The Sun.
London, England, 1868-04-27 00:00:00

Do 3 per Oen'. —
Do. Deferred
Do Land Warrants (Hectares) - -
Peruvian 5 per Cent. 1865 Bll I
Do Account .. 82
Do 4} per Cent. (Uribarren) -
Do 4} per Cent., 1862 ~ 951
Do Account
Portuguese 3 per Ct.. 1853, '6, '7, ','60,'2,': 391
Do. do., 1467 —
Do. do., Scrip, £2) paid*. —
Russian 5 per Cent., 1822, £ St —
Do 4} per Cent. 1850
Do 4.4. per Cent., imin
Do 3 per Cent., 1859
Do 5 per Cent., . 1,.G 2
6 5
Do. Anglo-Dutch, 1864, £lOO horde,,

Do. - do. • 4:84 13s. d 0...
180, £lOO Bonds
Do. £B4 15s. d 0.....
Sirdinian, 5 per Cold
panish 3 por Cell .
Do Account
Do New Dcferrou
Do Account -
Do Passive
Do A cc. ant
Do 00m. Cert. of Cou. nut f tv:ded
Do Account
Do 4 por Cent., Guaranteed
Turkish 6 per Cent.
Do Account
Do 6 per Cent. 1858 6o}
Do Account

Do £lOO Bonds
Do 6 per Cent., 1862 64 31
Do Account
Do £lOO Bonds
Do. 1801.3 ,
Do 5 per Cent., 1865.,
Do Account
Do 6 per Cent., 1BGS
Venezuela, 3 per Cent.
Do 6 per Cent., 1862
Do 6 per Cent. 1864
Do. 4 per Cent. Certificates
Dividends on the above payable in London
Belgian, per cent., Ex. 25f.
Dutch 2} per Cent. Ex. 12 Unit
Do Account
French Rentes, 3 per Cent., Ex. 23f. —
Austrian o per Cent. Ex 10 Florins
Reim, 5 per Cent. 1861, Ex. 2sf.
Do. Account
CLOSING PRICES.
Consols, Money 9l
Do. Account, sth May 9l /

66

311 j i

LAW IN TELLIGE NCE.—This Day.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Giffard).
LYON V. 11031 E.

This case was resumed this morning, but the
proceedings consisted of the speeches of counsel for
the plaintiff, on the evidence they had brought
forward to prove their case. They dwelt very strongly
upon the evidence of Mrs. Lyon, who they contend
Plainly showed that the influence the defendant had
obtained over her rendered her far from being a
free agent. The lady had been imposed upon from
beginning to end, and one of the learned counsel
(Mr. Fisher) said that after Mrs. Lyon bad declared
the whole thing a swindle, the defendant had coolly
written to her to ask her for a letter vouching for
his personal honesty. Homo invariably addressed
his letters to Mrs. Lyon as "My darling mother,
and, in fact, he effected so complete au ascendancy
over her that she became his tool, notwithstanding
that he had written that he felt repugnant at her
attachment, although he had by his great attachment
succeeded in getting so large a sum from her. She
was a lady who had the greatest affection for her
husband whilst alive, and .after his decease she
seemed animated by the greatest desire to do all
that he had requested. The defendant found
her to be a person of great susceptibility,
and, finding she possessed great wealth,
he set about obtaining an influence over her, which
eventually lie turned to his own personal advan-
tage. Although he (Mr. Fisher) could not deny
that Mrs. Lyon had given the money, she had been
so imposed upon that she really at one time believed
oanillythmateloiunlefohradretsotoit
ldrhger,viz., that
communication lie
between
et
ehne
her and her deceased husband, and it ,a •as believing
that completely that had led her to do that which
had given rise to the institution of the present suit.
The case seems likely to go on for several days yet.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-TlllB DAY.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

PRICKING TIIE GARTEIZ:' -- CHEATING A
FOREIGNER.—Johann Emile, described as a printer's
roller maker, was charged before Mr. Tyrwhitt
with being concerned with another not in custody
in defrauding Louis Adolph Malaterre, a French
tailor living in Marshall-street, Golden-square, of
the sum of X. 3 4s in French money, by cheating him
at a game called " pricking the garter."
After sonic evidence being given, Mr. Tyrwhitt
(on the application of Police-constable George King,
7(3,1)) remanded the prisoner for a week.

WEs-rmix STE It .
A REMARKABLY INQUISITIVE TURN OF MIND.—
James Topson, described as a wood merchant, was
charged under the following circumstances :
John Besloy, a foreman of painters, living
at 55, Eccleston-place, said that at seven
o'clock ou Saturday evening
he had occasion
to go to a shop in Buckingham Palace-row,
Pimlico, to varnish a revolving shutter. While
he was doing it the defendant, who was drunk, with
two companions, came up, and defendant pushed
one of them up against the steps, upon which com-
plainant was standing, and also run up against
them himself, and had it not been for
seizing a bracket, complainant must have
been thrown to the ground. In about an
quarter of an hour after defendant and a companion
returced and commenced wiping his angers down
the varnish. Complainant told him to desist, or he
would shove the varnish-brush in his face. De-
fendant put his hand on the varnish again, and upon
complainant going to prevent his doing it again
defendant pushed him, and he then put the varnish-
brush on his face, and then defendant and his
friend knocked him about.

Defendant denied that he had assaulted the ma►n
as described or pushed any one against the'steps.
lie put his finger upon the wet varnish, and inquired
whether it was " copal." Upon which complainant
told him to go about his business. lle (defendant)
put his finger on the varnish again,observing, " he
thought it was copal," upon which the complainant
thrust the brush in his face and varnished
all his face and hair, and then, a general struggle
ensued.

A policeman proved finding the complainant
engaged with the defendant, who was drunk, and
another man. Ile saw defendant strike complainant
three or four times.
Defendant denied this, and wished to be allowed
to ask complainant a question.

Mr. Arnold assented.
Defendant—Did not I inquire whether it was
copal varnish?
Complainant—Yes, you did.
Defendant—When I put my finger to it a second
time, did I not say I thought it was ?
Mr. Arnold—Yours must be a most inqui-
sitive turn of mind which could make you
interfere in this way. I have no doubt you went
to the man and interfered to annoy him. You
must pay a fine of 10s. or seven days, and enter
into recognisances for your good behaviour for
three months.