# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Verney, Ralph (1712?-1791)

1904 Errata appended.
​VERNEY, RALPH, second Earl Verney and third Viscount Fermanagh in the peerage of Ireland (1712?–1791), politician, born about 1712, was second son of Ralph Verney, first earl (d. 1752), by his wife Catherine (d. 1748), daughter of Henry Paschall of Baddow Hall, Essex [see under Verney, Sir Ralph]. His elder brother, John, died on 3 June 1737, leaving only a daughter. Ralph was admitted fellow-commoner of Christ's College, Cambridge, 20 April 1733, graduated M.A. in 1735, and succeeded his father in the British parliament as member for Wendover in 1753. He was elected F.R.S. on 20 April 1758. He had several pocket boroughs in connection with his large Buckinghamshire estates. He early recognised Edmund Burke's ability, and gave him his first introduction to parliamentary life by nominating him for Wendover; he had already given William Burke (d. 1798) [q. v.] a seat at Great Bedwin. Lord Verney at that time represented the Welsh borough of Carmarthen. In the parliaments of 1768, 1774, 1780, and 1791 he sat for Buckinghamshire; he fought many contested elections in the whig interest against the Grenvilles.
In 1774 the condition of Lord Verney's affairs obliged him to ask Edmund Burke to find another seat (which he did at Bristol), but this made no break in their friendship. ‘His private circumstances are very indifferent,’ Burke writes; ‘indeed I am infinitely far from having any sort of reason to complain of the step which he is going to take. He ​will, indeed he must, have those to stand for Wendover who can bear the charge which that borough is to him.’ Burke complains bitterly to the Duke of Richmond that Lord Verney's services had not been recognised by the whig leaders. ‘I believe no man in England,’ Burke wrote, ‘without the exception of another has been so indulgent, humane, and moderate a landlord on an estate of considerable extent, or a greater protector to all the poor within his reach.’ Burke added that if Verney would have temporised as Lord Temple did, or have joined the court party, for which he did not lack invitation, ‘he would have had neither the least uncertainty nor a shilling expense in his election.’
The rivalry between the Verneys and the Temples was not confined to politics. Sir Richard Temple had commenced in 1697 to build a palace at Stowe which was the admiration of the county. Earl Verney boasted that he would make of Claydon a more beautiful house, without the gilding and painted ceilings with which Stowe was resplendent. Soon after his father's death in 1752 he pulled down a wing of the old Claydon House, which he rebuilt on an ambitious scale from the plans of the architect Adam, adding a hall with a lofty dome and a great ballroom. He employed artificers in wood, iron, and plaster who worked under Patrioli, an Italian artist, Lord Verney personally supervising the work with his own admirable taste. Three beautifully decorated rooms remain and a broad marqueterie staircase with a graceful iron balustrade; but his niece and successor pulled down the new wing, which had not been completed at his death.
With this lavish expenditure Lord Verney's money matters went from bad to worse. ‘It is past all description, past all conception,’ Burke writes, ‘the supinesses, neglect, and blind security of my friend in everything that concerns him. He suspects nothing, he fears nothing, he takes no precautions, he imagines all mankind to be his friend.’ Burke had reason to know this. In 1769 Edmund and Richard Burke owed Lord Verney 25,000l. between them. In 1784, in a schedule of sums due to him are the entries, ‘Rt. Hon. Ed. Burke 11,000l., Wm. Burke, esq., 20,000l., do., no security except honour 40,000l.’ Lord Verney's West India property fell heavily in value, his transactions in East India stocks proved disastrous, blow after blow fell upon him. In 1783 he sued Edmund Burke in chancery for a sum of 6,000l. lent for the purchase of Beaconsfield, but failed to establish his claim. Yet, in spite of his losses, Lord Verney's interest was as magnificently supported as ever in a fiercely contested election in 1784, on which the attention of the whole country was fixed. The polling lasted sixteen days, and Verney was defeated by twenty-four votes. His many creditors again pressed upon him, and he was honourably anxious to meet them all. His estates were put in the hands of trustees and lawyers, and, as they were anxiously considering how small a pittance their magnificent client could live upon, another general election burst upon the country. The clamour for the popular candidate drowned all other cries; Lord Verney's agent wrote that he would try to limit his expenses to 12,000l. or 15,000l. (June 1790). Processions carrying his banners converged on Aylesbury from all the neighbouring districts, two hundred gentlemen breakfasted at Claydon House, three hundred of the meaner sort were fed with the remnants of the meal; he was triumphantly returned, and the county rang with his praises. Then came the crash; bailiffs were put in possession; the sudden death of the countess on 20 Jan. 1791 added to the confusion and gloom at Claydon; the furniture was seized and sold, and tradition says that the master of the house eluded his creditors by escaping in his wife's hearse. Verney died without issue at his house in Curzon Street, Mayfair, on 31 March 1791. On his death his titles became extinct. He married, on 11 Sept. 1740, Mary, daughter and coheir of Henry Herring of Egham, a London merchant and a director of the bank of England.
M. M. V.
Dictionary of National Biography, Errata (1904), p.270 N.B.— f.e. stands for from end and l.l. for last line
| Page | Col. | Line | |
| 265 | ii | 35 | Verney, Ralph, 2nd Earl Verney: for Ralph succeeded read Ralph, who was admitted fellow-commoner of Christ's College, Cambridge, 20 April 1733, and graduated M.A. in 1735, succeeded |