estates. An early disappointment in love affected his
mind and drove him into a life of seclusion. He was a
man of intellect, taste, and polished manners, but eccentric
in his conduct. An illicit connexion with his
housekeeper brought him a daughter, to whom he
became much attached; his housekeeper proved faithless,
and she was banished; but the child was educated in a
costly manner, and as she grew up was introduced to
society, and well received, as his own daughter. At her
age of thirteen, he made a will, entailing her estates on
her and her issue; but at sixteen she went astray with
the coachman, to her father's excessive but not
unrelenting indignation. A child was born in 1803, in her
father's house; received the name of Marianne, and
soon secured his eccentric affections. But two years
after, his daughter made a second faux-pas; became
pregnant by Arnold, a young farmer, eloped with him,
and married him: Arnold's father was one of
Bainbrigge's tenants, and there was an inveterate quarrel
between them on the subject of game. He made a fresh
will, in which he cut off Mrs. Arnold without a shilling,
and resettled all his estates on her first daughter
Marianne, who was brought up under his roof. In 1815,
when he lived in Derby, he had a fall from his horse,
the consequence of which was that his eccentricity
became almost insanity. From having been a man of
elegant exterior, with a most precise as well as a
sumptuous household, he became neglectful of his person even
to filthiness, and his household arrangements became
revolutionised. The carriage in which he drove out
was covered with the dirt of fowls that roosted in it; his
driver was a labourer in a smock, immediately from the
farm-yard and dung-heap; he carried home the carcase
of an ox on the roof of his carriage; pigeons gained
access to his library, and built among costly books—
"a capital place for them," said he; and a horse that
offended him he tried, convicted and sentenced to
transportation, but, by commutation of the punishment, kept
it in solitary dark confinement seven years. His
granddaughter Marianne was taught the most depraved
language and obscene conduct, and encouraged by him
to exhibit this in public—her notorieties giving him
great delight, and eliciting the remark that she was "a
chip of the old block." Nevertheless, during the height
of this extravagant and almost maniacal conduct, it was
proved by his brother magistrates that he was a keen
and sagacious magistrate, and to all appearance, in their
society, no more than an extravagantly eccentric
gentleman. So matters continued till the l5th of June 1818,
when an excessive indulgence in brandy-drinking, to
which he was addicted, brought him to his death-bed;
and Mr. Blair, his solicitor, a man of high professional
station and character, was sent for to make his will.
This gentleman drew a testament which gave the reversion;
of the estates—to the prejudice of the testator's
nephew and heir-at-law, to persons whom the testator
had regarded with the utmost aversion, namely—after
the death of his grand-daughter Marianne and her issue
to the sons of his daughter Mrs. Arnold. Marianne
like her mother, had run away at sixteen, and had
two children; but she and her children were dead,
and the question of succession arose between the
testator's heir-at-law and the family of the Arnolds in
whose favour the will had been made. It was declared
by some of the attesting witnesses, that the testator was
never conscious from the day he took to his bed, on
Monday the 15th of June, till his death on the next
Saturday; and that Mr. Blair guided his hand to sign
the will, when he was in a state of dying stupor. Mr.
Blair himself took advantages under the will, and the
testator's relations were kept from seeing the deceased
during the whole of his last illness. After the death,
when the will was read over, the youngest brother of
the deceased, then Captain now Major-General
Bainbrigge, saw the original full of blanks and pencil
interlineations; when, after years of foreign service, he came
home and went to Doctors' Commons, he found the
original will so different a document in appearance, that
he believed it to be one substituted for that which was
read over to the relatives in 1818. On the other hand,
respectable clerks, who were in Mr. Blair's employment
when he drew the will, swore to having written the
original document, and to the identity of the original
with the one now in Doctors' Commons. Lord Campbell's
opinion in summing up was favourable to the good
faith of Mr. Blair, and the validity of the will; but the
verdict of the jury was in favour of the plaintiff, the heir-
at-law.

In the Arches Court on the 6th the Rev. Mr.Gorham
was formally admitted into the Vicarage of Brampford
Speke.—The society called the "Metropolitan Church
Union" had prepared an address to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, praying him to prevent Mr. Gorham's
institution to the living, and had requested his grace to
permit a deputation to wait upon him for its presentation;
the Archbishop returned an answer to the effect,
that as the address proposed that he should assume to
himself the authority of reversing the sentence of the
legitimate tribunals, and that he should deny to Mr.
Gorham a right to which he is declared to be legally
entitled, he (the Archbishop) could not receive the
address, and must decline naming a time for its
presentation.—On Sunday the 11th, Mr. Gorham was inducted
into the living in the presence of a numerous congregation;
and thus has terminated the celebrated Gorham
Case. It may, however, be revived; for the Bishop of
Exeter has written a letter to the church-wardens of
Brampford Speke, in which, after denouncing the
doctrines of Mr. Gorham, he concludes;—"You have,
already, too strong reason to apprehend that your new
vicar may endeavour to spread the poison of heresy
among his people by denying the efficacy of the holy
sacrament of baptism to baptised infants; and, therefore,
I now charge you, if you ever hear such false
doctrine flow from him, that you note his words
accurately, and report them to me, or to the archdeacon,
without delay."

At Monmouth Assizes on the 7th, two young Irishmen
named Murphy and Sullivan were convicted of the
Murder of Jane Lewis on the 3rd of April. She was a
poor old woman, and was murdered on her way home
from market, the ruffians having apparently mistaken
her for another woman who had been receiving money
there. They were apprehended near Gloucester,
immediately after they had robbed an old gentleman named
Meredith on the highway, and beaten him till they left
him for dead. They were condemned to death, and
heard their sentence unmoved.

In the Court of Bankruptcy, on the 9th, judgment
was given on the application of Mr. Alaric Watts, a
gentleman well known in the literary world, for a
Certificate. A first-class certificate was granted; Mr.
Commissioner Fane expressing his sense of the perfect
integrity and propriety of Mr. Watts's conduct. The
Commissioner quoted an interesting trait of the generosity
of Sir Robert Peel from a statement made by Mr. Watts.
After mentioning that Sir Robert Peel had, without any
application from him, appointed his son to a place under
Government, 'Mr. Watts added, "A few months only
before his death, having been induced to make inquiries
respecting me, from having been told by Mr. Christie,
that my portraits of Mrs. Siddons by Sir Thomas
Lawrence, and of Sir Walter Scott by Leslie (portraits well
known by amateurs), were for sale, he wrote me a letter,
which he despatched to me in the Queen's Bench, by
the hands of his private secretary, conceived in a spirit
of the most delicate generosity, offering me any pecuniary
aid which might tend to alleviate the discomfort of my
situation."—"I could not resist," said the Commissioner,
"the pleasure of giving publicity to this additional proof
of the private virtues of our great statesman, and I do
so the more because I hope that the opinion so impliedly
given by so great a man, in favour of Mr. Watts, may
come in aid of the judgment I am now pronouncing,
which is, that Mr. Watts is better entitled to a first-class
certificate than any bankrupt that ever came before me."

Mr. Thomas Paull, a young man of respectable
station, was tried at Wells Assizes on the 10th for Setting
Fire to a Wheat Stack, near Ilminster. The stack
belonged to his mother, and was destroyed by fire, just
as the mother and her sons had quitted the occupancy
of the farm. The chief witness was John Harris, a man
who had been in the service of Mrs. Paull. He asserted
that Thomas had spoken to him about setting fire to
certain mows, as the contents were bad, with the object
of at once getting money for them from an insurance