him in the cab then directed the cabman to drive
along the Strand, but the mob who had followed the
vehicle from Gresham Street so annoyed him by mud
and other missiles, that Mr. Sloane expressed a wish that
the cabman should cross Waterloo Bridge and put him
down at the railway station, and he ultimately escaped
without any serious injury.

Several cases have occurred of workmen being driven
from their employment by Combinations of their Fellows.
A labouring cooper complained at the Thames Police
Court, on the 17th, that his trade association had fined
him £10. for entering a workshop where steam is
employed, and that they now persecuted him, and got him
turned out of work to such a degree that he must
starve. The magistrate could only say that the
association might be liable to an indictment.

A mill-sawyer was charged at Lambeth Police Office,
on the 14th, with leaving his employment under threats
by fellow-workmen, because the master, Mr. Woods of
Nine Elms, employed men not members of the Sawyers'
Society. The man was engaged to work eleven hours a
day for 24s. a week; but after working a few hours,
went "pale and trembling" to Mr. Woods, and prayed
to be free, or his society would scratch him off their roll.
The magistrate found that one rule of the society is—
"That if any member of the society shall introduce
his son into a situation as a saw-sharpener, thereby
depriving another member who is qualified, or out of
employment, of taking the same, he shall be excluded."
This rule would prevent a man from performing his
first natural duty of providing for his own child; and it
must be wrong in morals. But it is also in clear
contravention of the 6th George IV., commonly called Mr.
Hume's Act, which declares, "That if any person shall,
by threats, intimidation, or by molesting, in any way
obstruct another, force or endeavour to force any
journeyman, workman, or other person hired or employed,
from his work or hire, all such persons so offending are
liable to be sent to the house of correction for three
calendar months." After conversation, Mr. Woods
offered the sawyer constant work if he would give up
the society; and the sawyer consented to stick by his
master. On that understanding, the magistrate allowed
the summons to stand over for a fortnight.

The persons Charged with the Robbery on the
premises of Mr. Chapman, jeweller, in the Strand, were
tried at the Central Criminal Court on the 20th.
Clinton, the shop-boy, who admitted the robbers in the
evening after the manager had gone, Shaw and Badock,
the shoemaker's, Clinton's friends, with Gardner and
Buncher, two reputed thieves, were tried as principals;
Mary Buncher and Mary Cheroneau were tried as
comforters and abettors. Clinton pleaded guilty. The trial
of the others had an unexpected result: Clinton's former
statements, incriminating the others, have been so
contradictory, and his whole conduct so untruthful, that
the Crown prosecutors would not put him in the box
as Queen's evidence; and the other witnesses failed to
make out a case against the other prisoners, who,
except Clinton, were consequently acquitted. Clinton
was sentenced to be transported for twenty years.

A Melancholy Suicide has been committed by Mr.
Spence, Q.C., the eminent barrister. He was sixty-
three years old, and had for some time been in declining
health, and afflicted with a deep mental despondency.
He became at last possessed by the delusion that he was
dying from an internal disease which his father had
laboured under; and his medical attendant was quite
unable to remove the wholly ungrounded impression.
On the 10th, his mind wholly gave way, and in the
dead of the night he opened veins in his neck, his
thighs, and his wrists; and his summoned household
found him at the point of death from loss of blood.
Still rational, he said—"My sufferings were greater
than I could bear: you see what a dreadful thing I have
done. I am pleased that I have been punished in this
world, and I hope I shall escape hereafter." By medical
skill his life was preserved till the 19th, when he died
from exhaustion. A coroner's jury, at his house in
Hyde Park Terrace, returned a verdict of "suicide under
the influence of temporary insanity."

Another case has occurred of Robbery attempted by
means of Strangulation. Mr. Adolphe Dubois, a
dentist in Princes Street, was passing through Norton
Street, near Portland Place, about half-past nine o'clock
on the night of the 18th, when he noticed three men in
a doorway, as if they were there to get out of the rain.
As he was passing, one of them ran down the steps and
rushed against him, at the same time throwing a rope
or gag over his head, which was instantly forced round
his neck, and tightened so as nearly to choke him. Mr.
Dubois endeavoured to give an alarm; but the rope
was twisted tighter, a man being at his back, using
something like a lever to effect this compression. He
contrived, however, to call out; upon which the other
two men ran down the steps and held his hands. By
the time he had nearly lost consciousness, he felt the
pressure removed, and then saw the three men running
off by different ways. He called out "Murder! Police!"
and he then noticed that his outside coat was torn, and
that his watch and chain had been taken from him.
In a minute or two afterwards, a man who called
himself William Thompson was brought to him, and he
instantly identified him as the man who had used the
gag or rope to him. The watch was soon afterwards
produced in a shattered condition, having been found in
an area close to where the prisoner was stopped. He
had marks on his neck from the violence to which he
had been subjected; and he suffered a kind of spasm
every five minutes from the same cause. Thompson
was brought before the Worship Street Police Court,
next day, and remanded on a statement by the police
that they expected to capture his accomplices.

A recent Trial for Murder in France has created
a great sensation from the atrocity of the circumstances.
The Abbé Gothland, a priest, and Madame du
Sablon, the wife of a physician at Augoulême, were
placed at the bar on a charge of having wilfully
murdered a woman named Deguisal, who lived with
Gothland as his servant. The corpse of the deceased
had been exhumed upon suspicion, and was found to
contain arsenic; in addition to which it was testified
that the deceased had sickened suddenly, and had
suffered from violent vomitings previously to her death.
These facts suggested that she must have come to a
violent end; suspicion fell upon the prisoners; and
evidence was brought to show that Gothland had been
living in adulterous intercourse with Madame du Sablon;
that this illicit connexion had been discovered by
Deguisal; and that the murder had been devised and
perpetrated by the joint exertions of the pair to remove
this witness of their guilt. Proof was brought that
Gothland, in parishes where he had formerly officiated,
had been notoriously inculpated with other married
women, and that Madame du Sablon had maintained
a similar connexion with Gothland's predecessor in the
curacy. Evidence of a less direct kind was also taken
to prove the criminal dispositions of both the accused
parties. On the other hand, it is particularly remarkable
that the defence was made to rest more on the
probability of suicide, than the improbability of adultery
and murder; nor was any testimony offered to the
sanctity or innocence of the priest beyond the simple
evidence, that, with the fate of his predecessor before his
eyes, he had resolved to exercise greater caution in his
intercourse with his female parishioners. The question
of the "probabilities" was complicated by an incident so
wholly French in character, that it is difficult to attach
to it, according to the English notions, any decided
purport. As soon as the accusation had become known
to Dr. du Sablon, the husband of the female prisoner,
he held a long "explanation" with his wife, the result
of which was they both shut themselves up in a room
with a little boy their son, kindled some pans of charcoal,
and thus endeavoured to terminate at one stroke
their existence and their difficulties. In the execution
of this resolve they were interrupted, though not until
their purpose had been nearly effected; and both the
parties to the trial endeavoured to turn the fact to their
own peculiar benefit. Madame du Sablon insisted that
if her husband had considered her guilty, he would not
have sacrificed his life with her; to which the prosecutor
replied with more plausibility, that if he had been
persuaded of her innocence he would not have proposed
suicide at all, or, at any rate, would not have included
his little son in the sacrifice. In the end, after a melodramatic