exercise of office by deputy, the non-residents and pluralities of the clergy, the absence of the prebendaries from their stalls, and the neglect of the religious education of the poor loudly called for remedy. The public expects both a serious and speedy reform of all these particulars, and will take the measure into their own management, if the ministers delay it, or deal it with a sparing hand. I hope to see you at the head of those who promote these substantial and necessary reforms. I hear from Berkshire that your speeches were most favourably received. They certainly have been praised in London ... I hope it will not be long before you hear your own voice in Parliament. Every day’s delay adds to the difficulty of a speaker for the first time. You may be assured that at present, public opinion is greatly in your favour.
Throckmorton mss 11/4; Petre, 280-3.
At a celebration dinner at Newbury, 25 May 1831, Throckmorton proclaimed ‘the triumph of reform over a little knot of oligarchists, who had so long usurped their rights’, portrayed himself as ‘the avowed enemy of all jobs’ and said that he would be found ‘foremost in the ranks of the advocates of the comprehensive and enlightened policy’ of the government.
He made little mark in the House. He voted for the second reading of the reintroduced reform bill, 6 July, and twice against adjournment, 12 July 1831. He was a generally steady supporter of the details of the bill, but he voted against the proposed division of counties, 11 Aug., and for the enfranchisement of tenant farmers, 18 Aug. Explaining the former vote, 12 Aug., when he approved the proposal to create some three Member counties (of which Berkshire was one), he said that division would ‘tend to nomination’. At the same time, he insisted that in his constituency the measure had ‘in all its details given very great satisfaction’. He had presented a Newbury agriculturists’ petition for all occupiers paying rates of a certain amount to be given the county vote, 20 July. He voted with ministers for the prosecution of those found guilty of giving bribes at the Dublin election, 23 Aug., but not against the opposition censure motion which followed it. On 19 Sept. he presented a petition from the Vale for reduction of the duty on fire insurance. He voted for the third reading of the reform bill later that day, and for its passage, 21 Sept. He voted for the second reading of the Scottish reform bill, 23 Sept. At the Berkshire meeting to petition the Lords to pass the English bill, 5 Oct., he professed to be ‘convinced’ that they would do so
as it appeared impossible that they could resist the power of public opinion so vehemently expressed ... It had been said that the question now was, reform and peace, or insurrection and bloodshed; but he denied that it was so, for he felt convinced that a little patience only was necessary, and that after one more session at the utmost, they would see their hopes fully accomplished, even if the cup was now dashed from their lips.
Ibid. 10 Oct. 1831.
After the rejection of the bill he told his Tory brother-in-law, Sir Ferdinand Richard Edward Acton, whose known desire for a peerage at that moment was something of an embarrassment to him, that London was ‘perfectly quiet and no apprehension is entertained I believe except in Scotland, where the people are furious’. He voted for Lord Ebrington’s confidence motion, 10 Oct. 1831, and spent the recess at Buckland, Coughton and the Acton residence in Shropshire.
He went up to vote for the second reading of the revised reform bill, 17 Dec. 1831. He was absent from the divisions of 20 and 23 Jan. 1832 on the bill, though he was in London on the 24th, when he told his wife, to whom he wrote frequently, and in terms of great affection, but with whom he seems to have had a passing tiff:
I have just got your darling letter, angel. How sorry I am at what I said. I am so afraid sometimes you do not know how I adore you and I am always trying to do what will please you, so forgive me when I have a jealous fit, darling ... I wish I had never got into this beastly Parliament and that I could get out this year. I hate it. We were so happy and well with our child before.
Throckmorton mss folder 16/52.
He was one of the reformers who voted against government on the Russian-Dutch loan, 26 Jan., and he divided for inquiry into distress in the glove trade, 31 Jan. He voted for the £10 householder clause of the reform bill, 3 Feb., after which he paired off, ‘except on Belgium’, with Lord Villiers until schedule A came under consideration. He was therefore absent from the division on relations with Portugal, 9 Feb.
Throckmorton stood again for Berkshire at the general election of 1832 and was returned in second place, but he retired from Parliament at the dissolution of 1834. He succeeded his uncle to the baronetcy and estates in five counties in 1840.
