forehead and temple; that on the back part must have been inflicted with a blunt instrument, and those in front with some sharp one, like a knife of some kind. These wounds he had no doubt had occasioned her death. The jaw was fractured in two places. The back blow might have been inflicted by the axe now in Court, but certainly not the front ones, they were more of the nature of stabs: the jaw might have been broken by the axe: either the back or front wounds might occasion instant death.

George Ruthven, the officer to whom the prisoner was delivered in to custody at Sandwich, in Kent, stated, that on their road into town, the prisoner told him that some time previous to the 28th of September, his wife went out for water and staid a long time, and he suspected she was with a man in the cow-house. On the 28th he caught this man and woman in the fact in this same cowhouse, and the man escaped from him. She said she was forced there by the man; and prisoner then told her, if she would prosecute him he would forgive her, but she refused, and said she loved his little finger better than his (her husband's) whole body. Prisoner then described to him the continuance of the altercation after they went home, and admitted his then having killed her with the axe; he added, that after the first blow, she either said, "Oh, you know," or "Oh, you rogue,' "he did not know which. This was the declaration made by prisoner when he had him in custody.

Here the case for the prosecution closed, and the prisoner, when called upon for his defence, spoke as follows:

On the Monday, the day before, I saw my wife, who went out to get a pail of water, and was gone a long

time; on her return I chastised her for being out, knowing she had been doing wrong. The following day she said she was going out, and suspecting her to be going to act improperly, I followed her to the cow-house, near which I saw her with this John Lawrence, and on her return, when I accused her of it, she said, "You be d-d," and she would do as she liked. The following day I told her I wanted to buy a pair of shoes, and asked her to accompany me; she refused, and went off by herself half an hour before. I sought her for some time, and at length met her near Bishopsgate; she at first refused to go with me, but ultimately consented, and soon after left me, and when I came home she refused to tell me where she had been; I was very angry, and we had words all the time of tea. I told her I had not money enough to get shoes, and she wanted me to go to Churchstreet, Newington, where she said I might get them; I went there, and found neither shop nor shoes. On my return I found her again from home, and sought for her in the coachyard, where she sometimes went to the men, but she was not there. I then went to the cow-house, where I heard her breathing." He then minutely described the situation in which he found his wife with Lawrence on the evening of the 28th of September, and her entreaties to be forgiven, because the man forced her in; he stated his offer to prosecute the man, her refusal, and declaration that she loved that man's finger better than his (the husband's) whole body. He then admitted his having had a continued altercation with her in the bed room, and his being at length provoked, and that, in the height of her abuse of him, and threats to go out again to the man whom she loved, and also her imprecations that

she would be the death of him or herself, he struck her once, twice, or thrice, with the axe which he picked up in the room; and after having done so, he drew her head to wards him and kissed her, saying, "You were once my comfort; I have now been your death: and you, my dear, will be the death of me." He admitted his having taken the one pound from his father-in-law's box, and threatened those in the house not to stir. In the course of his address, which was rather long and in some parts unconnected, the prisoner more than once adverted to acts of infidelity on the part of his wife, which, according to his account, he was aware of before the night of the murder. He said she had been in the habit of going with married men in the neighbourhood, and that he had long suspected her. On the night on which he alleged he had detected Lawrence and his (prisoner's) wife in the cow-house, he said he upbraided her; but afterwards consented to forgive her, and forget what had passed, provided she would go and live with Lawrence or with Tucker, or with any one else she loved better than himself, and not come to him any more. It also appeared It also appeared from his statement, that the man (Lawrence) had joined them (prisoner and his wife) before they got home from the cow-house, on the night in question, and had called for some drink for them, acknowledging that the whole transaction with prisoner's wife was his (Lawrence's) fault. Prisoner said he would not drink, but (we think) only tasted it, and threw away the glass. From another part of his speech it appeared, that he had on a former occasion been bound over to keep the peace for illtreatment of his wife. This he alleged as a reason for not striking her when she provoked him so, by saying, (as he stated,) that she would do

as she liked, and he might go and be d-d; for (he added) that he was afraid she would send him to prison, and let him rot there. From the whole of his defence, admitting it to be true, we could infer, that the life he and his wife had led before the melancholy conclusion of hers was a constant scene of quarrel and reconciliation. On the present occasion he rested his case chiefly on the great provocation he had received from one whom he said he loved so dearly.

A number of witnesses were then called, who gave the prisoner an excellent character for humanity.

Mr Baron Wood summed up the evidence to the Jury, and remarked, that had the prisoner committed the act of which he stood charged, at the moment he caught another man in adultery with his wife, then the law had humanely provided a palliation for his crime; but here the act was deliberately committed at a subsequent period, when the passions had had time to cool, and therefore the prisoner had disentitled himself to the benefit he might otherwise have had in the eye of the law.

The Jury, after six minutes' deliberation, found the prisoner Guilty, and the Recorder immediately pronounced upon him, in the most solemn manner, the awful sentence of the law.

ABSTRACTING MONEY FROM LET

TERS.

High Court of Justiciary, Friday, March 19.

This day came on before the Court the trial of George Warden, lately clerk or assistant to the Postmaster of Aberdeen, accused of having abstracted from letters money and bills to the amount of L. 20, between

the month of May and the 4th of December 1818, when he was apprehended. To these charges the prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and the trial proceeded.

Alexander Dauney, Esq. Sheriffsubstitute of Aberdeen, proved two declarations of the prisoner to have been freely and voluntarily emitted. He was present when a drawer in the Post-office, of which the prisoner had the exclusive possession, was searched: the four notes now shown him were found on the prisoner. A letter, addressed," James Meikle, Abercorn, near South Queensferry," was produced during the taking the prisoner's declaration. A letter, addressed, "Donald Ross, Helmsdale, Sutherlandshire," was found in the drawer sealed up with a wafer, and had the appearance of having been opened. A letter without address, commencing," Inclosed you have a Post-office order for L.15," was also produced during the examination of the prisoner. Another unfinished letter was also produced.

George Cockburn and Peter Laing corroborated Mr Dauney's evidence. Simon Grant, sheriff-officer in Aberdeen, was employed in December last to search the premises of the prisoner, and went to his father's house, along with Mr Henderson of the Post-office, Edinburgh, Mr Lumsden, and Mr Harvey: a search was made, and they found, in a pair of pantaloons, which the prisoner said were his, a letter directed to a woman at or near South Queensferry. The letter now shown him is the same. Witness searched his person, and found eighteen notes upon him, all, he thinks, of one pound each. (The four notes mentioned in Mr Dauney's evidence being here shown the witness, he declared them to have been taken from the person of the prisoner, and that, after having mark

ed them on the spot, he gave them to Mr Lumsden.) The prisoner said the whole of the money belonged to his account in the Post-office. The marking put on by the witness was by a pencil, but he saw the notes next day before the Sheriff, when he marked them over again with ink, and he had no doubt they were the identical notes. Witness took the prisoner into custody, and went to search his room at the Post-office. The prisoner showed them a set of drawers, which he said were the only ones he had access to, and which were searched. After some interval, Mr Dingwall, the Postmaster, was sent for, who pointed out another drawer which he said was the prisoner's: it was locked, and the prisoner then produced the key, and, upon searching it, some bank-notes and other money were found, together with a letter addressed," Mr Donald Ross, Helmsdale, Sutherlandshire," as also another unfinished letter, which witness at the time marked, and left in the drawer, which was locked and sealed.

James Shearer, Esq. one of the Surveyors of the General Post-office. -Complaints were frequently made of letters containing money being amissing in passing through Aberdeen, both from South and North. After consulting with the Secretary and Postmaster-General, he took measures to find out how this happened. A number of experimental

were made, and sent to Aberdeen, and ought to have arrived there on a particular day. Two letters were sent to be put in at Inverness, one addressed to Mrs Donald, near Queensferry, containing L.2, another addressed to the care of Mr Young, Burntisland, containing L.3. Witness went to Stonehaven, and the letters should have arrived there on the 4th of December, in the even

ing. Witness desired the guard to bring in the Aberdeen bag, and, on going over the letters, he found only one of five experimental letters there. Witness immediately went off to Aberdeen, and the prisoner was apprehended, and his drawers searched, as detailed by preceding witnesses. One letter was found addressed to Donald Ross, Sutherlandshire.

Cross-examined.-By experimental letters, he meant that one of the letters sent was fictitious, and the others were not; that it frequently happens letters are mis-sorted; that they are put in a particular place, and are generally sent by next post. Alexander Shepherd, writer, Inverness, stated, that he received two letters from the Solicitor for the Post-office, each containing two one pound notes, addressed to Mrs Donald and James Thomson; he had seen them dispatched on the 3d of December, and had no doubt of the notes being the same as those shown to him, as he had kept a memorandum of their numbers, &c.

Alexander Dingwall, Postmaster, Aberdeen, stated, that the prisoner had been employed by him for twenty-one months in the most confidential services, in consequence of the very favourable character which he had received. He had allowed the bags to be opened by the prisoner, who slept in the office. He recollects having been suddenly called to the Post-office on the 4th of December, when he found Warden in custody of the officers. The prisoner was allowed to retain possession of the key of the drawer, which contained the money belonging to the office, and to which witness himself had no access. Witness sent to a

neighbouring house for Mr Shearer, who, after examination, sealed the

money drawer. This witness underwent a long and close examination, as to the number of letter carriers, and as to the situation of the office, with the means taken to secure the doors and windows. He stated that the prisoner had been absent for eight days, several months previous, on account of indisposition, and thought his emoluments would amount to about L.100 annually.

Exculpatory Evidence.

George Fyfe, messenger at arms, Aberdeen, had known the prisoner for five or six years, and he bore an excellent character.

Certificates from several gentlemen were read by the counsel for the pannel, which testified to the former good conduct and character of the prisoner.

The Lord Advocate then charged the jury on the part of the Crown.

Mr James Gordon made an able speech in favour of the prisoner, in the course of which he reprobated the officers of the Post-office, for throwing out a snare to entrap the prisoner. After commenting at considerable length upon the evidence, the learned counsel concluded by making a most impressive appeal to the feelings of the jury, on account of the youth of the prisoner, and the excellent and unblemished character he had hitherto borne.

The Lord Justice-Clerk summed up the evidence at considerable length; and the jury having retired for about an hour, returned into Court with a verdict, finding, by a plurality of voices, the prisoner Guilty of the crime charged, but at the same time recommending him to mercy. The Court then pronounced sentence, ordaining the pannel to be executed, in such place as the Magistrates of Edinburgh should ap

point as a place of public execution, on Wednesday the 14th of April.

MURDER.

After the examination of the witnesses, the counsel for the prosecutor and for the pannel addressed the jury; and the Lord Justice-Clerk having summed up the evidence, the jury retired and deliberated for an hour and three quarters, when they

June 14.

Peter Bowers, journeyman millwright in Haddington, was charged with the murder of John Sandilands, day-labourer or farm-servant to the Earl of Dalhousie, on the 15th day of April preceding, by striking him on the head with an axe.

The prisoner having pleaded Not Guilty, the jury were sworn to try the case. It appeared in evidence, that some young men had been amusing themselves by leaping on the high road, opposite Coalston toll-bar, when they were joined by the prisoner and his master's son, who had been working in the neighbourhood, and after finishing their job had regaled themselves with some gills of whisky at different public-houses. The deceased was standing enjoying the amusement, when the pannel said he would leap with any of them for twopence; and having lost his bet, and refused to pay it, some trifling altercation took place among the parties, when the deceased said he would either jump with him, or fight with him, for any thing he liked. Some high words then ensued between the prisoner and the deceased, the import or amount of which was not distinctly recollected by any of the witnesses present; but it ended in this, that the prisoner advanced towards the deceased, and struck him a blow on the head with an axe, which he then had on his shoulder, and inflicted a severe wound on his left temple, out of which a part of the brain obtruded.

a plurality of voices, the pannel Guilty of the crime libelled, but unanimously and earnestly recommended him to mercy. The Justice-Clerk immediately pronounced the awful sentence of the law.

HOUSEBREAKING AND THEFT.

High Court of Justiciary, Monday, July 19.

Ralph Woodness, and Richard Smith, commonly called Curley, were charged with housebreaking and theft; in so far as they did, on the 29th day of March preceding, wickedly and feloniously break into and enter the shop of Andrew Edgar, merchant in Linlithgow, by cutting through the shutter of a window, and taking out a pane of glass, and thereby getting at and removing the pin which fastened the bolt of an iron bar; and did then and there steal a large quantity of woollen cloth of different sorts, also bombazines, sarcenets, cambrics, silk handkerchiefs, burial crape, silk thread, &c. to the value of L.350 Sterling or thereby ; they being both habit and repute thieves, and previously convicted of theft before the Magistrates of Glasgow.

The pannels pleaded Not Guilty to the indictment.

The declarations of the pannels were proved to have been freely and voluntarily emitted before the Sheriff-substitutes of Lanark and Linlithgowshires.