intended to have gone away from London by the six o'clock train, but was too late, and she was obliged to travel by a first-class train, and that it had cost her 37. I did not know the value of English money, and asked her how much 31. was, and she said that a pound was worth twenty-five francs. I replied, "So it has cost you seventy-five francs to come to Paris." She replied, "Yes." Neither myself nor my wife would believe what the prisoner said, and she pulled out a newspaper from her pocket called La Petite Presse, and pointed out to me one of the columns. At the very moment that the prisoner was making this statement the police arrived and apprehended the prisoner, and took her away. During the conversation I had with the prisoner, she told me that as she was on her way to Paris her young mistress, Mdlle. Riel, was on her way to England.

Cross-examined-The father of the prisoner, I believe, is a very respectable

man.

Inspector Hinschberger, of Paris, was the next witness, and was followed by Inspector Druscovitch, of the Metropolitan force.

Mr. John William Berton, cashier at the bank of Cox and Co., proved that Lord Lucan kept an account there, and he produced his lordship's cheque for 807., drawn on March 30 by himself, and said he paid him in bank-notes.

The Earl of Lucan said-I keep an account at Cox and Co.'s, and I went there about March 30 last and drew a cheque for 801., and I received sixteen 57. Bank of England notes in payment for the cheque. I gave Mdlle. Riel six of these notes to hand over to her mother on the same day I received them.

Cross-examined-I have had occasion to see Madame Riel now and then. Was she a passionate person ?-She was "vive," like all Frenchwomen— hasty I should say, perhaps-but I did not notice anything else particular about her. I never witnessed any differences between her and her servants, or noticed that she was particularly passionate.

The Attorney-General-Was she a woman, as has been suggested, of ungovernable temper ?—I never noticed anything of the sort. She was not at all different in her manners from ordinary French people.

Mdlle. Riel said, in answer to questions put by Mr. Archibald, that her mother was hasty but very good-hearted, and she never made use of bad language. The diamond ring found in the possession of the prisoner at Paris belonged to her mother, but she could not say the exact time when she last saw her wearing it.

By Mr. Powell-There were perhaps five bracelets and four pairs of earrings in the jewel-box. They were not of very large value, but they were valuable articles. Witness was in the habit of wearing some of the jewellery when she went to St. James's Theatre.

Dr. Wadham was called, and described the appearances presented by Madame Riel's body when he examined it.

After further evidence, Mr. Powell proceeded to address the jury for the prisoner. He did not, he said, attempt to deny that the prisoner had caused the death of the deceased, but he argued that the story told by the prisoner was the truth, and that the act was committed during a quarrel and under a sudden impulse, and he contended that the prisoner ought only to be convicted of manslaughter.

Baron Channell summed up the case to the jury, who retired at twenty

minutes past eleven o'clock to deliberate upon their verdict, and returned into court at five minutes to twelve o'clock.

They found the prisoner guilty of murder, but at the same time strongly recommended her to mercy, on the ground that there was no premeditation in the act.

The prisoner asserted that she had no intention of causing death.

Baron Channell, having put on the black cap, addressed the prisoner, and said the jury, after a most careful consideration, had found her guilty of the crime of wilful murder. It would be his duty to take care that the recommendation to mercy which accompanied that verdict should at once be transmitted to the proper quarter, but at present all he had to do was to pass upon her the sentence of the law. His Lordship then passed sentence of death in the usual form.

The prisoner was then asked whether she had anything to urge in stay of execution, the object being to know whether she was pregnant.

She replied that she was not.

The prisoner was then removed from the bar, and the crowded court was soon cleared of its occupants.

The prisoner's sentence was afterwards commuted in accordance with the recommendation of the jury.

IV.

THE ATTACK ON THE QUEEN.

ARTHUR O'CONNOR, the lad who attempted to alarm the Queen by pointing a pistol at her as she was about to alight from her carriage at Buckingham Palace on the evening of February 29, was on the 11th of April brought up for trial before Baron Cleasby at the Central Criminal Court.

When the prisoner was first brought up he pleaded guilty, and it was expected that judgment would be at once passed; but Mr. H. Williams, the counsel for the prisoner, asked that that plea might be withdrawn, on the ground that prisoner was not in a fit condition of mind to plead. Baron Cleasby said he thought it would be better to try the question whether the prisoner was of sound mind or not, and a jury was accordingly empanelled for the purpose. Mr. Williams then briefly addressed the jury, and the following evidence was adduced :

Mr. George O'Connor said-I live at No. 4, Church-row, Houndsditch, and am in the employ of the Iron Steamboat Company. The prisoner is one of eight children. I am nephew to the late Feargus O'Connor, who was confined in a lunatic asylum. Other members of our family have also been insane. The prisoner has always had bad health since he was six years old, and in 1866 he sustained a severe accident in Chancery-lane, and was wounded on the head, and was insensible for some time. After this injury I did not notice immediately any difference in his habits, but subsequently there was a marked change in him, and I noticed that he became very irritable. He was always a studious and silent boy, and I never heard of his attending any

political meetings, or that he had any political associates. I did not notice anything particular in the prisoner's demeanour on February 29, the day on which the outrage was committed. I had previously heard that he was very restless at nights, and he complained of his head, and in the morning he seemed fatigued and jaded, and said that he had pains in his head. I did not know that he was in custody until Superintendent Williamson told me of it. I have seen the prisoner several times in Newgate, and when I spoke to him on the subject of his crime he would not make any reply. I never suggested to the prisoner that he should plead guilty to the charge.

Cross-examined by the Attorney-General-The prisoner has had bad health since he was six years old, but could read and write, and was employed in several businesses, and I never heard any complaint against him. He was a clerk in a law stationer's office, and there was no complaint of the manner in which he did his work. He left that employment on account of the state of his health, not on account of the state of his mind. This was after he met with the accident. After this he was engaged by Mr. Marshall, and then I heard no complaints. He went from this place to Lovett and Franks's in the Borough, and he was in their service when this was done. He was employed as clerk in the wholesale warehouse, and I had no complaint of him from them. The prisoner went out with one of his brothers, nine years old, to see the illuminations on the night after the Prince of Wales went to St. Paul's. I consider the prisoner's mind was out of order all the time the prisoner was at Lovett and Franks's. His wages were 12s. a week, and he was paid every Friday.

The Attorney-General-Did you see the prisoner pretty often in Newgate? -We went as often as we were allowed.

How often did you speak to him about the trouble he had got into ?-Only once, and that was about a fortnight ago. I asked the prisoner how he could be so foolish as to do what he had done, and he made me no reply. I repeated the question, and he made me no answer. The prisoner subsequently complained of the food that was given to him, and said he did not like the gruel, and that the meat was hard. I do not know if the meat was hard. It was I who sent Dr. Tuke and Dr. Harrington to see the prisoner. I do not know who is to pay them. Nothing was said about payment.

Dr. Smith, of King's College, who amputated the prisoner's toe, also went to see him. He did not go by my desire. I never made a communication to the solicitor for the prosecution that it was my wish the prisoner should plead guilty. I did not know he intended to plead guilty. I have received a letter from a gentleman in Ireland named Connor in reference to this matter.

The Attorney-General-Did you ever authorize Mr. Connor to communicate with the Solicitor to the Treasury upon the subject of the prisoner pleading guilty? I never heard anything of the sort.

My mother answered Mr. Connor's letter, but I am not aware that she said anything about the prisoner pleading guilty. I am not acquainted with the contents of that letter, or that there was any suggestion that the prisoner should plead guilty, and that he should ask to be leniently dealt with. I left it entirely to my mother's discretion how the letter should be answered. I might have asked her what she said in the letter, but she only gave me a general answer. Of course she thanked Mr. Connor for his kindness, and also told him that we were without funds, and did not know

what to do. We meant we did not know what to do about defending the prisoner.

My son was in the habit of reading Victor Hugo, Dumas, Thackeray, Dickens, and Bulwer's works. I am not aware of his reading books of any other description. He used to amuse his brothers and sisters sometimes by telling them stories of different kinds. Latterly he has not gone to any place of worship that I am aware of. He used to go to St. Dunstan's, in Fleetstreet, when he did.

The Attorney-General-Is it your desire that the prisoner should be kept for life in a lunatic asylum ?-Certainly not.

What is your wish? Are you aware that if he is found not guilty on the ground of insanity that is what follows ?-Yes.

And, knowing that, you wish the question of his insanity to be tried ?—Yes. Do you think he is insane now? you are his father; tell us.-Well, I should say, as he is standing there, he is not mad. It is for the medical men's opinion, and not mine.

I knew nothing about the plea of guilty being withdrawn in one respect; it was done by other parties, not by me. I did not know that the prisoner had pleaded guilty until the day after, when I read it in the papers. I first went to the solicitor, and then I went to Dr. Tuke.

Re-examined I was a petitioner in Mr. Feargus O'Connor's lunacy, and Dr. Tuke was examined on that matter, and he has acted out of friendly feeling. All I desire in the matter is that justice should be done to the prisoner.

The Attorney-General-That is what we all wish.

The evidence of the prisoner's mother and of Dr. Tuke was then taken. The former spoke of her son as a quiet, gentle, and studious lad; in fact, she said he was one of the best of boys. She trusted him to take care of a younger brother and sister at the illuminations, which she should not have done if she had supposed that his mind was affected. He had expressed to her his regret for what had happened; he remarked that it would make him look ridiculous, and if he could get away he would change his name, and go where he was not known. When she heard that he had pleaded guilty, she considered that he had told the truth, as she had advised him, and that he could not do otherwise. Asked by the Attorney-General whether she considered him mad, she replied, Certainly not.

Dr. Tuke gave a long account of an interview he had with the prisoner. He found that he had a badly-shaped head and a smaller brain than is usual, but he was nevertheless very shrewd and intelligent, and conversed very clearly and rationally upon many subjects. (The witness had previously told the prisoner's father that he feared the boy's mind was going wrong, as his uncle's did.) Dr. Tuke said the prisoner told him that he got into St. Paul's on Thanksgiving Day by a clever stratagem, but was turned out because his boots were muddy. Asked as to the conclusion at which he had finally arrived, Dr. Tuke said: The conclusion I arrived at was that the prisoner was a weak, delicate boy, both in mind and body, suffering from scrofula and a blow on the head, and that all these compound causes had produced what I call exacerbation of insanity at or about the time when this act was committed. I considered it a very dangerous form of reasoning insanity, and I think that he would be very dangerous to be at large. He may be very much

better at the present time, and may be very sorry for what he has done; but I do not think he is recovered, and he is in my opinion liable at any time to a recurrence of his original condition.

Dr. Tuke was cross-examined at considerable length by the AttorneyGeneral with a view to show that he had intruded himself into the case unasked. He admitted that he had told the prisoner's father his services should cost nothing.

The Attorney-General-Did you notice any delusion about him?—Yes, I thought it was a delusion for him to think that the Queen, when surrounded by her attendants and her guard, would have signed such a document as the one he had drawn up. I think that it was a sensible observation for the prisoner to say he was sorry for what he had done, and throw himself on the mercy of the Court.

Don't you think it more sensible than to rely upon the evidence of Dr. Tuke, and get shut up for the rest of his life at Broadmoor ?-Dr. Tuke gave

no answer.

Do you not believe that he knows perfectly well what he was charged with; that he was charged with an outrage upon her Majesty, and that he pleaded guilty to the offence he was so charged with ?-I believe that he was quite aware what he was charged with.

Dr. Tuke was re-examined by Mr. Williams, and he stated that he had no communication with the father of the prisoner either directly or indirectly, until the father called upon him in reference to the case, and asked for his assistance. Although the prisoner may perfectly well understand his position at the present time, I do not think that this in any way affects the question as to his sanity.

After some further medical evidence the jury interposed, and said they were unanimously of opinion that the prisoner was of perfectly sound mind, and quite competent to plead to the charge that had been preferred against him.

Baron Cleasby, addressing the prisoner, said—Arthur O'Connor, you have pleaded guilty to this indictment, which charges you with having presented a pistol at the Queen with intent then and there to alarm her Majesty. It has been felt necessary not only to preserve the Sovereign from danger, so far as the law can do so, but also to preserve her from alarm, at all times, and particularly at a time when it might have been productive of the greatest possible injury. Accordingly, the Act of Parliament under which you have been indicted imposes a heavy punishment on those who offend against it. That punishment may be penal servitude for seven years, or it may be imprisonment for three years, with or without hard labour, and with an additional punishment. In dealing with the present case I must consider the circumstances, and there are many of them undoubtedly of the most aggravated nature. There is the occasion on which the crime was committed; there is the manner, the contrivance, and the cunning with which it was done; and there is still more the intention which entered the mind, though it was not harboured by the mind, of which we have heard the first to-day from those who are supposed to be your friends. No doubt all these matters weigh very heavily against you, but there are some things which we may take into account on the other side. There is your age, and there was the being induced by some act of enthusiasm which sometimes gets