unfortunate woman was already dead from profuse
hemorrhage. No one having seen anything in the husband's
hand, it was not for the moment known with what
instrument the injury had been inflicted; but upon his
being taken into custody an open long-bladed clasp
knife, covered with blood, was found under the seat
upon which he had been sitting.—An inquest has since
been held, when, after a brief deliberation, the jury
returned a verdict of "Wilful murder" against John
Spear, who was committed to take his trial at Gloucester
at the next assizes.

Sir James Rivers, Bart., was charged before the Bath
magistrates, on the 19th with Assaulting two of the
officials in the employ of the Great Western Railway
Company. The complainants were Isaac Crew, a railway
porter, and Samuel Haines, a railway policeman,
the latter of whom appeared with his hand bound up.
It appeared that on the previous Saturday, Sir James
Rivers drove to the Bath Railway Station in a dog-cart,
with a pair of horses, and pulled up to await the arrival
of the seven o'clock train, upon the ground usually
occupied by the omnibuses. The complainant, Crew,
subsequently went up to him and requested him to
remove, so that the omnibuses might back in, at the same
time pointing out to him the place set apart for private
carriages. Sir James replied that he should not move to
please anybody, at the same time using abusive language,
and telling witness that it was Saturday night, and that
he was drunk. Crew left, but as the omnibuses were
arriving, presently went again to defendant and told
him he must please to move, and at the same time he
put his hand on the hind part of one of the horses. Sir
James immediately struck him violently across the hand
with his whip, and swore that he wished he had hit his
hand off. The other complainant, Haines, afterwards
went to defendant, and requested him to move, as he
was occupying the place of the omnibuses. Defendant
said he would not move for any policeman, and, after
repeating his request, the witness laid hold of the horses'
bits to lead them on. Sir James immediately stood
upon the box and lashed the horses furiously for the
purpose of riding over the policeman, who said that had
he not been accustomed to horses, and pushed those of
defendant back into the breeching every time they reared,
he must have been thrown back and rode over. Finding
himself unable to drive the horses over the policeman, Sir
James leaned over the splash-board and belaboured him
across the head, shoulders, and hands, with the butt-end
of his whip. The policeman then let go his hold, and
afterwards, whilst standing on the steps leading to the
railway station, the defendant came up and struck him
a violent blow in his stomach with his fist. He had
been unable to attend to his duties since the assault
from the injuries he had received, and had spit blood
ever since. For the defence, it was stated that Sir
James had been provoked to the assaults, his servant
stating that the policeman put his hand on Sir James's
breast before he (Sir James) struck him on the stomach.
The Magistrates at once fined Sir James 50s. and costs for
the first assault, or one month's imprisonment in default.
For the second assault £5, or two months' imprisonment.
The Mayor commented severely on such conduct in a
person of Sir James's rank. The fines were at once
paid.

The case of the Rev. Robert Whiston, head-master of
Rochester school, has been decided by the Bishop of
Rochester. Mr. Whiston was removed from the Mastership
in 1849, for publishing Cathedral Trusts and their
Fulfilment, a pamphlet which exposed with searching
severity the dealings of the Dean and Chapter of
Rochester in certain parts of their administration. The
Bishop pronounces the pamphlet "libellous" as regards
the Dean and Chapter; but he thinks Mr. Whiston may
have been misled by "legal opinions of high authority,
though given on erroneous data, upon the main charge
against the Dean and Chapter of having illegally taken
to themselves a disproportionate share of the revenue of
the Cathedral property." Having recorded this opinion,
the Bishop reinstates Mr. Whiston in the office of Head
Master, on the 1st of next January; on condition that
Mr. Whiston "shall have no right or claim against the
Dean or Chapter, or any one else, for any profits or
emoluments accruing from the 19th day of October, the
day of his removal from the office, up to the 1st of
January next,"—the Visitor being of opinion that
Mr. Whiston "deserved to be suspended during the
time aforesaid." The judgment also cautions Mr.
Whiston not to publish any more editions of his
pamphlet.

M. Cournet, formerly an officer in the French navy,
has been Killed in a Duel, at Crown Farm, near
Windsor. The duel took place on the afternoon of the
19th, with pistols; a bullet passed through Cournet's
body, and he died in a few hours. Three foreigners
who were concerned in the matter were arrested at
Waterloo terminus on returning from Windsor; a fourth
was captured when he came with a French surgeon to
the inn at Egham whither the wounded man had been
conveyed. These men were examined by the Chertsey
magistrates on the following day. Their names are
Baronet, Alain, Mornay, and Barthélémy. Two long
swords were found wrapped up in a cloak in the possession
of one of the men arrested in London. There was
no evidence to show that either of the accused was the
surviving principal in the duel. All were remanded.
The inquest was commenced on the 20th. It appeared
from the evidence, that six foreigners went to Windsor;
four are in custody, one is dead, and the sixth has not
yet been traced. No pistols were found on the spot, or
in the possession of the prisoners. Many witnesses
related how they had seen the men arrive at and pass
through Windsor, and what occurred after Cournet had
been wounded; but no one pointed out the surviving
principal. M. Gustave Nagute, who identified the body,
admitted that he knew that his deceased friend was
about to fight, in consequence of a political dispute;
but this gentleman declined to disclose all he knew—he
would bear the consequences of refusing. The Coroner
was obliged to place him in the charge of the police. A
number of foreigners were brought into the court, but it
does not appear that any one could be recognised as the
man who is wanted. The four prisoners remain in
custody; and the inquest was adjourned to the 26th,
on which day the jury found a verdict of wilful murder
against: them. The cause of the quarrel has not yet been
explained.

Thomas Archer, formerly an engine-driver on the
South-eastern line, was tried at Maidstone Quarter
Sessions, on the 20th, for Negligently Driving an
Engine on the night of the 26th July, whereby he
perilled the lives of passengers and others. The man
had himself a narrow escape from death, having been
thrown from the engine: he is hardly yet convalescent.
On the 26th July, Archer drove a "tidal train" from
Folkstone—a very fast train. As he approached Headcorn
station, the up-line was blocked up by a "pick-up
train" of waggons, put there out of the way of the
down mail-train. Into this pick-up train the man drove
his train; the collision was violent, but, fortunately, no
passenger was fatally hurt. The crash obstructed the
down-line with ruins, and the mail train ran into them,
altogether producing a terrible scene of confusion. The
question for the jury was, did Archer cause the disasters
by his negligence? Railway officials asserted that danger-
signals were exhibited at the station, and a man was
sent forward with a red light; and if Archer had taken
heed of these signals there would have been no danger
of a collision. The night was rather wet and dark; the
engine driven by Archer was a new one, and stiff in
working; Archer slackened speed somewhat as he
approached the station; no fog-signals were placed on
the rails, as would at least have been highly desirable.
The station-master at Headcorn has since been reduced to
a booking-clerk. The prisoner perilled his own life! he
had always been a careful driver. The jury consulted for
a considerable time; and then found a verdict of guilty,
but with a recommendation to mercy because it was
"a very dark night." The culprit was sentenced to
prison for six months, but without hard labour, on
account of his delicate health.

At the Central Criminal Court, on the 25th, William
Rex was indicted for Feloniously Breaking into the
Dwelling-house of Mary Lamb, and stealing several
articles, her property. The prosecutrix was a widow,
and resided in a cottage at Twickenham. In the
evening of Sunday, the 17th inst., she went out, leaving