The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-24 00:00:00

Attempt to Murder.

Yesterday, a private of the 44th Regiment, named
John Connor, was taken before the magistrates, at
Dover, he having attempted to • take the life of
Colour-Sergeant William Whittaker, of the same
regiment, by stabbing him several times with a
bayonet. The facts disclosed a very determined
attempt to murder, although the charge was simply
for unlawfully wounding. Whittaker appears to have
been sergeant of the guard at the Citadel, Dover, on
the night of the 20th inst. About 9 o'clock in the
evening the prisoner was paraded for night-guard,
when Corporal Braney, thinking he was intoxicated,
took him to Sergeant Whittaker, who pronounced
him in an unfit state for duty, and ordered Corporal
Williams to see his things taken off and the man
taken from the guardroom to the " dryroom." Ser-
geant Whittaker then sat down at a table to make
out his guard report, and the prisoner was being
divested of his accoutrements, when all of a sudden
he seized hold of a rifle with fixed bayonet, and
clearing his front made a full charge at Sergeant
Whittaker. The sergeant, hearing a noise from the
rifles, looked round, and was in the act of jumping
up, when the bayonet passed between his fingers,
penetrating his coat sleeve, and tore the flesh at the
muscle of his arm. Prisoner then made a second
charge and stabbed the sergeant in the side, the
bayonet grazing against the ribs, which prevented
its penatrating his body. At the time the prisoner
made the second charge he ejaculated " There, you
- ! you shan't report another man drunk." The
wounds the sergeant had sustained prevented his
defending himself, and the prisoner quickly followed
up the second with a third thrust, which, as Corpo-
ral Williams said, must have gone through the body
of Whittaker had he not rushed upon him and
twisted the musket and bayonet from his grasp.
Sergeant Whittaker was removed to the military
hospital, where he was treated for the wounds, but,
though suffering much from his injuries, he was able
to give evidence yesterday. The prisoner pleaded
drunkenness, and said the guard might have pre-
vented what he did had they been disposed to do so;
but it was proved that the prisoner was not so
drunk as not to know what he was doing, as on the
following morning he told a comrade that he stabbed
Sergeant Whittaker the night before, and inquired
whether he was much hurt. It was also shown that
the guard could not have warded off the bayonet
from the sergeant without great risk to themselves,
as the man lowered the weapon to charge, and
cleared his front to got at the sergeant. It is said
the prisoner bears a very bad character in the regi-
ment, and his appearance would lead to the belief
that he was quite capable of the act imputed to him.
The magistrates having beard the evidence com-
mitted the man to take his trial.

- -
MESSRS. BARKER AND SONS' "Joint-Stock Com-
panies' Directory" for 1866, in addition to the particulars
of public companies, gives an admirably comprehensive
list of the principal financial transactions concluded during
the last five years.
A FEMALE STAKEHOLDER AND LIABILITY OF THE
IlusuAND.—At the last sitting of the Sheriffs' Court,
before Mr. Lefroy, the case of Wilson v. Newton, raised an
important question in the law of betting. The plaintiff
was a butcher and the defendant a publics; and it appeared
that upon a certain day plaintiff went into defendant's
house with a leg of mutton. Mrs. Newton was in the
bar, and the conversation turned upon the price of meat
generally, and the leg of mutton brought in by the
plaintiff particularly. Plaintiff said it was a leg of
prime wether mutton, and cost 81d. per_lb., to which a
bystander remarked that he could go and got a leg of
wether mutton for 50. per lb., quite as good meat as the
leg produced by the plaintiff. Plaintiff denied that this
could be done, and the matter resolved itself into a betting
transaction, plaintiff staking £1 to 6d. that a leg of wether
mutton equal to his could not bo purchased at the price
quoted by his opponent. Mrs. Newton agreed to hold the
stakes, and the money was handed to her, but, as plaintiff
was leaving the house, it was intimated to him that he
was going to be " done." He at once went back to the
bar and demanded his £1 back. Mrs. Newton declined to
hand over the stakes until the bet was decided, and plaintiff
was compelled to bring this action. His Honour remarked
that plaintiff had sued a person named Newton, bearing a
Christian name in blank. Plaintiff said he had sued
the husband, as Mrs. Newton was a married woman. His
Honour said that no one appeared for the defendant, and
plaintiff would have a verdict. Pllaintiff, in asking for
his costs, said that while he was arguing with the land-
lady about the stakes some personstole his log of mutton.
His Honour said that plaintiff was entitled to his costs,
but could not recover anything for the lost leg of mutton;
as ho had not paid for it.