(Vol. viii., p. 495.)
"On the 21st of July, 1828, the corpse of John Hampden was disinterred by
the late Lord Nugent for the purpose of settling the disputed point of
history as to the manner in which the patriot received his death-wound. The
examination seems to have been conducted after a somewhat bungling fashion
for a scientific object, and the facts disclosed were these: 'On lifting up
the right arm we found that it was dispossessed of its hand. We might
therefore naturally conjecture that it had been amputated, as the bone
presented a perfectly flat appearance, as if sawn off by some sharp
instrument. On searching under the cloths, to our no small astonishment we
found the hand, or rather a number of small bones, inclosed in a separate
cloth. For about six inches up the arm the flesh had wasted away, being
evidently smaller than the lower part of the left arm, to which the hand
was very firmly united, and which presented no symptoms of decay further
than the two bones of the forefinger loose. Even the nails remained entire,
of which we saw no appearance in the cloth containing the remains of the
right hand.... The clavicle of the right shoulder was firmly united to the
scapula, nor did there appear any contusion or indentation that evinced
symptoms of any wound ever having been inflicted. The left shoulder, on the
contrary, was smaller and sunken in, as if the clavicle had been displaced.
To {647} remove all doubts, it was adjudged necessary to remove the arms,
which were amputated with a penknife (!). The socket of the left (_sic_)
arm was perfectly white and healthy, and the clavicle firmly united to the
scapula, nor was there the least appearance of contusion or wound. The
socket of the right (_sic_) shoulder, on the contrary, was of a brownish
cast, and the clavicle being found quite loose and disunited from the
scapula, proved that dislocation had taken place. The bones, however, were
quite perfect.' These appearances indicated that injuries had been received
both in the hand and shoulder, the former justifying the belief in Sir
Robert Pye's statement to the Harleys, that the pistol which had been
presented to him by Sir Robert, his son-in-law, had burst and shattered his
hand in a terrible manner at the action of Chalgrave Field; the latter
indicating that he had either been wounded in the shoulder by a spent ball,
or had received an injury there by falling from his horse after his hand
was shattered. Of these wounds he died three or four days after, according
to Sir Philip Warwick. According to Clarendon, 'three weeks after being
shot into the shoulder with a brace of bullets, which broke the bone.' The
bone, however, was not found broken, and the 'brace of bullets' is equally
imaginary."
This account is from a newspaper cutting of _The News_, August 3, 1828.