Remarks on Mr. Long's Papers. 47 



cause," needing " witnesses to be had and sought for," &c. (vol iv. 

 p. 215). These admissions fully vindicate for him the sobriquet 

 of ' Wild Darell ' by which he is still traditionally remembered in 

 the neighbourhood of Littlecote, and dispense with the need of 

 any apology for supposing it possible that he may have been guilty 

 of the darker deed which the same tradition fastens upon him. 



Let us, however, turn now to the other document given by Mr. 

 Long in his last paper. This is a letter to Darell from his Cousin, 

 Anthony Bridges, of [Shefford, Berks, a village, as already men- 

 tioned, about six miles from Littlecote,] dated July 24th 1578, in 

 which he reports •' matters which you will wonder to heare, and 

 yet tchich I siqjpose, concerne yourselfe.'^ He goes on to say that he 

 (Bridges) had been recently visited and questioned (vulgarly 

 pumped) by some inquisitive persons, " on matters of great impor- 

 tance, yea, as great as may he to those parties to whom they did 

 appertayne ." (which parties the preceding sentence shews to have 

 been chiefly in the opinion of the writer, Darell himself). He con- 

 tinues, " The matter feare you not, yf it be no worse than I knowe" 

 meaning probably, if they are no better informed than they shewed 

 themselves to him to be as to the party implicated : " there was no 

 party named whom the matter did concern, otherwyse than " a 

 gentleman dwellinge within three miles of my house." He goes 

 on to say that he put them off, and would tell them nothing. 



This letter clearly shews that some serious charge implicating 

 Darell was matter of inquiry among some of his neighbours and 

 perhaps enemies, in the year 1578, and that it was supposed by 

 the latter that Mr. Bridges possessed some knowledge which might 

 help their inquiry. Now what was this accusation ? Must we not 

 look for an answer to this question in the document, found in the 

 Rolls Office attached to the foregoing letter, and " similar to it in the 

 ink, the handwriting, and the paperT (p. 391, vol. vi.) ; viz. the 

 same A. Bridges's statement of the Deposition before him and 

 others of an old midwife ' Mother Barnes of Shefforde,' ' not lono-e 

 before her death ' — a deposition to facts identical as we have 

 seen ' in all important particulars' with the heads of the ' legendary 

 tale ' as currently reported ? It is true this deposition implicates 



