him to some peril. He had dined with Mr. Jenkinson at his seat near Croydon, together with Dundas and Pitt (then Chancellor of the Exchequer), and returned home with them in the evening on horseback. When the party, who were all tolerably merry, reached the turnpike-gate between Tooting and Streatham, they found it open. Having no servant with them, they determined to pass through without paying the toll. The keeper, awoke by their horse-hoofs as they galloped through, sprang up and ran into the road; and finding they did not stop when he hallooed, discharged his blunderbuss after them, fortunately without effect. He took them, it seems, for a gang of highwaymen that had been committing depredations in the neighborhood. The story afterwards got about, and excited much

amusement.

Thurlow very freely expressed his opinion of Pitt's conduct in supporting the opposition in the impeachment of Warren Hastings. The grounds on which Mr. Pitt supported the impeachment differed substantially from those on which the Opposition proceeded. Pitt grounded his support on the fact that the conduct which Hastings pursued towards Cheyt-Sing (whom he considered as a criminal, but whom the Whigs regarded as an oppressed Prince) showed an intention of punishing him too severely. This intention, Pitt contended, was criminal; and for this intention he should vote for the impeachment. When Lord Thurlow heard of Pitt's reason for supporting Mr. Burke's motion, he reprobated with vehemence the injustice of grounding an impeachment on a mere intention. "If a girl," he said in his growling style, "had talked law in these terms, it might have been excusable."-Fay.

The late LORD TRURO, then Mr. Serjeant Wilde, was once concerned for the County Insurance Company in resisting a fraudulent demand made by a Jew furrier for the amount of his insurance on his house and stock, which had been destroyed by fire. The cause was looking very healthy for the Jew, the Sergeant having been able to do very little for the company in the cross-examination of the Hebrew witnesses, who swore that there were fifty real sable muffs in boxes in the shop; until the plaintiff's counsel called as a witness a nice-looking girl, who, after stating that she had been in the Jew's employment in the shop for two or three years, was asked every possible question except about the muffs, which constituted the chief part of the Jew's claim for the value of the stock destroyed. The Sergeant observing this, kindly asked her in his cross-examination what had been the nature of her employment in the shop. "To sew-in linings to the muffs and other articles," was her reply. Then, continuing his kind mode of interrogation, he said, "So you mean to say there was not a sable muff in one of the fifty boxes; how do you know that fact?" inquired the Sergeant. She answered, “Having been called away, I stuck my large needle hastily into one of the boxes. On my return, finding that the needle had slipped through into the box, I pulled the lid off, and saw to my surprise that there was no muff in it.” "And how," inquired the Sergeant, "did you know about the contents of the other boxes?" "O, sir," said the girl, "I had the curiosity, whilst all the shop-people were gone to dinner, to open the next, and the next, and the next, and in succession the whole of the boxes, and not a muff was there in any of them." This evidence came upon the court with so much surprise that the Judge said to the plaintiff's counsel, "Surely you will not go on with this cause after such evidence?"

The Jew's counsel, finding that he was in a nonplus, submitted to a nonsuit, very much to the gratification of the Sergeant.-Jay.

A very awkward exemplification of Mr. JUSTICE PARK'S injudicious way of thrusting forward his religious sentiments in court, occurred some time ago at a trial at one of the county assizes. A little girl about ten years of age was put into the witness-box to give evidence on the trial then proceeding with. The counsel opposed to the party for whom the young creature appeared, maintained that her testimony could not be received on the matter then before the court, because of her extreme youth, adding that he had no doubt it would be ascertained on examination that she did not understand the nature of an oath.

"We shall soon see what is the extent of her mental capacity," said his lordship. "Little girl," he continued, addressing himself to the youthful witness, "little girl, attend to me."

"Yes, sir," said the girl, making at the same time one of her best curtseys.

"Have your parents given you a religious education ?"

"Yes, sir," lisped the young creature.

They have taught you the Church Catechism, I have no doubt?"

"Yes, sir."

"You know the ten commandments, do you?" "Yes, sir."

"You could repeat them, I dare say, if you were asked?"

"Yes, sir."

"You're a very excellent girl-a very good child in

deed. And of course, you have learned the Apostles' Creed?"

"Yes, sir."

"I'm very happy to hear it. It's a great credit to your parents that they have brought you up in this way. No doubt you have also got the Lord's Prayer by heart?"

"Yes, sir."

"And could repeat it at any time if asked?"

"Yes, sir."

"That's a very good girl. Now, my excellent child, just tell us what you do before going to bed?"

The young innocent was silent.

"Don't be ashamed, my good girl, to answer the question. Pray do tell us what you do every night, just before going to bed?"

The girl hung down her head and said nothing.

"Pray don't be afraid or ashamed to answer the question. What do you do just before going to bed?" “Tell his lordship," whispered her father, who stood beside her.

"Aye, come, do tell us," said his lordship, who had heard the whisper. "Speak up, and tell us what you do before going to bed."

"Put off my clothes, and put on my night cap,' answered the girl, raising up her head and looking Mr. Justice Park with great simplicity in the face. The court was convulsed with roars of laughter at the oddity of the answer, when compared with that which it was manifestly the object of the judge's questions to elicit. He wished her to say that she was in the habit of regularly attending her devotions before going to bed. And had he put the question direct, whether or not she statedly said her prayers before she lay down on her bed, he would at once have got the answer he wished.