By the Rev. J. E. Jackson. 



261 



CAUSE OF THE MURDER. 



So far the Narrative of the Outrage. It will naturally be asked, 

 what were the motives? and what provocation had been given ? 

 The Narrative itself contains little or nothing upon this part of 

 the subject : for it only says that " Charles Lord Stourton wishing 

 to coerce his mother into a bond never to marry again, desired to 

 obtain in this matter the assistance of the elder Hartgill who was 

 Steward of the Stourton Estates : that Hartgill refused, unless 

 some provision were made for the lady : and upon this they utterly 

 fell out." How far this is correct we have no means of knowing, 

 for upou this particular point no fresh evidence has been met with. 



The only other cause mentioned in any work hitherto published 

 is the one assigned by John Aubrey, upon the authority of his ■ 

 friend the Rev. Francis Potter, Rector of Kilmington, who however 

 lived about a century after the event. His account of the matter is 

 as follows : — " A surly, dogged, crosse fellowe it seems he (Hartgill) 

 was ; who, at last, when his Lordship had advanced him to be 

 steward of his Estate, cosined his Lord of the Mannour of Kilmanton, 

 the next parish. I thinke it was a Trust. The Lord Stourton, 

 who also had as good a spirit, seeing that his servant Hartgill had 

 so ensnared him in law tricks, as that he could not possibly be 

 relieved ; not being able to bear so great and ungratefull an abuse, 

 murthered him as aforesaid." 1 



From the further information that has now been obtained, it 

 would appear that in one point Aubrey's statement is not quite 



Derby, October 1651, after the Battle of Worcester. Lord Derby having been 

 by Bradshaw's management, condemned to death, and his execution ordered 

 within four days, his son Lord Strange rode with all speed, night and day, to 

 London and presented a Petition to Mr. Speaker Lenthall by whom it was read 

 to the House of Commons. u Cromwell and Bradshaw however had previously 

 taken the necessary steps to prevent this measure succeeding. Observing 

 that a majority of Members were inclined to allow the Earl's Petition, they 

 basely quitted the Assembly with eight or nine of their confederates, and 

 with a cold-blooded calculation and indifference unknown in History they 

 reduced the number of the House below Forty, by which means the Question 

 was lost and so much time suffered to elapse as secured the execution of the 

 sentence." I find this story in Baines's History of Lancashire vol. iv. p. 35, 

 and, using Bishop Burnet's words, "I leave it with my reader as I found it." 

 1 " Collections for Wiltshire, Aubrey & Jackson," p. 393. 



