The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-05 00:00:00

Government did not introduce any measure at all with
respect to Scotland.
The order was then postponed until Thursday.

SUPPLY.
The report on supply was brought up and w reed to.
SHERIFF COURT HOUSES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the order of the day for going into committee on this
bill,

The LORD ADVOCATE moved that the bill be com-
mitted on Tueschiy, the 12th, at 12 o'clock.

Mr. DISRAELI said he wished to facilitate business as
much as possible, but he thought the first morning sitting
ought not to be proposed surreptitiously in a whisper after
midnight.

Mr. STEUART hoped the proposition of the learned
Lord would not be agreed to.

TherLORD ADVOCATE said there were several Scotch
bills waiting for committee, and he had fixed them all to be
taken at a morning sitting. He infcrm'ed the hon. member
for Stirling of his intention to move that the bill be taken
at a morning sitting.
Mr. BOUVERIE remarked that if hon. members would
neither agree to going into committee on a bill after twelve
o'clock, nor agree to a morning sitting, he did not see how
the business was to bo got through.
Sir J PAKINGTON observed that the complaint was,
that almost in a whisper the Lord Advocate proposed to
take the bill at a morning sitting.

Mr. BUCHANAN thought that it was better to take
Scotch bills in a morning sitting.
After a few words from Lord C. HAMILTON, -
Sir G. LEWIS denied that there had been anything sur-
reptitious in the conduct of the Government.
Mr. DISRAELI and other members opposed the motion,
on the ground that it should not have been made without
due notice. They would consent to the consideration of
the Scotch bills on Friday.
The house divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority for the morning sitting —l3
TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND
(IRELAND) BILL.

Mr. CARDWELL proposed to take the adjourned de-
bate on the second reading of this bill at a morning sitting
on Friday next. •

Mr. WHITESIDE objected to this proposal.
After a brief discussitn, in which Mr. Cogan, Lord Claud
Hamilton, The O'Donoghue, Mr. Longfield, and Mr. Dis-
raeli took part,
Mr. CARDWELL then proposed that they should pro-
ceed with the adjourned debate this day (Tues.fay) with
the view of adjourning the debate to a morning sitting on
Friday, should it be necessary.
After a few observations from Mr. P. O'Brien, Mr.
Hassard, and Lord Palmerston, the proposal of Mr. Card-
well was acceded to.
THAMES EMBANKMENT.

Mr. HENNESSY moved that the select committee on
the Thames Embankment consist of seventeen members,
and that Lord Fermoy and Mr. Joseph Locke be added to
the committee.
Sir J. PAXTON said that personally he had no objec-
tion to either of his hon. friends whe were proposed to be
added to the committee; but in accordance with the usual
practice, the committee had been composed of fifteen mem-
bers, and it would be productive of great inconvenience if
the arrangement was now altered.
Mr. W. COWPER also opposed the motion, which was
supported by Colonel KNOX.
The house .divided on the question that the committee
consist of seventeen members, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority
The other orders were disposed of, and the house ad
journed at twenty minutes past one o'clock.

38
-28

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--.Tune 4.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURTS.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir J. Stuart.)
NOTTIDGE V. FRINGE.
This was a bill by Mr. Ralph Clarke Nottidge,
who was the administrator of his late sister, Miss
Louisa Jane Nottidge, against Mr. Henry James
Prince, now the head or proprietor of the Agape-
mono, in the parish of Spinxton, near Bridgwater,
in Somersetshire, for the purpose of recovering
from the defendant a sum of £5,728 7s. 7d. New
Three per Cent. Annuities, on the ground that it
for med part of the personal estate of Miss L. J.
Nottidge, and that sum had been transferred by
her into the defendant's name by the exercise of
undue influence on his part over her, and when she
was, in fact, under his spiritual ascendancy, and in
a state of religioEs delusion with respect to him,
believing him to be the Tabernacle of God on earth,
and that God's spirit dwelt therein, Prince's
original spirit being extinct. Prior to December,
1845, three of the sisters of the late Miss Louisa
Jane Nottidge became members of the society called
the Agapemono, in which there is no observance of
the Sabbath, no practice of public or private
worship, except only that hymns or anthems of
• praise are sung ; no usage of prayer or intercession
with the Almighty, and in which it is held that
prayer is useless, as the day of grace is past, and
the day of judgment has arrived. In December,
1845, Miss L. J.^Nottidge herself became one of the
disciples of Mr. Prince, who then and now declared
himself to be the servant of the Lord, and was and
is still preacher of the above doctrines. Miss Not-
tidge, who was then about 41 years of age, went in
that month to reside in the neighbourhood of tha
Agapemono, where the plaintiff alleged she was
under Prince's influence. After some difficulty
Miss Nottidge's brothei and brother-in-law suc-
ceeded in taking her to reside with her mother,
and as Miss Nottidge appeared to her friends to be-
tray symptoms of insanity, they called in medical
aid, and the result was that in November, 1846,
she was, upon the usual medical certificates, placed
in confinement, the chief ground upon which
the opinion of her insanity was based being that
she alleged that Prince was God Almighty, and that
he had the power of conferring immortality upon
her. Miss Nottidge remained in a private lunatic
asylum until May, 1848, when she was released by
order of the Lunacy Commissioners. Those gen-
tlemen in one of their reports said that Miss L. J.
Nottidge admitted that she did not now pray to
God, for that there was no use in it ; that she
acknowledged that she believed the Tabernacle of
God was upon the earth, that Prince was that
tabernacle, and that the spirit of God dwelt therein,
Prince's original spirit being extinct. In another
report the Lunacy Commissioners said Miss Not-
tidge, in answer to their inquiries,"had said that
she was satisfied that there was no such person as.'
Prince, but that the spirit of God dwelt in his body ;
that she believed the spirit of God was now on
earth, and that it resided in the body of Prince.
The Lunacy Commissioners stated as their reasons
for liberating Miss Nottidge, that, although no
material improvement had taken place in her
mental condition, and her extraordinary and irra-
tional notions on the subject of religion, which
they regarded as delusion, were irreconcileable with
soundness of mind, were unabated, yet beyond those
delusions she had exhibited no other indication of
insanity; and her bodily health had been latterly
giving way, and there was much reason to appre-
hend that it might be seriously-injured by the pro-
longation of her confinement. On the day of her
return she was met by Mr. Thomas, who was ono
of Prince's followers, and had married one of her
sisters, and was by him brought to London, when
they, on the day after her return, went to a stock-
broker's respecting the transfer to Prince of the
stock then standing in her name. Not knowing
the exact amount of stock in her name, she was
then unable to make the transfer. She immediately
left London for the Agapemone, and, having in the
meantime ascertained what amount of stock she
had in his name, she procured a power of attorney,
and accordingly made the transfer now called in
question, 15 days after her release. Miss Not-
tidge died in July, 1858. The defendant said
that Miss Nottidge had frequently, prior to her
confinement, offered to give him the above
stock, but that he had always refused to accept
it ; and that she made the transfer to him without
any solicitation on his part, and without his know-
ledge. He also denied that Miss Nottidge was
under any delusion with respect to himself, and
claimed to be entitled to the stock transferred into
his name for his own benefit.

The above is a general outline of the case, which
is at present only part heard.
Mr. Malins (with whom was Mr. W. Knox
Wigram), for the plaintiff, occupied the Court the
whole day, and bad not concluded his address.
Mr. Bacon and Mr. Smale appear for the de-
fendant, Prince.

COURT OF DIVORCE.

(Before Sir Cresswell Cresswell, Mr. Baron Martin

and Mr. Justice Willes.)
SHEPPARD V. SHEPPARD.
Dr. Tristram conducted the case for the peti-
tioner.
This was a case for a dissolution of marriage, in-
stituted by Mrs. Sheppard, on the ground of her
husband's adultery, coupled with desertion without
cause for two years and upwards. The respondent
was a pork-butcher. The marriage took place on
the 30th July, 1846, and the parties afterwards
e3habited at various places, and lastly in Royal
Mint-street, Minories. Previously to May, 1851,
the respondent had several quarrels with his wife,
and wished her to go to her father's house, but she
always declined. In that month, however, be said
he had sold his business, his stock in trade, and
furniture, and that she could not remain in the
house any longer. The petitioner accordingly
went to her father's with her child, and shortly
afterwards her father received a letter from Shep-
pard, stating that, having had frequent disagree-
ments with his wife, he had now sold c'ff his furni-