corrupted by his brother Holder. Lord Campbell
sentenced Holder Alleyne to be imprisoned for two
years, D'Arcy for one year, and M'Geachy Alleyne for
six months, in the Middlesex House of Correction. But
the defendants had escaped from the country before the
termination of the proceedings.

In the Central Criminal Court, on the 29th ult., W.
Smith, alias Glenister, twenty years of age, was found
guilty of the Murder of his Wife. He was recommended
to mercy on the ground that he was intoxicated when
he committed the acts of brutal violence which resulted
in death. Mr. Justice Maule promised to forward the
recommendation to the proper quarters, but sentenced
the prisoner to death, and warned him to prepare for
his fate. His sentence, however, has been commuted
to transportation for life; a measure which has been much
commented on, as no circumstance of extenuation, such
as can be supposed to have recommended it to the
tenderness of the Home Office, or the mercy of the
Crown, was elicited at the trial or has been publicly
mentioned since.

An inquest was held on the 2nd inst., on the body of
James Martin, a stoker on the South Coast Railway,
who was Killed by a passenger train running into a
goods train, as it was crossing the single bridge over the
Arun at Ford, on the 27th ult. It appeared from the
evidence that the engine-driver, Pemberton, had been
driving too rapidly. The jury returned a verdict of
manslaughter against John Pemberton, with the following
recommendation—"Having found the existence of
an invention which promises to lessen the risk of life
and limb on railway lines, we recommend that the
invention be fairly tested by the railway companies and
adopted, if found good; and if Mr. Whitworth's plan
be a good one, no Board of Directors ought to regard
the small expense attendant on its adoption." This
(added the foreman) was a note he found in Dickens's
"Household Words." "And also, that the engine-drivers
be directed to slacken their pace on approaching the
Ford Bridge."—the invention referred to by the jury
was described in "Household Words" of the 29th
November.

Another dreadful "Agrarian Murder" has been
committed in Ireland. Mr. Thomas Bateson, the brother
of Sir Robert Bateson, and manager of the estates of
Lord Templeton in the county Monaghan, was returning
home on the evening of the 4th inst., from his model
farm to Castleblayney, when he was attacked by three
men, who lay in wait for him in a hollow of the road
near some small plantations which afforded a cover. A
little boy named Baillie, age thirteen, was driving home
his father's cows, and saw the onset. A shot was fired;
then three men rushed on Mr. Bateson, and beat him
down with pistols, or with bludgeons. Mr. Bateson
rose against them three times, but at last fell as if
dead; and the men escaped through the plantations.
The Armagh omnibus passed immediately afterwards,
and Mr. Bateson was found insensible, but not dead.
He lingered till the following evening, and then expired.
His skull had been fractured in many places, and a
portion of the brain carried away. Two pistols were
picked up near the scene of the attack, both of them
clotted with blood, and carrying portions of Mr.
Bateson's hair. One had been fired, the other was
still loaded, but the cap had been flashed. A large
stone covered with blood and hair was also found. Two
persons have been arrested on suspicion. Mr. Bateson
was proverbially kind to the poor, and gave constant
employment to a great number of labourers; but he
had lately taken some eviction proceedings against
dishonest tenants of Lord Templeton.

An action at the instance of Mr. Birch, proprietor of
"The World," a Dublin newspaper, against Sir William
Somerville, Chief Secretary for Ireland, to recover
£7000 for political services to the Irish Government, was
tried in the Dublin Court of Queen's Bench, on the 5th
and 6th inst. The first witness in support of the claim
was the plaintiff himself, who swore to conversations
and correspondence with Mr. Corry Connellan, Sir
William Somerville, and Mr. Meredith, the result of
which was that he devoted his paper "The World" to the
defence of "law and order,"—and, having admitted
payments of several hundred pounds to him by the
gentlemen above named, under that agreement,—he
estimated the value of the services still not paid for,
at £6500. On his cross-examination, he said that he
considered himself entitled to £5000 for his services;
that he could not swear that the circulation of his paper
ever exceeded 1500 copies, and that its price was sixpence;
that he had received £358 from Lord Clarendon; that
he had also received £2000, and £1700 additional from
his Excellency; notwithstanding which he considered
himself entitled to £6500 more. He further stated that
one of the principal objects for which he was engaged
was to write down the rebellious press, the "Nation" and
"United Irishman," in 1848, and to write up the Government,
but he admitted, however, on cross-examination,
that one of his editors, and the writer of many of
the articles for which he claimed remuneration, to
whom he paid 30s. a week, was at the same time the
sub-editor of the "United Irishman." The Earl of
Clarendon, who was next examined, stated that he first
knew of Mr. Birch by having received various communications
and applications from him tendering his services
in support of the Government as proprietor of "The
World" newspaper, and although he knew nothing
whatever of Mr. Birch's antecedents, he felt that at the
critical period of 1848, it was his duty, as the head of the
Government, to accept the services of every man who
offered himself in support of the law and order. He
believed he had two or three interviews with Mr.
Birch, but he did not augur much service to the
Government from him, nor did he know much of his
newspaper writings, for he never read them. He had,
however, directed several sums of money to be paid to
him through Sir W. Somerville; and in the whole,
the plaintiff had received from him £3700, part of which
came in the first instance from the public money on his
responsibility, and every shilling of which he had long
since repaid, so that the whole amount came entirely
out of his own private pocket, paid to the plaintiff
through the agency of Sir W. Somerville, who acted
for him on the occasion, and that was all Sir W.
Somerville or the Government had to do with the
transaction. Mr. Corry Connelan, the Lord Lieutenant's
private secretary, was examined, and admitted
all the letters produced to have been written by him,
and with the concurrence of the Lord Lieutenant, to
whom he then had been private secretary, and the
different sums of money he had paid to the plaintiff on
various occasions. Mr. Meredith, the secretary of
Sir W. Somerville, was next examined, and made
similar admissions. For the defence it was contended
that the action was a rascally attempt to entrap persons
in authority into writing to him, in order that he might
afterwards extort money from them by threats of
publication of their private letters; that the jury ought to
convict this "literary assassin" of the crime of wilful
perjury; for a number of his letters were totally inconsistent
with the idea that he thought that £7000 was due
to him; and lastly, that Lord Clarendon possessed his
release of all claims. To get rid of him for ever, Lord
Clarendon had given him £2000; and he had signed a
release of all causes of action, dated the 4th November,
1850—a release of all causes of action against Lord
Clarendon, or any other person, from all claims for and
in relation to services rendered, or alleged to be rendered
by him. The jury gave a verdict for the defendant,
with sixpence costs.

The case of Miller v. Salomons,—the prosecution for
penalties brought against Alderman Salomons for illegally
sitting and voting in the House of Commons—was
disposed of in the Court of Exchequer on the 8th inst.,
Mr. sergeant Channell and Mr. Macnamara appeared
for the plaintiff, and Sir Fitzroy Kelly, with Mr.
Peacock, Mr. Goldsmid, and Mr. Willes, were for Mr.
Salomons. Mr. Macnamara had explained the pleadings,
and Mr. sergeant Channell had made an opening
speech, when the judge, Baron Martin, suggested, that
as the facts did not seem disputed, the doubtful law
might be better determined by preparing a special case
for the court above; and he offered to prepare the
case himself. After consultation it was agreed that the
offer of the judge should be accepted. The jury found
a verdict accordingly; and Baron Martin is to frame
a case on which the opinion of the court can be taken,