that "on the contrary (said his lordship) repeated
attempts to escape have taken place—in one case with
success; and that none of the persons on whose behalf
my interference is solicited have expressed contrition
for their crime, or manifested any sign of gratitude, or
loyalty to the gracious Sovereign, whom they have so
grievously offended, and to whose clemency some of
them are indebted for their lives. Under these circumstances,
I do not consider myself justified in recommending
the prayer of the memorial to her Majesty's
favourable consideration."

NARRATIVE OF LAW AND CRIME.

Two persons were brought before the Bow Street
magistrate on the 8th, charged with Writing threatening
Letters to the Earl of Derby. John Middleton, an
elderly Irishman, who rendered service to government
some years ago, by giving valuable evidence before a
committee on Irish fisheries, and was rewarded in a
manner which he deems insufficient, was charged with
writing to Lord Derby, "Wo betide those who refuse
me justice;" it appeared that he considered he was
entitled to £859,000 and had got but £200. Being
obviously of unsound mind, he was placed in kindly
custody for the present.—William Stuart Sheridan, a
former offender in the same way, was charged with a
more distinct threat: he asked restitution to an office
in the Excise, with a reminder of "the fate of the
lamented Mr. Perceval." For his former threat, which
was against Lord John Russell, he was held to bail:
he was now sent to prison till he could find two good
sureties for his keeping the peace during twelve months.

On the 10th inst., the Vice-Chancellor gave judgment,
on the application of the lessee of her Majesty's
Theatre, for an Injunction to restrain Mdlle. Wagner
from appearing at the Royal Italian Opera, the case
having been fully heard on several previous days (see
'Household Narrative' for April, page 87). The
court held that the agreement of November last was
binding; that the additional clause binding Mdlle.
Wagner exclusively to her Majesty's Theatre, though
not originally in the contract, had been subsequently
acquiesced in and adopted; and that the stipulation for
payment of £300 was not a "condition precedent"
necessary to be fulfilled at its precise day beforehand,
but an independent clause, which was dispensed with
by the consent of the parties themselves. The court
was, therefore, of opinion, that there was nothing to
justify the Wagners in throwing up their contract with
Mr. Lumley, and making a new one with Mr. Gye, and
that Mr. Lumley retained his right of action on the
contract. On these grounds the injunction was
continued. Notice of appeal was given by the defendants.
The case was heard on the 26th, before the Lord
Chancellor, who dismissed the appeal.

At the Central Criminal Court, on the 12th, Thomas
Cathie Wheeler was indicted for the Murder of his
Mother, by cutting off her head. It was suggested by
the counsel for the prosecution that the prisoner was
not in a fit state of mind to plead, and that probably it
would be a saving of the time of the court if that
question were at once to be disposed of by hearing
medical evidence upon the point. The prisoner was
then placed at the bar. He gazed wildly round the
court, and when the charge was read, he immediately
called out in a loud voice "Not guilty." A variety of
medical and other evidence was then given, which
appeared fully to establish his insanity, and though he
was aware of the offence of cutting his mother's head
off, with which he was charged, he was unable to
comprehend the effect of a plea of guilty or not guilty.
The jury accordingly returned a verdict that the
prisoner was of unsound mind, and therefore
incompetent to plead. Upon this finding, the prisoner was
ordered to be detained in safe custody during her
Majesty's pleasure.

On the same day, Richard Ambler, professing to be a
licensed surgeon, was tried for inveigling to his house a
young woman, named Newberry, with the intention of
Violating her Person. He was found guilty, and sentenced
to eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour.

Mrs. Chitty, the wife of a shopkeeper at Guildford,
has, under the influence of a lunatic frenzy, Murdered
two of her young Children. A grown-up son, hearing
an alarming noise, ran into his mother's room, and
found her battering the children's heads with a wooden
mallet. It appeared at the inquest, that the poor
woman's husband had become insane, and the misfortune
had deranged her mind also. After she was
arrested she attempted to strangle herself with a
handkerchief; and she asked a man who was watching her,
to "make away with her by striking her on the head
with anything he could get at." The jury, as a matter
of form, returned a verdict of wilful murder, and she
was conveyed to prison.

At the Central Criminal Court on the 15th, George
Terry, Joshua Tudgey, and George Cooper were tried
for Assaulting Eliza Coffield. It appeared from the
statement of the prosecutrix, an interesting looking
young woman, that her father had been landlord of the
Horseshoe and Magpie, in Clerkenwell, and having fallen
into some difficulties he had all his goods sold off at the
close of the last year, after which she was left in the
house to keep possession. Some attempts were made to
obtain possession, and get her out, but they not succeeding,
Terry, who is a jobbing builder in Clerkenwell,
came, accompanied with a dozen men, amongst whom
were the two other prisoners, and, stating that they had
been sent by the freeholder to make repairs, they, with
a view of driving her out of the house, were guilty of
the most brutal conduct. Under Terry's direction they
took out the windows, took up the floors, cut down the
stairs, and, under the pretence of cleaning the rooms,
drenched the place so, that, to use her own expression,
"the water for two days was up to her ancles." Day
and night some of them were in the house. They
abused her, threw water over her, bricks and pails of
water down the chimney the moment she attempted to
light a fire, opened the drains, and finally Mr. Terry so
carried on the work of demolition that the house next
door fell down. This not succeeding they had recourse
to personal violence, and after pushing and driving her
about, she was by those at the bar knocked down.
Terry said, throw her anywhere. Tudgey said, knock
her down. Tudgey threw her into the fireplace, and
Terry threw a pail of water over her, and finally upon
the last day of the riot Terry again came, and they ill-
used a young man named Hardy, who was in the house
with her. Terry knocked her down and kicked her.
Her screams had attracted a great crowd, and some of
the neighbours extricated her and took her fainting to
the nearest surgeon's, under whose care she was for
some time. The jury found them Guilty. Terry was
sentenced to six and the others to four months' imprisonment
and hard labour.

In the Westminster County Court, on the 15th, an
action was tried at the evidence of Mr. Bayfus, a
cabinet-maker, against the Hon. Thomas Hatten George
Fermer, lieutenant in the 2nd Life Guards, for £50, due
on the Defendant's Acceptance. On the part of the
plaintiff it was stated that he had taken the bill in the
course of his business, and upon its arriving at maturity,
applied for payment, when he was referred to the
defendant's solicitor, who made certain proposals which
were not acceded to, and the defendant then absented
himself from England. Proceedings were subsequently
taken by the plaintiff in the Brompton County Court,
and were defeated by defendant's absence. Upon his
return to England a fresh summons was issued, which,
to the plaintiff's surprise, was met by a plea of "infancy."
This plea was now brought forward, and evidence was
given of the defendant's birth in 1832. The judge gave
a verdict for the defendant, but without costs, and
strongly reprobated the practice of young officers signing
bills when under age, and thus exposing tradesmen to
risk without any notice or intimation that the contract
was bad.

By a Parliamentary return respecting the Court of
Chancery, it appears that since 1845, when the 5th and
6th Victoria, cap. 103, came into force, £294,901 11s. 6d.
has been paid for salaries and office expenses up to
the 26th November last, and the enormous sum of
£364,355 19s. 8d. as compensation for loss of offices. To
the late four sworn clerks, appointed taxing-masters, no