New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-06-09

scrbed as holding it's breath, daZed ana COLI
fused by the unexpected revelation OF the Prince
of Wales as an offender against the military
code, and as menaced with dismissal from the
service as a notorious gambler. There have
been many outbursts OF cynical radicalism dur
ing the second half of the Victorian reign; but
neither from Sir Charles Dixie in his premature
republican propaganda at Chelsea, nor from
Charles Bradlaugh in his widest North Of
England flight of democratic invective, nor from
any of the screaming Socialist groups of orators
in Trafalgar Square, has anything been heard
during the present generation equally contempt
nous of royalty and its selfish interests 1t was
sufficiently amazing that an English Juryman
should have had the hardIhood to rise in the
box and ask the Prince direct questions in re-
Iation to his connection with the baccarat scam
dal. That was an episode which marked
sweeping advance of democratic free thought
and corresponding decadenoe of royal pres
tige in England. The impression produced by
that remarkable scene, however, was faint In
comparison with the effect caused in court by
the Solicitor-Gener deliberate arraignment of
the Prince for violations of the military code.
This old Tory barrister, while one of the high
est law officers of the Crown, spoke with all
the vehemence of Gambetta denouncing in
a press trial toe scandals of the Second Empire.
The Prince was told to his face that while he
had come into court to muzzle witnesses and
counsel there was a solemn duty which an
honest lawyer owed to his client, and 1t would
be performed without reference to social or
political consequences.
ID may he contended that Sir Edward Clarke,
having been overfnatched in this case, was
forced to make fierce onslaught upon royalty
in order to retrieve his reputation and to make
some show of fighting for his client. A law
yer, who had apparently lost his cause and was
compelled to sum up with the unimpeached
testimony of half q dozen witnesses against
one, and that ole with an discriminating con-
fession to explain away, might reasonably be
suspected of being in temper for running
amuch against the Prince or any other illustrl-
Gus parsonage who might come in his way. 1t
is familiar practice at the bar for a lawyer who
has the weaker case in evidence to be the moro
violent and declamatory In his appeal to the
Jury. The Solictor-General having been placed
at disadvantage in trial which has been Of
absorbing interest to every one in London, may
have been tempted to 60 beyond the bounds Of
court decorum and worldly prudence in con-
demning the Prince and sneering contempt
uously at the Wilson family, who are reputed
to have lent him good deal Of money. What
ever may have been the lawyers motive or
ground of justification, his exhibition of what
may be termed starlS-nalled candor in dealing
with the heir to the throne will make him
famous during the remainder of his career.
do l,,+
royalty has been arragned and discredited with
out reference to their verdict. The inquisitive
juryman and the high-tempered lawyer between
them have smashed the time -honored traditions
of loyalty to the throne.