Adobe PDF - Lincolnshire Archives Committee Archivists' Report 24 ...

=9
been involved in the Stamford fracas. Capt. Gardiner immediately
asked for a court martial, and this was granted by Townshend, the
Minister of War. The outcome of this was that Glover was given
a stiff reprimand (J. C. Walter, Parishes around Horncastle R 345).
It did not dampen his usual cheerfulness, as in December 1762 e was
able to jest with Sir John Cust about a bet. However, sometime
between 1763 and 1765 he resigned his commission, probably owing
to the increasing attention he would have needed to give to his
estates. The general opinion of Glover was that he was indiscreet,
and possibly something of a martinet, but this may have been somewhat
harsh; however he was, it seems, easily provoked into hasty
action.
In 1767, as mentioned above, he inherited the Wispington estate;
his first objective was to provide for his family, but he had no son,
only a daughter Laura, born about 1775. There is not much in the
family records for 176580 to show how the estate was progressing,
except for small pieces of information from the few rentals that
survive (5/39(b) ). However, he did mortgage the Calcethorpe property
to Taylor Calcroft, who had been a party to the 1767 settlement
(5/39(a) ), in 1772; this property had been one of the later purchases
of Phillips’ father, in 1743. There is also a bundle of share subscription
vouchers (5 / 37), which show that Glover possessed L5,ooo of
stock in the Chesterfield Canal scheme, which he supported from
1771.
His sister Mary had, about 1750, married John Plumptre of London,
by whom she had two children, John, and Mary who in 1785
married Richard Carr Glyn the London banker (knighted in 1791).
Apparently John Plumptre the elder was related to Elizabeth
Chudleigh, the notorious Duchess of Kingston, of whom it was said
by Leigh-Hunt “ . . . she concentrated her rhetoric into swearing,
and dressed in a style next to nakedness.” (G.E.C. Vol.VII p.310 n.).
On her death in 1788 there were certain estates in France of which
she was the owner, and about which there was to be considerable
controversy, particularly some property in Calais, a mansion near
Paris called St. Assise, and another house in Montmartre. It is about
the succession of these estates that we have a fairly lengthy correspondence
(4/203), concerning the part played by Phillips Glover.
The correspondence opens with Glover in Paris in the autumn of
1788 attempting to find out what he would be entitled to as a second
cousin. Unfortunately he seems to have been utterly deceived by
a M. Bequet de Cocove, from whom the Duchess had bought a house
in Calais, into thinking that if he paid some of the Duchess’ debts,
he would have a better claim to the French estates than the first
cousins; it was also suggested that he come to an agreement with
the other heirs at law, and purchase their succession rights. The
villainous Frenchman together with an English clergyman named
Jackson, apparently managed to continue the deception, until in early
1790 Glover heard from his French bankers, Perregaux & Co. of Paris,
that de Cocove had got his signature on a bond for &4,000, payable
to de &cove after Glover’s death. By the early months of 1790, still
in Paris, he seems to have gone into debt to the tune of E13,500
(4/a/34); it was lamented that so many claims to the Duchess’ estate
were pending. In January he left for England, and did not return,
but kept up a regular correspondence with Perregaux & Co., from
whom come most of the letters that survive here. About this time he