Algiers; wandered round in Holland, England, and Germany; was with the French before Courtrai; and in Catalonia fought bravely under his uncle at Argos, and died in Greece on August 26, 1686. The most mysterious episode of his life was brought on by his sueing for England's richest and highest heiress, Elizabeth, daughter of Josceline, second Earl of Northumberland. The other brother, Count Philip Christopher, was involved in the well-known tale of the unfortunate wife of George I., the unhappy Sophia Dorothea of Zelle, afterwards Duchess of Ahlden, and met his death under circumstances of much mystery. According to the Duchess's assertion, he was the elder brother, as she states he was born in 1656. The sisters were--Amalie Wilhelmina, and the well-known mistress of Augustus II., Maria Aurora, the mother of Marshal Saxe. Amalie married the Count Charles Gustavus of Löwenhaupt. Extract from Von Bulau's _Geheime Geschichten_, vol. iii., article on "Count Löwenhaupt." J. R. J. BOILING CRIMINALS TO DEATH. (Vol. v., pp. 32. 112.) MR. JOHN GOUGH NICHOLS'S observations upon the reply you favoured me by publishing upon this subject, require from me some few observations in further support of it. When I wrote the article in question, I had not had an opportunity of consulting the statute of 22 Hen. VIII. itself. In making the assertion that, prior to the case of Roose, "there was no peculiarity in the mode of punishment," I did so principally on the authority of Blackstone, who says-- "Of all species of deaths the most detestable is that of poison, because it can of all others be the least prevented either by manhood or forethought, _and therefore_ by the statute of 22 Hen. VIII. c. 9. it was made treason, and a more grievous and lingering kind of death was inflicted on it _than the common law allowed_, namely, boiling to death." Upon a perusal of the statute (as published by you at p. 33.), I am confirmed in my opinion that the statute _was_ "retrospective in its enactments as against" Roose, and was more extensive in its operation than (as MR. NICHOLS appears to consider) merely depriving the culprit of the "advantage of his clargie." The Act, after reciting the facts of the case, enacted that the particular act of poisoning should be deemed high treason; and that the said "Richard" should be attainted of high treason: and because that offence, then "_newly_ practised," required _condign punishment_, it was further enacted, that the said Richard Roose should be boiled to death without benefit of clergy.