The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-25 00:00:00

WHITECHAPEL.

The supplies of meat are moderately good, and the trade
renerally rules heavy, as follows :
- Beef, 3s Od to 45 8d ; mutton, 38 4d to 5s 2d; lamb, Fs Od
to 5s 10d; veal, 4s Od to 5s Od; pork, 4s Od to 5s 2d per
Ms. by the carcase.

BOROUGH HOP MARKET.
The trade generally rules firm, and prices are fully sup-
ported. Duty, £125,000 to £130,000.

LA IV INTELLIGENVE.--(THIS .DAY),

COURT OF CHANCERY.
(Before Irice-Chancellof Sir John Stuart)
THE AGAPEMONE—JUDGMENT.,

NOTTAGE V. PRINCE.

His Honour this morning, in delivering judgment in this
case said. In tie month of June, 1848, the defendant, Henry
Thomas Prince, obtained from Miss Louisa Nottidge a.
transfer in his own name of two sums amounting together
to the sum of £5,728, 3 per Cent. Bank Annuities. This
was stated eo be the whole of her remaining fortune, and
her whole means of subsistence, and the defendant
claims to be entitled to retain it for his own use, as a.
free gift obtained by him from this lady, who died..
intestate in the year 1858. Her brother was the plain--
tiff' who had instituted the present suit, as her
legal and personal representative, to recover the whole of
her personal estate. The bill stated that the alleged gift
to the defendant was obtained by misrepresentation and
deception, and obtained under the influence of a gross delu-
sion circulated concerning himself, and used by him for the
purpose of obtaining her confidence in him and obtaining
the transference of her Bank Stock more effectually to
him, and which he obtained under the impressim
of such delusions and such influence. If these alle-
gations were sufficiently proved the defendant could
not be allowed to retain the property. Whether
the gift was obtained under the influence of deception or
delusion it could not stand. Whether, continued his
honour, the deception or delusion is temporal or spiritual is.
immaterial. If the gift is made under the influence of de-.
lusion it is -void. This influence and delusion is clear...
Thero is ample evidence to show that the defendant exer-
cised power and undue dominion over the mind of Miss,
Nottidge. The evidence is clear that he assumed a fals&
character, and in the character which he assumed
he induced this lady to part with her property. It
is nothing that ho entertained the same delusions. He,
describes in his cross-examination what his delusions~
were, and the deceptions practised against this lady-
which induced her to part with her property—that he acted
under the authority of God and influence of the Holy-
Ghost, and required a portion of her property for his service
and other necessary purposes. His Honour read several__
extracts from the evidence prodUced, and observed that the.
, law was clear on tie subject, that no gift was valid by any

one under the undue influence of another, and referred to
the decided cases of Guardian and Ward, Solicitor and f
Client ; and in France to confessor and priest, where publi. c
policy required, even in Catholic countries, that no gif t
whatever should be offered by the confessor or taken by th,

priest or the religious order to which he belongs for reli-
gious services. Happily the high character of the clergy
in this country renders such cases as the present
comparatively unknown. •His Honour came to the con-
clusion that the transference of the bank annuities by the
late Miss Louisa Nottidge to the defendant was null and.

void, and the plaintiff was entitled to a decree in his favour
for re-transference of the same as her legal personal repre-
sentative, and decreed accordingly. The rights of the
sisters, or next of kin, can be disposed of afterwards.
Mr. Malins, Q.C., stated that there was now omly
£4,557, and not £5,000, as formerly, in the bank.
His Honour observed that, on the plaintiff showing the
decree to the Bank, he would obtain a re-transfer of the
stock, and all questions could be settled afterwards.
At the conclusion of the judgment, which occupied onl y
ten minutes in delivery, the audience expressed their apps
bation of the result by a simultaneous burst of applaus
on leaving the court.

The court was densely crowded. Several gentlemen
assembled round the doors at an early hour.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY-)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

DISGRACEFUL BEHAVIOUR IN HYDE-PARK.—Fredik .
Bishop, a labouring man, was charged as follows:
Albert Jones, 510 A, said he was on duty in Hyde-par k
the previous day, when his attention was called to the
pri-
soner by a nursemaid, who said the prisoner was acting i n
a disgraceful manner. He went to the spot pointed out b y
the female, and found the prisoner acting as described, tv
females having just passed him. He then took him int a)
custody.
Prisoner said he had nothing to say.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said the prisoner was a perfect pest. Ire
was doing all the mischief he could in ruining young p( sr-
sons' minds.
Committed for three months with hard labour.
AN OLD OFFENDER.—Mary Welsh was charged w ith
stealing a fowl from the shop of Mr. J. Taylor, poulterer,
Little Pulteney-street, and also a piece of bacon front •the
shop of Mr. Henry Webber, Brewer-street.
The prisoner paid Mr. Taylor a visit, and after leaving
the fowl was missed by a shopman named Goodge, and on
his fetching her back it was found under her shawl, as Om)
the piece of bacon. The prisoner was then taken to Ihe
shop of Mr. Webber, when the piece of bacon was at onbce
missed from the board.

The prisoner, who is an old offender, and wished the cf tse
settled at once, was committed for 21 days with hr ;rd
labour.

THAMES.

A TILL ROBBERY.—George Ward, a stout and powerfi 11
fellow, about 19 years of age, was brought before 1113 c.
Yardley, charged with stealing 2s. 6d. in silver from a 1511
in the Brunswick Arms beer-house, Blackwall.

It appeared from the evidence of Mr. Foster, the propriie-
tor of the Brunswick Arms, that he and his wife had 1 oft
the bar for a short time yesterday afternoon, and upon t re-
entering it at opposite doors saw the prisoner coming ron nd
the bar with something clenched in his hand, and the till
wide open. Mr. Foster seized the prisoner, ani said. to
him " You scoundrel, you have robbed me." The prism zer
immediately put something in his mouth.' Mr. Foster
grasped him by the neck, and said " What hieve
you there ? " to which the prisoner anawened
" What I have I mean to keep." Mr. Foster ea id
" You shall not swallow the money," and compressed his
throat so tightly that the thief could neither swallow an(y-
thing or utter a word. In this position they remained wail
a police constable named Farling, No. 79, arrived, on whiieh
the prisoner took his handkerchief from his pocket and
applied it to his mouth as if he was wiping it. Farling seized
the handkerchief, when the prisoner withdrew it from his
mouth and found in it a shilling, two sixpences, and a throe..
penny piece, the exact amount which the prosecutor mimed
from his till. One of the sixpences was a very peculiar one
and the prosecutor was enabled 'positively to say it was in
his till 6 minutes before he seized the prisoner.

Mr. Yardley—ls the prisoner known ?
Roche, the gaoler of the court, said the prisoner had
been in his custody. It was three years ago, or more.

Parling said the prisoner had been"in custody very re-
cently for a similar offence, and was acquitted.
Mr. Yardley asked the prisoner if he would plead now
or prefer being sent to the sessions for trial.

The prisoner—Settle it here at once.
Mr. Yardley—Do you plead guilty or not guilty ?
The prisoner-1 am guilty.
Mr. Yardley-4 convict you of larceny, and sentence you,
to three months' imprisonment and hard labour.