On the 1st or 2nd of October she had a recurrence of the
malady from which she had previously suffered, but the
attacks were of a still severer character. She was
seized with strong convulsions, and there was no doubt
at this time she had acute mania, and that shortly
afterwards there were symptoms of inflammation of the
brain. She remained in a dangerous state for some
time, and undoubtedly for several days was of unsound
mind. A few days before her death—that is, in
October, 1848—(as appeared from the duke's evidence)
he was with his wife, and she suddenly said to him.
"Mandy" (the short word she used for Mandeville),
"I am not satisfied with my will. I do not wish Lord
Frederick to have so much power, neither do I wish
the children to be independent of you." She repeated
this more than once, whereupon the duke, having
taken his measures, said to her, "Would you have
any objection to leave me the Irish estates, with
the understanding that I am to carry out your
wishes? " Sir Frederick Thesiger told the jury that the
duchess appeared to be delighted with the suggestion.
The duke despatched his steward to a solicitor in a
neighbouring town for the draught of a will in blank.
The will was to give absolute property in everything
the dying wife possessed to her husband, with nothing
but a moral trust that he would carry into effect the
wishes she had expressed to him with regard to the
disposition of her property. Subsequently the blanks
were filled up, and the will was executed by the Duchess
in the presence of the Duke's steward and Dr. Verity,
the family physician. "The Duchess was in a recumbent
position," said Dr. Verity, "and when she put her
hand to the paper it shook very much, and she addressed
me and said, 'I shall want your assistance,' and I then
steadied her hand. The position of the Duchess at the
time, and the circumstances under which the signature
was made, will account for its appearance; it is evidently
a nervous signature." The Duchess's mother, Lady
Olivia Sparrow, was at the castle at the time, but it
does not appear that anything was said to her about
the will. This last fact, however, was accounted for
from the circumstance that there had been previous
misunderstanding and ill-feeling between the husband
and the mother-in-law. It was they who were the real
opponents in the suit. The Attorney-General, who
contested the validity of the will, in the course of his cross-
examination and by evidence of his own, succeeded in
showing, with very painful precision, that the unfortunate
duchess was mainly out of her mind during the last
weeks of her life. She might have had lucid intervals
and in one of these the will may have been executed.
The jury thought they had evidence enough before them
to justify them in arriving at that decision. It appeared
that she thought persons had set the house on fire; that
she had just been delivered of a child; that the Queen
was in the room with her, &c. The three most celebrated
lunatic physicians of the day gave a strong opinion that
the lady could not have been in a state of mind to
dispose of her property. "From what I have heard of
the symptoms exhibited by the deceased lady," said Dr.
Sutherland, "I believe that there must have been a
disorganisation of the brain, and that the delusions
which have been spoken to by the witnesses could not
have been occasioned by the opiates that were administered,
but were evidently the results of mania." In
this opinion both Dr. Mayo and Dr. Conolly concurred.
These gentlemen, however, spoke from description—
they had not seen the patient. The jury gave a verdict
for the plaintiff, establishing the second will.

A serious Mutiny has occurred on board the American
clipper the Sovereign of the Seas, which arrived in the
Thames from Melbourne on the 19th inst. with 35,000
ounces of gold. On the 17th of March a quarrel took
place between two of the steerage passengers and one
of the crew. The mate interfered, and ordered the
seaman on deck, but he refused and became abusive;
when he was put into irons by direction of the captain.
After a few minutes, all the crew mustered aft, and
demanded of the captain the immediate release of the
man (an Englishman). The captain at once armed
himself, as also did the officers, and then proceeding
on deck, ordered the men forward; they refusing, he,
with his officers, drove them back at the point of the
bayonet; in the scuffle four men were wounded. Most
of the men had weapons in their possession, either a
belaying-pin, crow-bar, or knife, and their conduct was
of such a character as to create alarm for the safety of
the ship. After being driven forward, they still refused
to return to their duty, and mustered in the forecastle.
The captain, perceiving the serious nature of the case,
consulted with the chief cabin and a large number of
the steerage passengers, which resulted in their arming
themselves, and aiding the captain in seizing the ring-
leaders. Six were picked out, and they had been placed
on one side of the deck, when a man named Hall stepped
forward from the remainder of the crew, and urged
them not to stand by and see their shipmates put in
irons, but to stand up for them. The captain, seeing
the man making towards him, cautioned him not to
move a step; if he did, he would blow his brains out.
He persisted, when the captain in raising a pistol, it
by some means got discharged, and the contents passed
through the legs of the third mate—Mr. Myers, a
German—wounding him severely. Hall, with the rest,
were immediately seized and dragged down below,
where they were securely ironed.

A coroner's inquest was held on the 24th inst.,
touching the death of Mr. R. Daly, an elderly
gentleman, a retired West India proprietor, who
was Found Hanging from a bed-post on the
previous Sunday morning. It appeared from the
evidence of Mr. Buckley, a friend of the deceased,
that they had been intimately acquainted for the
last thirty years. He had been formerly in the
receipt of an income of £4,000 per annum; but
in consequence of the depreciation of late years of
West India property, he had been in very straitened
circumstances. He resided with his sister, but
not being able to meet his rent day, a warrant
of distress had been either threatened or put in.
He was in an almost frantic state for some time
past, and upon the landlord, the Rev. Mr. Hardy of
Pimlico, hearing of his actual condition, that gentleman
at once gave him a full acquittance of his arrears. His
life was assured for £700 in the Indisputable Life
Policy Company, and a fragmentary kind of letter
addressed to the company, stating that he would be
unable to pay any more premiums, was found upon his
desk. A portion also was addressed to a solicitor to
whom he owed a large sum of money, but not greater
than he would have been able to have paid had he
lived a year longer. The jury returned a verdict
of "Temporary insanity."

In the Arches Court, on the 25th inst., a suit was
tried, brought by the Rev. Edmund Roberts, rector of
Paul's Cray, Kent, against his wife Elizabeth Ann,
for a Divorce by Reason of Adultery. The parties were
married on the 12th of July, 1836, and Mrs. Roberts
had been the mother of nine children, six of whom were
alive, the youngest having been born after the parties
had separated. In the spring of 1852 Mr. Roberts
engaged a young man named J. Mowatt, as assistant
tutor, and it was pleaded that an improper intimacy
soon afterwards sprang up between this person and his
wife. It was alleged that they had been seen kissing
and embracing each other, and that on several occasions
they had been alone together. That in August, 1852,
while Mr. Roberts was in Ireland, Mrs. Roberts came
to London with Harriett Whittleton, her companion;
that they were joined at their lodgings by Mowatt, and
that they afterwards paid a visit to Bath in company.
On behalf of Mrs. Roberts the existence of any
indecorum was utterly denied, and the various acts of
attention which she was proved to have shown to Mowatt
were attributed to a mere feeling of compassion, excited
by his delicate health. Mowatt's interviews with her
were explained by a statement, that he was engaged in
a somewhat angry correspondence with his friends,
whom he had offended by renouncing Wesleyanism for
the Church of England, and that he used to consult
her upon such correspondence. His visits to London
and Bath were also explained by a statement that he
had engagements there, and that he merely escorted
Mrs. Roberts, whom business called to those places.
Sir John Dodson now delivered sentence, and after an
elaborate examination of the pleas and evidence on