Sturt’s quixotic, Foxite father, who matched his wife in the adultery which wrecked their marriage and exposed them to public humiliation in 1801, encumbered his son’s inheritance. After his death in 1812 his personalty was sworn under £10,000, and the following year his estate was in chancery. Fortunately for Sturt, who was granted letters of administration in 1832, his father’s executors were able to rectify matters.
Sturt, whose politics were indeterminate, made no mark in the House as Member for Bridport, where the family interest was evidently in decline. He ‘relinquished his pretensions’ there at the dissolution in 1820, when a contest loomed.
enter into any detail upon politics because it is unnecessary ... I am generally inclined to ministerial measures because I imagine them to be the most correct, but I am not tied or pledged to any measure whatever. I am free and uncontrolled as the winds.
He was beaten into third place in the contest, which cost him at least £500, but did not carry out his threat to petition against Ponsonby’s return.
In April 1830, when he became a freeman of the borough for the purpose, Shaftesbury brought him in for Dorchester in the room of one of his sons.
wherever he saw a willingness to diminish undue patronage, wherever he saw a willingness to diminish the expenditure and burdens of the nation, and a desire to relieve it from its distress, he should deem it his duty to support such measures.Dorset Co. Chron. 8, 15 Apr. 1830.
There is no evidence that he acted up to these professions in the House, where he took his seat, 26 Apr. He divided with the Wellington administration against the Galway franchise bill, 25 May, and for the grant for South American missions, 7 June, when he voted against the abolition of the death penalty for forgery. He is not known to have spoken in debate and at the general election of 1830 he made way for Shaftesbury’s heir, Lord Ashley.
Sturt secured a county seat as a Conservative in 1835 and occupied it until 1846 when, with his cousin Ashley, he resigned it, being then a convert to free trade, but representing an overwhelmingly protectionist constituency. To the prime minister, Peel, who tried to make him sit tight, he administered a ‘gentle’ rebuke, by wondering whether repeal of the corn laws ‘might not have been managed without stranding others and myself’.
