Charles Schreiber, Esq.
(1826-1884)
6 July 1861

Volume 4, page 181, sitting number 4794.

Born on 10 May 1826 at Colchester, Charles Schreiber was the eldest son of Lieutenant-Colonel James Alfred Schreiber of Melton, Suffolk and his wife Mary Ware, daughter of Thomas Ware, of Woodfort, County Cork. He was educated at Cheltenham College and at Trinity College, Cambridge.

On 10 April 1855 he became the second husband of Lady Charlotte Guest née Bertie, widow of the wealthy ironmaster John Josiah Guest, owner of the largest ironworks in the world. He had been the tutor of his wife's son, Ivor. He later became the Member of Parliament for Cheltenham (1865-1868) and for Poole (1880-1884).

The couple appear on the 1861 census living at Exeter House in Putney Heath, London. At the time of the census, Mr Schreiber was 34 and his wife was 48. He gave his place of birth as 'Essex, Colchester' and his rank as 'gentleman.' Also in the house on the night of the census were Lady Schreiber's four daughters from her first marriage; her brother, the Earl of Lindsey; a governess; and at least eleven servants, with a great many more (gardeners, coachmen, stablemen, laundresses and dairy maids) living in various buildings on the estate.

Charles Schreiber died, aged 58, at Lisbon on 31 March 1884. He was 'on his way home from the Cape, whither he had gone in the hope of recovering from the effects of the very serious illness with which he was attacked last Summer' (Cheltenham Looker-On, 5 April 1884). The lengthy obituary concludes: 'By the death of Mr Schreiber, Lady Charlotte has lost a devoted and affectionate husband; Poole an able and talented representative; many residents in Cheltenham a sincere friend, and the Conservative Party in the House of Commons a staunch and consistent supporter, upon whom they could confidentially rely whenever questions of national importance were at issue. [He was] ever prepared to advocate the welfare of the humbler classes, and ready to co-operate with others in any movement for their amelioration and social elevation, of which his efforts last Session in Parliament to procure a more generous recognition, on the part of the Government, of the services and responsible duties performed by postmen, and other servants of the postal department, than they were receiving, afforded sufficient evidence.'