respect to the pistol, evidence was offered to show that
Dr. Smith had purchased one, in August last, like that
found on the ground; and that he had purchased two
ounces of gunpowder on the 19th of November, ostensibly
for mixing an ointment. A packet of gunpowder
was found in Smith's house by the officers; it was short
of two ounces by a quarter of an ounce; but it was
shown that in opening it the officers spilt some, and the
servant of Dr. Smith deposed to finding some on a plate
after they had left the house. It was also shown that
William M'Donald had purchased in September, 1848,
from Mr. Gray, the brother of the Provost of Peterhead,
a pistol similar to that found by the body; and Mr.
Gray expressed his belief that it was the same pistol he
had sold. The main question was one of time. Where
was Dr. Smith between half-past seven o'clock and
eight o'clock on the evening of the murder? Dr.
Smith's own account is not disputed, except in one
important item. He declares that he had no appointment
to meet M'Donald; that about six o'clock he
went to the "manse" on professional business, and
returned to his own house soon after seven; that he
dug up some flower roots, occupying his time until
about five-and-twenty minutes to eight; that he then
went to Miss Anderson's, and remarked the time, 7·35,
on her clock. Staying with her a few minutes he went
to Pirie's, and subsequently to Mrs. Manson's, and back
again to Pirie's; leaving that house about half-past
eight in company with Reid and Taylor. The important
item in this account is that Smith was at Miss Anderson's
at twenty-five minutes before eight; that he drew
her attention to the fact, and the hands of the clock did
mark twenty-five minutes to eight; but Miss Anderson
swore on the trial that the clock was a quarter too slow.
That left fifteen minutes unaccounted for. Smith
exhibited no signs of guilty consciousness at the
discovery of the body. In summing up, the Lord Justice
Clerk remarked, that at an early period of the trial he
had taken up the impression that unless more evidence
were brought than appeared likely, there was not
enough to infer the guilt of the prisoner, or to substantiate
the fact that a murder had been committed. Since
hearing the whole case, that impression had been
strengthened and confirmed. The jury deliberated
about ten minutes, and then returned a verdict of "Not
proven." Questioned by the bench, the foreman said
that the verdict was the result of a division; there was
a minority for a verdict of "Guilty." The crowd
slightly hissed the announcement, and Dr. Smith was
taken out of court by a private door to evade the mob.

The trial of Richard Hugh Smyth, alias "Tom
Provis," took place at Gloucester on the 1st inst. The
circumstances of this case have already been fully detailed.
(See Household Narrative for August last, p. 183.)
The charges against him were that he had feloniously
forged a codicil to the will of Sir Hugh Smyth, Bart.,
with intent to defraud, and that he had uttered the said
forgery. There was another indictment for perjury,
committed on the trial of "Smyth v. Smyth," at the last
Gloucestershire assizes. The forgery charge was first
gone into. The prisoner had retained Mr. Gelinger
Symons to defend him, but that gentleman had thrown
up the brief, and the prisoner complained to the court
of this treatment, saying he must now trust entirely to
his God and the judge and jury. The evidence was a
repetition of the facts by which Sir F. Thesiger so
completely demolished Smyth's case last year. The bought
Bible, which had been passed off as the family heir-loom,
the forged seal, and all the apparatus of fraud, as
conspicuous as on the former trial. The interest, however,
of last year was utterly wanting on this occasion; every
stage of the proceedings leading to the foregone
conclusion of the prisoner's guilt. Smyth, however, made
an original defence. In a long and rambling speech he
contended that he had not forged the documents, nor
could he be charged with the uttering, because they had
been produced in court by his solicitors, and not by
himself, and as to forgery, he had heard it laid down by
a learned judge at the Old Bailey, that to copy the
names of men who perhaps never lived, or who, at all
events, must long since have been dead, was no forgery.
He had been justified, both by the laws of nations and
the customs of civilised society, in what he had done;
for nations resorted to arms, and did all manner of evil
to support what they conceived to be their own; and he
asked, did any one now dare charge Bonaparte as a
murderer, because, in prosecuting his claim to his own,
he had caused the deaths of numerous persons? He was
found guilty of forging and uttering the deed, and, upon
being called up for sentence, snivelled for mercy on
account of his wife (a young creature as beautiful as an
angel) and his four small children. The learned judge
expressed his concurrence in the verdict of the jury,
who would have found it impossible to come to any
other conclusion than that at which they had arrived,
and, remarking upon the enormity of the prisoner's
offence, sentenced him to be transported for twenty years.

Colonel Gordon, of the Royal Artillery,—a
distinguished veteran, in his sixty-seventh year,—Died
Suddenly on the 15th March, in a Railway-carriage
between Stafford and Crewe. After the interment,
circumstances came to light which led to the exhumation
of the body and a coroner's inquest. It appeared that
Colonel Gordon left London for Aberdeen on the night
of the 15th; he travelled in the mail-train, as a third
class passenger. In the same carriage with him, but in
another compartment, was a man drunk, who annoyed
the other passengers by his bad behaviour. At Stafford,
a passenger complained; whereupon Inspector Saunders
took the offender out of the compartment in which he
had so misbehaved, and wished to put him into that
occupied by Colonel Gordon. The Colonel protested
against the intrusion, and offered his card; the Inspector
answered him insolently, seized him by the shoulders,
and said he should leave the carriage: eventually the
drunken man was admitted. Colonel Gordon intimated
an intention of prosecuting the inspector for an assault,
and asked the names of three fellow-passengers as
witnesses, but did not take down their names: he seemed
as if he were going to sleep; presently his head began
to droop, and when the train arrived at Crewe he was
dead. This was the evidence of three passengers who
sat with the deceased. Saunders and other officials
denied that the man put into the compartment was
drunk. He "walked into the carriage with his hands
in his pockets." A guard said it was "not unusual
to find third-class passengers who had taken a few
glasses of liquor." Sir John Liddell, who made a
post-mortem examination, ascribed the death to a long-
standing disease of the heart: any sudden excitement
would be likely to cause death. The jury returned a
verdict of "manslaughter" against Saunders. Saunders
was put on his trial, at Chester Assizes, on the 6th inst.
Evidence similar to that given at the inquest was
adduced. When Sir John Liddell was cross-examined,
he said the Colonel's life was at all times in great peril.
His death might have arisen from the excitement which
took place previously to the prisoner's laying hands
upon him: it might have followed in the course of half
an hour. The Judge—"Can the jury, after that, say
that the death was caused by the violence of the
prisoner? " Mr. M'Intyre said, after that intimation
he would not press the case: and a verdict of acquittal
was recorded. Mr. Justice Crompton said, he could not
say that they had any right to turn Colonel Gordon out
of the carriage, or to put in a drunken man; but these
were questions which they could not decide, not having
heard the other side of the case. But it struck him that
the conduct of the railway officials was not justifiable.

At the Central Criminal Court on the 8th, Lewis
Bossy, a gentlemanly-looking man, was tried for a
misdemeanour—Uttering a False Diploma of the Royal
College of Edinburgh. Mr. Bossy is a licentiate of the
Apothecaries' Company; when in business as a general
practitioner he exhibited in the surgery what purported
to be an Edinburgh diploma of "M.D.," entitling him
to act as a physician; and he has since been appointed
physician to some life-insurance offices, the managers
believing he was really what he represented himself to
be. However, they were led to make inquiries at
Edinburgh; they discovered that Mr. Bossy's diploma
was a forgery; and hence this prosecution. The case
was fully made out. When arrested, Mr. Bossy
admitted that he had never been examined at Edinburgh,
but said he had purchased the diploma of a person who
represented that he could obtain it for him on his