she made the coffee for breakfast, on tasting it, it burnt
Hartley's mouth, and he charged the girl with having
put poison in his cup, which she denied; he then tasted
her coffee, and found it had no unpleasant flavour. His
daughter then snatched away his cup, and threw the
contents into a wash-hand basin. But in spite of her
tears and protestations of innocence, he took the basin
to Guy's Hospital, where it was found that the coffee
must have contained vitriol. The girl, who was said to
be of weak intellect, and stood sobbing at the bar, being
questioned, only shook her head and said she had
nothing to say. At a subsequent hearing the magistrate
decided that there was sufficient evidence for a committal.

Fresh Illustrations of Smithfield Cruelty were brought
to light by Mr. Thomas, secretary to the Royal Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, at the
Clerkenwell Police Court on the 19th, to complain of
acts of gross cruelty on the part of drovers and others.
It was stated that oxen were daily overdriven,
until they became completely exhausted, and were
obliged to lie down in the streets, when they were
cruelly beaten and pricked in the hocks until the blood
flowed from their flesh, and by being thus tormented
they crawled along in pain to their destination, where
they were tied up, and fresh and unnecessary cruelties
were inflicted upon them prior to their being slaughtered.
Numerous complaints had been made to the Society by
humane persons, who were determined, if possible, to
check or put down the intolerable nuisance. The
magistrate highly commended them for their exertions, and
intimated that he would grant warrants against offending
parties who could be identified.

A Scene from Life in London was detailed in the
Court of Exchequer on the 19th. A baker and bill-
discounter named Glen sued Lieut. Evans of the 69th, as
acceptor of a bill of exchange drawn by Lieut. Baldwin
of the Rifle Brigade. The defence was that the plaintiff
had obtained the bill by fraud and collusion with one
Humbert, who had stolen it from Mr. Baldwin, after
having got from him a letter in which he said he had
received money for the bill, which he had not. On being
cross-examined, Mr. Baldwin said, Lieut. Evans was in
London when the bill was drawn. We wanted to raise
£200, of which each was to have £100. The Turf
Winestores, in Jermyn Street, where I met Humbert, is not
a regular gambling-house, but one to which men go
to make bets. I was a very frequent visitor there,
"Ladies" are admitted. I have played at hazard at
this house with Humbert. When I have been there,
they have always tried to persuade me to play. I have
never been a winner there. I have never won a "copper"
there in my life. The game was not played there
habitually. When I wrote this letter I was intoxicated,
although it was only 5 o'clock in the afternoon. I wrote
it deliberately. "What!" exclaimed Baron Alderson,
"do you call it writing a letter deliberately if you are
drunk at the time?" The jury consulted for some minutes,
and then found "that the bill had been obtained by
fraud from the drawer, Baldwin, by Humbert, but that
there was no evidence to connect the plaintiff with that
fraud." The verdict was then entered as for the plaintiff,
damages £200.

A man named William Bennison, a workman in an
iron-foundry, has been committed to prison at Leith on
suspicion of having Poisoned his Wife. The circumstances
of the case are extraordinary. The scene of the
murder is an old-fashioned tiled house in Leith. Bennison
and his wife occupied the second floor of a house in
which also resides Alexander Milne, a cripple from his
infancy, well known to the frequenters of Leith Walk,
where he sits daily, in a small cart drawn by a dog.
Mrs. Bennison, after, it is said, partaking of some gruel,
became very ill, and died on Monday, the 22nd inst.
The dog which drew the cripple's cart died about the
same time: suspicion was drawn upon the husband, and
he was apprehended, and the dog's body conveyed to
Surgeon's Hall for examination. Some weeks before,
Bennison had purchased arsenic from a neighbouring
druggist, to kill rats, as he said. When suspected, he
called on the druggist, and requested him and his wife
not to mention that he had purchased the arsenic. He
even pressed for a written denial of the fact, adding
that there might he arsenic found in his wife's stomach,
but he did not put it there. On the Monday previous to
her death it is said he enrolled her name in a benefit
society, by which on her death he was entitled to a sum
of £6. At the prisoner's examination before the sheriff
the report of the chemists pronounced the contents of
the dog's stomach to have been metallic poison. The
accused was eventually committed for trial.—The deceased
and her husband were members of the Wesleyan
body, and bore an excellent character for piety. Bennison
professed to be extremely zealous in behalf of religion,
and was in the habit of administering its consolations to
such as would accept of them. His "gifts" of extempore
prayer are said to be extensive.

Two Men were shot at by a Gamekeeper lately in a
wood belonging to Lord Wharncliffe, near Barnsley.
The game on this estate is preserved by a solicitor, who
resides near Wokefield, who employs Joseph Hunter
as gamekeeper. Both the men were severely injured,
and Cherry, one of them, sued Hunter as the author of
the offence, in the Barnsley County Court, and the case
was heard on the 19th instant. Cherry stated, that on
the 23rd February he went to see the Badsworth hounds
meet at the village of Notton, and in coming down by
the side of a wood he saw the defendant, who asked
plaintiff and two others where the hounds were.
Plaintiff told him they were in Notton-park. These men
left Hunter, and walked down by the side of Noroyds-
wood. They went through the wood, when one of the
men who was with him began cutting some sticks.
Plaintiff then saw Hunter, who was about 25 yards
from them, coming towards them: the men began to run
away, when plaintiff said to the other, "He's going to
shoot us;" and before he had well delivered the words,
he was shot in the arm and side, and could not run with
the others. A surgeon proved that the wounds were
severe and in a dangerous part of the body. The two
men who were with the plaintiff corroborated his
evidence.—The Judge said that defendant deserved to be
sent to York for what he had done already. The
damages might have been laid at £100 or £1000 had
plaintiff been acting lawfully; but he thought plaintiff
had acted with discretion in laying the damages at £10,
for which he should give a verdict, and all the costs the
law would allow.

A simple personage named George Thompson, a cattle-
salesman in Little Britain, charged a suspicious-looking
fellow whose name did not transpire, at Bow-street, on
the 23rd, with an Ingenious Swindle. The complainant's
tale was, that on the previous day he was walking down
Holborn, when the prisoner, accompanied by another
person, accosted him in the following terms:—"Hallo,
old brick, you 're a countryman I can see by the look of
your jib; dang it, we must have a drain together." The
prisoner continued, "Well, we'll just go in to Tom
Spring's and have a drain." They according went in
to Tom Spring's, and witness was treated to two glasses
of port wine. While there, a game at skittles was
proposed by the prisoner, which was accepted, and his
friend and witness were invited to watch the game.
Various public houses were entered, and various
potations of brandy and water indulged in. When the
skittle-ground was reached, the prisoner and his friend
played witness, but asked to bet on the game, and,
briefly to relate, the only £5 which he had were soon
won by betting and playing. The prisoner then said,
"Have you no more money?" Witness said, "Not with
me, but I've £15 at home." After a great deal of
pressing on the part of the prisoner and his friend,
witness was foolish enough to go home with them in a
cab and get it. When he had got it, they adjourned to
another skittle-ground, and, of course, the £15 soon
followed in the wake of £5, and then they all set off,
leaving him "in pawn" at the public house for certain
liquors they had had. Information was given to the
police, and the prisoner discovered. The magistrate
who adjudicated in the case remarked that he had never
known a person evince such childishness as Thompson
had shown. The affair appeared to him to be a mere
gambling affair, though he had no doubt the money was
won by unfair means, and the prisoner must therefore
be discharged.

R. C. Willis, a clergyman of the Church of England,