office; after the fire, Thomas gave Harris a sovereign,
and promised him more money if he did not tell
anything; but a reward of £50 had been offered, and Harris
tried to get it by detailing his story of Thomas's guilt.
In cross-examination, the witness repeated his narrative
of long conversations word for word: it was evident he
had got it by rote. The prisoner's counsel asked the
jury whether they could believe Harris, and whether it
was necessary for him to call witnesses. The jury said
they did not require to hear more. Mr. Justice
Coleridge observed, it was quite evident that the story must
have been written by Harris himself, or by some one
more wicked than himself, and then learnt off by
repeated readings. No motive whatever could be
assigned for the prisoner committing such an act. The
jury gave a verdict of not guilty, which was received
with a burst of applause.

A singular case of Assault was tried at the Inverness
Sheriff's Court, on the 10th. Donald Macdonald, of
North Uist, was charged, with several others, with
violently entering the house of J. R. Macdonald, of
Harris, and putting the inmates in bodily fear. The
prisoner's defence was, that his object was to obtain the
lady, now his wife, from whom he had been separated
against their mutual wishes. It turned out that the young
gentleman and Miss Jessie Macdonald were lovers, but
her father had provided another match for her, and
they resolved to elope together. Accordingly, the
young chieftain, with a party of friends and dependants,
arrived at her father's house, on the sea-shore, at
midnight, in a stormy night, made their way into the house,
and even into the young lady's bed-room, and carried
her off in triumph, as it was proved, with her full
consent and concurrence. The jury returned a verdict
of acquittal, and the young couple left the court-house
amid the cheers of a great concourse of people.

Two cases of Juvenile Crime were disposed of at the
Mansion House on the 12th. The culprits were boys
of about twelve years old. The one had stolen a
blanket in which a sleeping infant was wrapped, and
the other had stolen a leg of mutton from a butcher's
stall near Duke's Place. This last crime has become
very common, being committed by small children under
the direction of experienced thieves. In both these cases
it appeared that the boys had homes and parents to
take care of them. The sitting magistrate (Alderman
Gibbs) said that in such cases a prison was a very
improper place to send a child to. Parents were bound
by law to protect their children, and he was determined
not to sanction the practice of filling the prisons with
children of such tender age. He therefore ordered the
boys to be well whipped and taken back to their parents,
with an intimation that if they were found again in a
similar condition the parents should be called to a
severe account for their negligence.

Elizabeth Bubb, a woman of forty, was tried at
Gloucester Assizes, on the 12th, for the Murder of Maria
Hook, a child of four years old, by withholding from
it necessary food and clothing. It was a horrid case of
inhuman cruelty. Hook, a woodman, lived at Churchham,
near Gloucester; two years since his wife died,
leaving three children, of whom Maria was the youngest.
Soon after her death, Bubb, her sister, who had two
children of her own, came to keep house for Hook.
Hitherto Hook's children had been healthy-looking, and
had been well attended by the mother. Now a sad change
occurred to them: they were neglected, ill-treated, starved.
While Bubb and her children were well fed, the other
children literally collected, from hunger, the crumbs
that fell from the table. The little girl Maria suffered
the most. Many witnesses described how she had been
misused. She was covered with filth, and almost naked
—looked stupified from ill usage, was afraid to cry out,
and was reduced to a skeleton. The woman abused any
one who interfered in behalf of the child; swore at her
constantly, threatened her, and exclaimed "Damn thee,
thee wilt never die, and nothing will ever kill thee!"
At length the child died in convulsions, and it was
clearly proved that she had literally been starved to
death. Proof was given that Hook, the father, was not
in want, and that his house contained an ample store of
provisions at the time of his child's death. The jury
found the prisoner guilty of "aggravated manslaughter,"
and she was sentenced to be transported for life. Richard
Hook, the father, was then tried for manslaughter, in
neglecting to give the child proper food, and clothing.
But it appeared that the treatment of the child was
much better when he was at home than when he was
absent; and he was therefore acquitted.

Hannah Curtis was tried at Gloucester Assizes on the
13th, for the Murder of her husband, Thomas Harris,
by poison. He was a hale man, but became suddenly
ill of violent pains in the stomach, and died ten days
afterwards. Grounds of suspicion having occurred, his
body was disinterred, and a large quantity of arsenic
found in his stomach and bowels. His wife had bought
arsenic, ostensibly to kill cats; had told her neighbours
that a gipsy had foretold that her husband would die
suddenly, but that she would not be long a widow; and
had married another man about three weeks after her
husband's death. On the other hand, the purchase of
the poison had been without concealment; it was shown
that she had always treated her husband kindly. The
jury after some deliberation found her guilty, and
sentence of death was pronounced. She left the dock
protesting her innocence. She was to have been executed
on the 24th, but has received a reprieve during pleasure.

A young girl, named Amelia Snoswell, Murdered the
child of her sister, Mrs. Cooper, an infant of eighteen
months old, at Gravesend, on the 14th. The infant had
been put to bed along with another child, when the girl
went into the room with a knife and cut its throat. She
then returned to her sister and said, "I have killed her
now, and she is happy." She had always been
affectionate to the child, but had lately shown symptoms of
mental derangement. She was committed for trial.

William Bennison, who was committed to prison at
Leith, in April last, (sec "Household Narrative" for
that month) on the charge of poisoning his wife, has been
tried before the High Court of Justiciary and convicted
of the crimes of Bigamy and Murder. It was a case of
singular atrocity. Some years since, when resident in
Ireland, he married an Irishwoman; but soon deserted
her, and coming home to Scotland, married there a
woman remarkable for her meek virtue and her devotion
to himself: he left his second wife, returned to his first
wife in Ireland, and soon after she died suddenly. He
then once more returned to his second wife, and gave
her the garments of his first wife as those of a deceased
sister—"a sister in the Lord." He was distinguished
for his gift in prayer, and at last was every evening at
the prayer-meeting. Here his eye fell upon one whom
he resolved to make his third wife. Six weeks after his
acquaintance with this girl, his second wife died: it was
proved that six weeks before her death he bought arsenic,
and with that poison frequently administered he took the
unfortunate woman's life. Her deathbed strikingly
exemplified pious resignation and trustful attachment to
her husband. With a climax of hypocrisy, immediately
after her death, he exclaimed at her bedside, "Thank
God, she is gone to glory! I have seen many a death-
bed, but never a pleasanter one than my wife's." The
wretch was found guilty on both charges. Sentence of
death was passed, and he was removed protesting his
innocence of the murder: but he afterwards confessed.
He was executed on the 17th.

A young German sought advice at the Worship Street
Police-office, on the 17th. He had married a young
lady who appeared attached to him, but for six months
refused him all Marital Rights; so they separated, she
insisting on his allowance to her of a weekly
maintenance. After a twelvemonth of separation, his wife
came to his house one night and insisted on remaining;
he received her, and consented that she should again
live with him; but for three months more she persisted
in her original eccentricity of wifely relation. This
state of things was once more put an end to, and
arrangements were made for a final separation; but the
young lady came back to him a third time, and she
now followed him about, and importuned him in a
manner no longer to be endured. Mr. Hammill
regretted that he could give no help. He advised the
applicant to institute a suit in the Consistorial Court for
a divorce, if he had the means of so doing; the German
left the court in a state, apparently, of perfect doubt and
mystification.