More than thirty persons have been examined before different Ma-

gistrates, on suspicion of having been concerned in the murder of Mr. Richardson ; and nearly all have been discharged from want of suffi- cient evidence to warrant their detention. On Monday morning, how- ever, two men, named Henry and John Child, brothers, were appre- hended on stronger grounds of suspicion than any of those previously charged. It seems that several anonymous letters, pointing to these men as the murderers, have been received by the Magistrates ; and a Row Street officer took them into custody some time ago, but was so well satisfied with the account of themselves which they gave, that he released them. The anonymous letters still continued; and at length the Magistrates ordered the men to be arrested a second time. This was not done without great difficulty, as they had left their usual haunts; but at length, on Sunday last, they were secured, after a struggle to escape by Henry Child, who was found in a house at West Bedfont. A smock frock, with the sleeve clotted with blood, was found in the same house. These two men were recognized by two constables, who saw- them on the day of the murder, lying in a hedge a mile and a half from Bletchingly. At that time, the constables noticed their suspicious appearance, and asked them two questions, which the men answered, respecting the distance to Bletchingly : the same questions were re- peated before the Magistrates, and one of the men answered in his na- tural tone, which the officers immediately recognized ; but the other evidently spoke in a feigned voice. The prisoners gave accounts of their proceedings, which are known to be false ; and it is remarkable, that when asked if they had either of them been to Brighton they said "NO, but added, that one of their brothers had been there lately. The only note known to have been in Mr. Richardson's possession on the day of his murder, was paid soon after into the bank of Wigney and • at Brighton. West, the carrier, and other witnesses, believe these wen to be the same they saw proceeding from the spot where Mr. Richardson was shot. They have lately had abundance of money ; and whin drunk, have displayed sovereigns, &c. There are other suspicious circumstances against them ; and they are to be reexamined.

At the monthly Sessions of the Justices of the Peace at Faversham in Kent, on Thursday, Mr. William Henry Crawford, Vicar of foinstead, summoned several of his poor parishioners for the recovery • of small tithes due to him. Among them was William Waters, a labourer, earning fifteen shillings a week, and paying two shillings a week rent. The Vicar claimed four shillings from this man, as two years' tithe of kis wages ; but as it had not been legally demanded front him, the case was decided in his favour; and the Vicar will have to

summon him again. In the course of the proceedings, this Christian pastor said, he was glad to find that Waters was a man of good character ; but he assured the Magistrates, " he did not know William

Waters." Is not the Church likely to be popular in Kent, when its pastors evince so kind and charitable a disposition to the poor, so inti- mate an acquaintance with them, and so anxious a desire to promote their religious welfare.]

An action for libel was tried at Taunton, before Baron Williams, on Wednesday last. The plaintiff was a barrister ; the defendant was his cousin and an attorney. The alleged libel was contained in a letter from the defendant to the aged father of the plaintiff; the latter being accused of dishonest and unprofessional conduct, particularly as regards some money transactions with his father. It was urged in defence, that the plaintiff had given the lie to the defendant, and otherwise provoked him ; and that the defendant had taken no steps to disseminate the

libel. No attempt was made to prove the truth of the accusation. The trial is only remarkable for the charge of the Judge; (which, by the by, is very badly reported). Baron Williams said, the counsel for the defendant had told the Jury, that the power of saying whether or not it was a libel was vested in them. It was not his intention now, on the first occasion, nor did he ever intend to trespass on the constitutional privileges of the Jury ; and he would go a step further—that understanding the act of Parliament to which allusion had been made, there had been occasionally something like an indirect attempt to deprive the Jury to a certain extent of their constitutional privileges •' for he did not consider that he was bound to tell them his opinion in point of law ; on the contrary, that sta- tute told the Judges that they were to inform the Jury that they were to judge of the whole matter in a cause of libel, as in all other criminal eases; and in notinstance did the law tell the Judges to state to the Jury that it was so and so. It did not do so in cases of muider ,or highway robbery, but it put it to them whether the facts were such as to induce them to come to this conclusion. His Lordship then proceeded to comment upon the evidence, leaving it to the Jury to say whether or not this in their opinion was a libel. As to the question of damages, that was entirely a circumstance for their consideration. The Jury having retired for some time, returned.

Foreman—" We find a verdict for the plaintiff; but the Jury have the strongest feeling on the point of damages. We wish the verdict may not (may costs.'

Mr. Baron Williams told the Jury the subject of damages was entirely for them, and that was all he could tell them.

The Forenian then said—" We find a verdict for the plaintiff ; damages one farthing." [Baron Williams, in the above charge, set an example to his brethren on the bench which they would do well to follow. In order to put a stop to the utterance of much nonsense, which would have no weight at all were it not delivered from the judgment-seat, the new Libel Law —which ought to be a brief and intelligible enactment—should make it imperative on the Judge, in all trials for libel, simply to read over the Act to the Jury, and riot to give his opinion as to the law of the case. The Taunton Jury also showed a praiseworthy jealousy on the subject of costs. Instead of the complicated aud very questionable rule proposed by O'Connell, it would be better to bring the actual costs, in every libel case, distinctly under the consideration of the Jury, as apart, and often the most material part, of their award.]

At the Chester Assizes,ast week, William Nailor was charged with

shooting at Mr. James Wilkinson,i a manufacturer at Staley, with in- tent to murder him, on the 1.5th of October last. The evidence against the prisoner was circumstantial but singularly conclusive.

It appeared that on the day in question, the prosecutor had been to Manchester market. He returned about six o'clock in the evening; and, as was his custom, immediately went to his mills. On his way, he saw a man drop from a wall, and eye him in a very suspicious manner ; and he bad not gone many steps be- fore he was shot at from behind that wall. The man that be met could not have been the person who had fired at him, A witness who was in that neigh- bourhood, saw a man jump over the wall, and heard voices; and after the re- port of the gun had been heard, a woman saw a person run from the field in the direction of the prisoner's house. Some pigtail tobacco was found near the spot pactly chewed; and the prisoner, it was stated, chews tobacco. Part of the Manchester and Salford Advertiser, which appeared to have been used as wadding, was found near the spot; and a beer-shop keeper, at whose house the prisoner was drinking a part of that night, deposed that she took in that paper. When the prisoner was apprehended, and before any thing had been said to him about the charge on which he was apprehended, he said he was at Ashton Wake on Tuesday, with a girl with whom he was acquainted. The prisoner's shoes had an unequal number of nails round them, one seventeen and the other eighteen ; there were also rows of nails round the inner part of the heels of the prisoner's shoes, one had eight, the other nine ; the shoe with seventeen nails round the sole had the nine in the heel, and the other eight. Impre.sions made near a stone on which the person who shot at Mr. Wilkinson must have stood, and in a gap leading from a field through which a witness saw a man running after hearing the report of a gun, exactly corresponded with the number of the nails in the prisoner's shoes. It was proved that the man who was met by Mr. Wilkinson near the spot was a man with whom the prisoner had been drinkin!, that night ; and an account given by the prisoner after apprehension, of the place where he spent the night, was proved to be false. Evidence was also ad- duced to show that within an hour after the assassination was attempted, he was at a beer-shop within a quarter of a mile of Mr. Wilkinson's house.

The prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to be barged, without any hopes of being reprieved.

At the same Assizes, Samuel Thorley, a nurseryman living at North- wich, was sentenced to death, for the murder of a young woman, to whom he had been engaged to be married, but who had afterwards re- jected him. There was nothing very remarkable in the circumstances attending this murder, except that the day after it was committed, the prisoner dressed himself with more care than usual, and walked to Chester Gaol, and confessing his crime, delivered himself up to justice.

James Walker, an overlooker in Mr. Thorpe's factory at Maccles- field, was then tried for killing a girl eleven years old, employed in the factory, by striking her four times with a heavy strap on the back of the head. The child became very ill, and died in two days. A sur- geon opened her head, and stated, that, in the membranes of the brain he found much inflammation ; and though there were no external marks, he thought the blows given would have produced the appear- slices be saw, and were the cause of the death of the deceased. The prisoner received an excellent character for humanity. He was found guilty, but recommended to mercy by the Jury; and was sentenced to two months' imprisonment.

An action was brought at Warwick Assizes, by Mr. Alfred Flo- rence, against Mr. James Tibbetts, Town-Clerk of Warwick, to recover penalties for bribery at the last election for that borough. Mr. Hill, however, as counsel for the plaintiff, agreed to a verdict for the defendant, as the evidence against him was insufficient. Subsequently, two other actions were brought against Mr. Oram and Mr. Trepass, for bribery on the Conservative or Greville side ; and both those per- sons were fined in penalties of MO/. each, and disqualified from voting at any future election, and from holding any civil office.

An old mem-yarned Barlow, was committed for trial at Manchester last week, for embezzling property of his former employers, Messrs. Thorpe and Co., to the amount Of -280/. He went to America with the money, and returned to Manchester, where be was apprehended. Be was determined, he said, to plead guilty, and would not put his master to any expense to prove him so.

The Greggs, father mid son, who robbed Messrs. Cropper, Benson, and Co. of Liverpool, of money to the amount of nearly 2.900L, were tried on Wednesday, at the Liverpool Sessions, found guilty and sen- tenced to fourteen years' transportation.