notes. He took them up, and under the notes was a basin with some gold in it, and he went away out of the house with it. He said he went down stairs, and saw the old woman struggling in the room below. He searched about and found his knife, and cut her throat. He then went back again up stairs, and cut the old gentleman's throat. He said he met the chap in the High-street, Plymouth, and they went over the mill-dam, and this chap gave him what money he thought proper. He did not say how much. He said, he then went home; but when he went he did not know. I asked him how the chap knew which way to get into the back of the house. He said, "I told him, for I had been there before" He said he shifted clothes with the chap in Camden-alley. He said while he was cutting the old lady's throat, some person knocked at the door. Thomas Hill.-I am turnkey at Portsmouth; I took charge of the prisoner, and put him in the cell, and stripped him; there were marks of blood on the clothes; I asked him, whether he wore them on the Sunday week; this was on the Monday; he said he did, for he had no others; I had heard him the day before say to the Mayor of Portsmouth, that he was in the mill-dam, and tossed up with the man who should commit the robbery; I asked him, where he was, when he tossed up which should have the money? He said he did not; they tossed up who should go to the house. He said, I will tell you the beginning of it; he then sat himself down on the stool, and said," on the night of the murder, when I left my father's house, I went to Camden-alley; I met a young man; we went together to Key-gates; we tossed up which should go into the house; as the young man was to go in, we exchanged clothes under the arch of the Key-gates, which is about a quarter of a mile from Camdenalley. He told the young man to be as quick as he could; the young man went to the house and I returned down White Hart-road into High-street; I afterwards met him in High-street; we then went to the mill-dam, and there we exchanged clothes again, and the young man gave me the money." That was how the blood came on his clothes. After he got the money he took it to his father's house and put it into a little box, and put it into the dung heap, and did not know but that it was there now. He said he could not tell who the young man was, for they had kissed the Bible not to tell of each other. On a subsequent day I showed him a box, and asked him if that was the box? He said it was, and that it was the same box that had been put into the dung-heap. Edward Hunt examined.-1 am gaoler at Portsmouth. On Monday, the 9th of March, I went to apprehend Stacey. Stacey was standing at a door; he disappeared; we ran but could not find him in the front room; but in a back dark room we pulled him out, and took him to the Shipwright's Arms. I searched him, but found nothing; he was taken before the Mayor, and asked where he got the money he had been spending. He said he had saved up 4l. 5s. 4d. at different times. I had a conversation with the elder Stacey; on the 13th of March he went with me to a lane about two miles from Portsmouth, and on the right hand side, a little way up, he pointed out a piece of turf, which I took up and found a hole, and in that hole something tied up in a blue handkerchief; I found it to contain bank-notes, gold, and a silver-watch, in the whole to the amount of 6301. odd. Mr. Read examined.-Stacey, jun. bought some seals of me on the Friday after the murder; he paid me on the Monday following a sovereign, and had twelve pieces of gold more; he offered me first 78., and went on to 13s., I only having asked him 12s. 6d. Ann Ingram examined.-I know the prisoner Stacey, jun. ; on the 9th of March I went with him to a public-house, he paid for four pints and a half of gin; he had got some sovereigns; he went to Portsdown; I saw the officers coming, and said to Stacey, "here is Hunt coming." He looked out and said, "If Hunt is coming, I am done, by G-d.” William Downer, the young man, who the prisoner said was the person who committed the murder, was called, and he satisfactorily proved that he was at the Antelope public-house from six o'clock in the evening (the supposed time when the murder was committed) until about ten o'clock. In the course of the examination the Judge directed the father to be put back into the dock; and the remainder of the evidence, which implicated him, was not gone into until the younger prisoner's case was finished, that he might not be prejudiced thereby. Mr. Justice Burrough summed up, and the Jury, almost immediately found the son Guilty. He was then removed, and additional evidence given, which proved the crime imputed to the father, against whom the Jury brought in a verdict of Guilty. Both prisoners were then placed at the bar and sentenced in the usual form-the son to be executed, and the father to be transported for life. LEICESTER, Aug. 17. (Before the Lord Chief Baron.) Trimmer, Clerk, v. Lord Huntingtower. The Rev. Henry Trimmer was the plaintiff, and Lord Huntingtower the defendant. The declaration stated that the defendant had committed several nuisances, to the great injury of the plaintiff'; to which the defendant pleaded that he was not guilty. Mr. Denman opened the plaintiff's case, and then adduced evidence of the following facts: The plaintiff, the grandson of a lady of some celebrity in the literary world, resided, previously to the year 1823, at Newdigate, in Surrey, where he had a curacy, and was the proprietor of a respectable school. In the course of that year, he was presented by the duke of Devonshire to the living of Buckminster, in Leicestershire, and shortly afterwards took possession of the vicarage house, which is near the paling of the defendant's demesne. As soon as lord Huntingtower heard of his arrival, he drove to the vicarage-house in his carriage, and had an interview with a brother of the plaintiff's. lordship stated, that the duke of Devonshire had recently exchanged the right of presentation to this living with him for another advowson, and therefore proposed that the plaintiff should also exchange his living for one the income of which was 201. or 301. a-year greater. To this Mr. Trim His His mer replied, that he did not think his brother would agree to that proposal, because the living mentioned by his lordship was, he understood, situated in an aguish part of the country. His lordship then proposed taking a lease of the glebeland, and of some small tithes ; Mr. Trimmer told him he would submit his proposal to his brother's consideration. On the next day, or the next day but one, lord Huntingtower again drove to the vicarage, when Mr. Trimmer told him that the plaintiff declined to let the land or tithes, as he meant to reside at the vicarage. lordship observed, that the vicarage house was too large for a man of his income, and would consequently ruin him, if he resided in it. Mr. Trimmer replied, that perhaps his brother might obtain leave to let the house to some gentleman for the sporting season, whilst he resided in a small one himself. "No," said his lordship; no gentleman will live near me.' "Or perhaps," added Mr. Trimmer, "my brother may increase the number of his pupils, and bring them here to reside."—" He shall bring no pupils here," observed his lordship, and added that he should take measures to prevent him. Mr. Trimmer said, his lordship would of course do what he pleased, but if he acted illegally his brother, would certainly seek redress. To which his lordship replied there was nothing he should like better than to engage him in a law-suit. He had already beaten the corporation of Grantham, and afterwards the duke of Rutland, at law; and it was therefore not very likely that the plaintiff could stand against him, for he would willingly spend 10,000l. upon a law-suit with him. There the matter rested, and the plaintiff went back to Surrey. In the month of September, in the last year, he came down to Buckminster to reside permanently, and was accompanied by two pupils, Mr. Brown, a young gentleman from Ireland, and Mr. Dalton. In two or three days after their arrival, the young men were amusing themselves by firing with a small pistol at a target, in the plaintiff's field, through which there ran a public pathway. The defendant drove in his carriage as far as his steward's house, which was about one hundred yards distant, and sent his servant to desire the young men to desist from firing. Mr. Brown replied, that they were on Mr. Trimmer's land, and they would do as they pleased. His lordship then drove up to the house, and called out to Mr. Trimmer, "I'll have no shooting here from those d-d boys;" upon hearing which Mr. Brown replied, "D-d boys! You scoundrel." Lord Huntingtower then observed, "You'll see what I shall do to-morrow," and drove away. On the following day, his lordship's workmen commenced erecting a pinfold in a field immediately in front of the plaintiff's house, at the distance of about thirty feet from it. As soon as three sides of this pound were built, a bull was turned into it, which was only shut in on the fourth side by the paling of Mr. Trimmer's lawn or foreground. To this animal, cows were brought daily, generally about the hour of three o'clock in the afternoon. A male ass was also put in, and she asses were led to it, even on Sundays, about the time when the afternoon service was over. For some days after the last-mentioned conversation had taken place, Mr. Trimmer and his two pupils continued to amuse themselves firing at the target, Mr. Dalton occasionally using his gun, instead of a pistol; but the firing was discontinued on the 12th of November, after which day none took place, at least with Mr. Trimmer's knowledge. In the mean time various modes of annoyance were resorted to by the defendant. He drove almost every day in his carriage to the front of plaintiff's house, and stopped there for a quarter or half an hour, either giving directions for what was going on, or threatening to add to the stock of nuisances. He had a sign erected in front of the pound, on which was painted "Trimmer's shooting academy." There was a cottage contiguous to it, to which he also had a sign affixed, with the words, "I spy Trimmer's shooting academy." In this cottage a woman named "Sally Hand" resided with her husband; and her sister, a common girl from Stamford, came there also about this time. One day the defendant called the woman out of this house, and then addressing Mr. Brown, who was about 18 years of age, told him, that she had got a girl for him who would invite him to drink tea and sleep with her. Mr. Trimmer immediately came forward, and asked his lordship, how he dared to address such language as that to his pupil? The defendant denied having addressed it to the pupil, saying he had merely spoken to the woman Hand. Another pupil, however, declared he had heard him address the words to Mr. Brown. The defendant then drove home, and returned in about an hour and a half, upon which the plaintiff, together with his pupils and servant, treated him to a concert of "rough music," Mr. Trimmer performing on a poker and fireshovel; another of the party rattling an old kettle with stones in it; whilst the third extracted "sweet sounds" from the tongs. This was stated to have been done for the purpose of preventing the defendant from being heard, in case he made a fresh attempt to corrupt the pupils, and also of driving him away. All this time the disgusting exhibitions at the pinfold continued without abatement, in the immediate view of the plaintiff's family, consisting of his wife and two children, a boy and girl, and three pupils; a Mr. Langdon, of Cadogan-place, Sloane-street, having been added to their number in February. The defendant allowed a she-ass to remain with the male for some days, and then separated them, in order that they might make the more noise braying for each other. He ordered his steward to put a mule into the pound, as it would make more noise than the ass, and being informed that a horse would make more noise than either, he threatened to add that to the stock. Young Brown, in some time afterwards, said to him, "Well, my lord, you have not put in the horse;" to which his lordship answered, that he would do so to-morrow; and he kept his word. This was after the 12th of November, when the firing, which was the alleged provocation, had been discontinued. Mares were then brought to the horse, and the nuisance rendered as disgusting as possible. Sometimes the mares were kept outside, in order that the horse might make the louder noise. All the time, however, his lordship was not altogether free from having divers petty annoyances retorted on himself. When his carriage made its appearance near the plaintiff's house, his brother would approach it, and jumping up, look in at him by way of insulting him, whilst the plaintiff himself would ride round it for the same purpose. The pupils, too, were not backward in manifesting the absence of much respect for him. His mode of addressing his coachman, "Drive on, Tommy," was mimicked, and he was told to go home, for he was an old wretch. Prior to the 12th of November, Brown sometimes would fire off a pistol, only charged with powder, within twenty yards of his horses, his lordship, who is paralytic, being unable to quit the carriage. The horses, however, were never frightened by the report. Whilst firing at the target, the young men used to stand within forty or fifty yards of his lordship's paling, but they always fired in a different direction. Upon one occasion the defendant told Brown that the plaintiff was a brick-maker's son from Brentford, to which Brown replied, "I don't know who his father may be, but I know that his grandmother was one of the cleverest women this country ever produced." "D-n his grandmother," said his lordship, "who the devil cares about her?" At length, the defendant informed Brown that he meant to advertise his name, and that of Langdon's, together with the plaintiff's, in the Leicester and Lincoln newspapers; and here again his lordship was as good as his word; for, on the following Friday, the advertisement appear ed. It was addressed "To But chers who are free of the town of Grantham." It then stated that there was a butcher's shop to let in the town of Grantham, and referred for particulars to his lordship's steward, who resided at Buckminster, where the rev. Henry Trimmer, and his pupils, Brown and Langdon, amused themselves daily, by shooting at a target, with guns and pistols, in the most frequented thoroughfare in the parish, to the great danger and annoyance of all their neighbours who had occasion to pass that way. Another advertisement subsequently appeared, commencing as before, but adding, that some poor Irish labourers had been set upon, and one of them shot, by ten ruffians, for merely saying that a Roman Catholic priest would not have acted as this parson of the Church of England had done. Some of them, however, it went on to state, had been lodged in gaol, and the others were known, so that there were hopes that they would all be transported at the next Leicester sessions for their ruffianly conduct. Young Langdon having gone home for the holidays, a letter addressed to his mother was delivered by the defendant's servant to the village postmaster, and was received by Mrs. Langdon, after her son had engaged his place in the coach to return to the plaintiff. This letter, which was in a disguised hand, was couched in the grossest language, acquainting Mrs. Langdon that her son, in company with the plaintiff, shot at a target, witnessed the scenes at the pinfold, had had a criminal intercourse with a girl named Sally Hand, who was preg nant by him, and lastly, had shot an Irishman, for which he was likely to be tried. Mrs. Langdon wrote to the plaintiff on the subject, informing him that she did not believe one tittle of the impu tations attempted to be cast upon him or her son, but adding her extreme regret that, from the dread of having his name associated with |