however, could stop the proceedings or let them go on.
The prosecutrix was then induced to give him a
sovereign to stop the proceedings, and said she would give
him more money in the course of the week. Although
her lodgers were most well-behaved women she was so
frightened that she afterwards parted with them. The
prisoner returned again in about a fortnight, and asked
for more money, which she was not able to give him,
and subsequently her suspicions being excited as to his
character, and his importunities becoming so intolerable,
she procured a warrant, under which he was
apprehended. The prisoner declared that the charge was got
up against him, and that he had never received a penny
from the prosecutrix. He maintained that he had a
right to put down the house, and that he had been
employed by Mr. Harness and others to do so, and had
succeeded in putting down other disreputable houses,
while he continued to asperse the character of the
prosecutrix. No evidence of the truth of his
statements, however, was brought forward. The Assistant-
Judge said the prisoner was about the most notorious
rogue in London. He lived by this infamous system of
fraud and extortion. He had been convicted twice.
On one occasion he was transported, and on another he
was sentenced to a year's hard labour. It was impossible
that a gentleman like Mr. Harness could be mixed
up with such a person. The prisoner maintained that
he had been employed in the way he had stated. The
Assistant-Judge said he certainly recollected a case in
which the prisoner was employed by a parish, but a
pretty mess the parochial officers got into in
consequence. He then sentenced the prisoner to one year's
hard labour.

At the same Sessions, Frank Fripp, a private in the
1st Life Guards, was indicted for Assaulting a Police
Constable in the execution of his duty. It appeared
that between two and three o'clock on the morning of
the 4th inst., the defendant was quarrelling with a
young woman in Chapel-street, Brunswick-square,
thereby creating a disturbance. The oificer on duty
interposed, but the defendant persisted, and at
length struck the woman, who was trying to get away
from him. The officer then proceeded to take him in
charge, but he struck him on the head and knocked
him down. He ran, pursued by the policeman, who,
on overtaking him, was again knocked to the ground,
and again after that. Assistance arrived, and defendant
was lodged at the station-house. The defendant's
counsel said he was instructed to appear by the officers
of the defendant's regiment, the defendant's character
being an irreproachable one. The result would be to
him, if convicted and imprisoned, one of complete ruin
as a soldier; and he (the learned counsel) hoped that if
the defendant was found guilty the Court would impose
a fine, and not pass a sentence of imprisonment. If this
course was to be adopted he would at once admit that
the defendant struck the officer; but if it was not, he
should have to call evidence that would give a different
complexion to the case. The jury found the defendant
guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy.
Captain Hogg said the defendant's conduct had been
very good during the time he had been in his troop—
two years. He was a good, attentive soldier. The
Assistant-Judge (Serjeant Adams) said this case showed
the advantage of a good character to a man. Had the
defendant borne but an indifferent reputation, the officer
of his regiment would not have come forward in his
behalf. Would the defendant promise never to do the
like again? The defendant said he would take care of
that. The Assistant-Judge then imposed a fine of 20s.

An attempt has been made to Burke a young woman
at Yarmouth, named Mary Ann Proudfoot. She was
found at night by the wall of a mill, all but suffocated;
her clothes were torn, and there were marks of a
struggle on her person; while over her face was fastened
a plaster made of pitch and tar. She stated that the
man who had beaten her and placed the plaster over
her mouth was Samuel Howth, a corn-porter, by whom
she was with child. She was a servant in the family of
the merchant who employed Howth. The meeting
was sought by Howth on pretence of providing
money for the woman's lying-in. Howth was
apprehended by the police, and examined by the magistrates
on the 19th. He is a man of forty, with a wife and
family. Mary Ann Proudfoot is thirty-six; she has
had two illegitimate children. Her appearance
produced a sensation of horror in the court. Her head
and face were swollen to nearly twice their original
size; the features appeared to be completely destroyed,
the face presenting a blackened pulpy mass, produced
by fearful blows inflicted by some blunt instrument
while on the ground. She was greatly exhausted and
almost bent double. From the poor creature's evidence
and that of other witnesses, it appears that the plaster
was a very large one, sufficient to cover the face, head,
and neck; it was made of Stockholm pitch and coal-tar
spread on canvass. The woman stated that she tore off
the plaster when Howth first threw it over her face;
but he replaced it. Her screams brought persons to the
spot in time to save her life. At Howth's house a
kettle was found containing tar and pitch, and a piece
of canvass similar to that used for the plaster. One of
his hands had a smear of tar upon it. A brace was
found near the woman; Howth had but one brace to his
trousers when arrested. The prisoner was remanded
for a week.

Another shocking Agrarian Murder has been
committed in the King's County. The victim was William
Manifold, Esq., of Annaghmore, near Frankford, the
agent to Captain Morris, over some property recently
purchased in the Encumbered Estates Court. The
tenantry refused to attorn over to the new proprietor,
which rendered legal proceedings necessary to compel
them. Consequently processes were issued against them,
and decrees obtained at the last Tullamore quarter
sessions. It was not the intention of Captain Morris or
his ill-fated agent to evict any of the tenantry who
submitted to the decrees. On returning from the sessions
court on the evening of the 19th in a gig, in which was
also his friend Mr. Dyas, a miscreant climbed up behind
the vehicle so stealthily that no suspicion of his presence
was created in the mind of either gentleman, and he
discharged a pistol into the back of the head of Mr.
Manifold, whose death was instantaneous. Of course
the assassin fled. Mr. Dyas, seeing the fate of his
companion, jumped out of the gig and ran towards the
station; but on his arrival there only one man of the
party was in the barracks, the others being out on patrol.
So soon as the party returned they proceeded towards
the place where the murder had been committed, and
on their way thither they met the horse and gig going
slowly along the road, with the body of the ill-fated
gentleman in it, still seated, but leaning backwards.
Mr. Manifold was a gentleman of very kind habits and
disposition. He had been but two years married, and
he has left a widow and one child. It was to instruct
the attorney as to the necessary processes that Mr.
Manifold had been to Tullamore. He had the papers
connected with the affair in his gig-box. He had also a
sum of £47 in his pocket, and none of these were taken.

A Dreadful Murder was perpetrated at Bristol in the
night of the 19th inst. The victim was a well-conducted
married woman, the mother of four children, named
Ellen Spear, the wife of a shoemaker named John
Spear. The husband was frequently given to habits
of drinking, and, being unable to procure some money
from his wife for such a purpose, took two of her
dresses and pledged them to procure the means of
obtaining more liquor. He was drinking in a tap-room
when his wife came in, having an infant in her arms,
and requested him to return home. At the same time
she upbraided him for having pawned her dresses for
drink. He refused to go home, upon which the wife
said that if he would persist in his habits of drinking she
would commence them too, and that if he drank beer
she would drink rum. She did not, however, call for
any. He again abused her, and having a piece of broken
tobacco-pipe in her hand, she threw it at him, upon
which he got up, and placing one hand on her
shoulder, with the other made a thrust at the lower part
of her person, and immediately resumed his seat. The
poor woman having uttered a single scream, fell forward
on the floor, and it was instantly seen by the persons in
the room that she had been stabbed. She bled
profusely. A surgeon was sent for, who arrived within a
few minutes, but too late to be of any avail, as the