The Sun.
London, England, 1869-03-25 00:00:00

A BETTING SCANDAL.

A jury trial—Hutchinson v. Gardiner—which is excit-
ing considerable interest in turf circles, has been com-
menced in the First Division of the Court of Session,
Edinburgh, before the Lord President. The circum-
stances out of which the trial arose are these :—Lieu-
tenant Hutchinson and other officers of the Bth (Royal
Irish) Hussars, at present stationed at Piers-hill Barracks,
were, during the last racing season, in the habit of making
bets nearly every day with certain" bookmakers" in Edin-
burgh. It happened that duty in barracks sometimes
prevented their arrival in Edinburgh for the purpose of
betting till after the races had been run, although before
the result was known there by means of the telegraph.
On the 11th of September last Lieutenant Hutchinson,
accompanied by two brother officers—Mr. Wentworth
and Mr. Ricardo—waited on and backed with
several bookmakers in Edinburgh different horses
for the races run at Doncaster that day. Among
other horses backed were St. Mungo and Ventnor,
for the Nursery Stakes, and the largest bets were
made with Mr. Gardiner, Turf Hotel. St. Mungo won the
race, and when settling day came, Gardiner refused to pay
the bets on St. Mungo. The matter was referred, at Gar •
diner's request, to the stewards of Edinburgh races. It was
alleged by Gardiner that Lieutenant Hutchinson and his
brother officers had learned before they betted with him that
St Mungo had won the race, and that thus they betted on
a certainty. The stewards, after hearing evidence, decided
against Gardiner, who appealed again to two bookmakers of
some note then at Edinburgh Races. They also decided
against him, but Gardiner refused to pay the beta, and
wrote a letter to Lieutenant Hutchinson, Mr. Wentworth,
and Mr. Ricardo, in which he alleged that he
had obtained "unquestionable evidence that they
had been holding illegal and improper collusion
with certain telegraph clerks," and that from his private
telegrams they had " surreptitiously got possession of the
information they contained, and by that medium betted
and gained or won money" from him. This letter
reflecting seriously on the character of Lieutenant
Hutchinson as an officer and a gentleman, the present
action for defamation of character had been raised.
Damages were laid at 0,000. The jury found for the
-)laintiff— damages one farthing.

LAW AND POLICE.

SIDNEY SUSSEX COLLEGE.—In the Court of Chancery,

on Wednesday, an appeal was heard from a decree of
the Master of the Rolls respecting an educational ,
trust of some importance. In 1641 a gentle-
man, named Coombe, left part of his estate to
the colleges of Sidney Sussex, Cambridge, and Trinity,
Oxford, for the use and education of certain descendants of
his own and his wife's family. The Master of the Rolls
directed an inquiry to be made as to what persons of the
testator's kindred were now in existence. It proved that
there were many descendants, but no poor kindred, and
the Master of the Rolls thereupon declared that the trust
was to provide education for the descendants at
any place, whether male or female, and in de-
fault of poor kindred, ordered a scheme to carry
out as nearly as possible the intentions of the testator.
The Lord Chancellor, however, passed the decree, saying
that it appeared to the court that the plain meaning of
the will was that the colleges should give the descendants
the benefits which they conferred upon all others who
resorted to them for instruction ; not that the gift was
intended as a trust for educating those persons at any time
or in any place, whether boys or girls. The costs would
go as directed by the court below.
THE CHANCERY AGENT.—At the Middlesex Sessions,
on Wednesday, a man named Hill, who had defrauded
great numbers of poor persons by the pretence that he
was an agent of the Court of Chancery, and had money
to pay over to them, was sentenced to five years' penal
servitude.