The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-06-10
CUMMING CHEATED AT CARDS.
So Say the Jury in Their Verdict for tbs
Defendants in The BaCCarat Case.
PUBLIC SYMPATHY WITH SIR WILLIAM
Loudly Cheered by the Crowd-How He Re
ceived the verdict-The "Wilsons and
Greens"-Effect of the Verdict.
[By Cable 70 The Times.l

Greens"-Effect of the Verdict.
GBy Cable 10 The Times.l
LONDON, June 9.-The jury in the baccarat
trial to-day returned a verdict against Sir
William Gordon Cumming
For the first time since the baccarat trial
began there was acheer for Gordon-C Cumming
as hepassed into the courtroom this morning,
The throng outside was greater than ever, and
the police found it difficult to make way for
those entitled 10 entrance The popular ex-
citement over the case is very great, and many
came in from other towns 20 London to see
the spectacle Of the prince. the accused and
the galaxy of wealth. beauty and nobility, on
exhibition Sir William Gordou-CUmmlng was
evidently in better spirits than a week ago,
and he took his seat with an air of confidence
and a smile TO his beautiful sister Lady Mid
dleton who, with her husband. Lord Middle
ton. has stood by him from the first. Sir
Charles Russell was there and seemed 10 have
got over the yawning habit which afflicted
him when Sir Edward Clarke was addressing
the jury. ] hrs yawnlng Is "a favorte trick
with SIR Charles and IS played by HIM 70 break
the force Of an opponents questions or argu-
ment Just as Sir Edward would be making
some strong point Sir Charles Russell would
stretch himself and would yawn loud enough
to detract from what the other side was say
ing.
The Prince Of Wales, to the disappoint-
nent of many, was absent. Bo was at the
Ascot races.
sPAT BETWEEN COUNSEL.
The proceedings opened with most sensa-
tiOnal incident. The Lord Chief Justice had
hardly taken his seat when General Owen
Williams stepped to the front of the bench
and said his face pale with emotion and his
voice husky with feeling.
My lord, have 10 ask your projection.
Yesterday Sir Edward Clarke thought
proper"
Here the solicitor-general Sir Edward
Clarke. spraug TO his feet and lnterruptlng
General Williams exclaimed:
II ask your lordship to interfere and that
General Williams should not be allowed 10
make a statement, as he has not the privilege
of doing So"
To this General Williams hotly replied in a
ringing voice, all trace Of huskiness having
disappeared under the influence of the angry
feelings which animated him:
Il was accused OF an abOminable charge"
Here the lord chief justice interfered say
II do not remember the expression, but
do not think that you can be allowed TO
speak"
But General Williams persisted in being
heard, remarkng angrily: We were accused
of sacrificing an innocent man. This state
ment was made without any evidence being
brought forward for its Justification"
THE SUMMING u.
Lord Coleridge again interrupted the gen
eral. remarking with considerable warmth.
II cannot hear any statement from you" and
Immediately coh .icnced h.e sd.aniins dp,
while General Williams retired. frowning
and greatly disconnected. TO bis seat. where
he received the coincidence OF the friends
who had come with him TO court III order 20
hear him defend himself from the allegations
made yesterday by the solicitor-general IN the
latters summing up for the plaintiff
The Lord Chief Justice at the opening of
his speech explained 10 the jury at length the
difference Of an action for SANDER. as this one
is, and an action for libel His Lordship
added that If the jury found that the defend
ants had spoken thetruth their verdict should
be for the defendants. But the jury thought
broadly that the charges they made were not
trne and that Sir Gordon Cumming did not do
anything wrong while playing baccarat at
Tranby Croft in September last, then their
verdict must be for the plaintiff.
Lord Coeridge then entreated the Jury 10
keep their minds steadily on the evidence
and the evidence only. The Lord Chief
Justice aDalyzed at length the evidence given
by the plaintiff, which evidence, he said, was
we'll worthy Of consideration. The plaintiff,
he added had his counters on piece of
white paper, and would have been less likely
TO be discovered if he had, as the Others did,
put their counters on the cloth of the table.
SIR EDWARD ANSWERED.
During another portion of his summing up
Lord Colerdge said that the Prince of Wales
presence at Tranby Croft was sufficient to ex-
plain MIR. Lvcett Greenes objection b
4 in ha hoCTarqt
or elsewhere by calling attention TO the
actions which he objected 10 on the part of
Sir William Gordon-Cumming.
'Sir Edward Clarke said Lord Coleridge,
had said that the eye saw what the eye ex-
pected to see, and undoubtedly II persons had
their minds set on certain things less proof
was sufficient TO satisfy them than would be
otherwise needed. But the question was as TO
whether in this case the observation referred
to would apply
"Sir Edward Clarke" the Lord Chief Justice
continued had cOmmentedupOn Dir. Berke-
lev Levett's exclamation: Good God, Sir
William Gordon-Cumming caught cheating.
But supposing that the remark had been
Good heavens. the archbishop OF Nova Scotia.
prelate of the Order of the Sun. caught
selling a living Laughter There would
have been nothing unlikely in such an eN-
clamaton."
Lord Coleridge also called the attention of
the jury to one particular observation which
was made on behalf of the plaintiff during the
course of the trial 1t was to the effect that
there was more in the case than appeared on
the surface
Against this, the Lord Chief Justice re-
marked, Il most emphatlcally protest. The
Jury has nothing TO do with things which are
not on the surface. You have to contine
yourselves to the single issue and what you
have heard and what has been proved during
the trial"
When Lord Coleridge had proceeded thus
far with his charge 10 the jury the hour ot
noon had arrived and the court, as usuai,
promptly adjourned for lunch.
THE CHARGE AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF.
During the discussion which followed the
remarks of the Lord Chief Justice the general
opinion arrived at was that the charge was
against Sir William Gordon Cumming, al
though nothing decisive had been sGid either
way. Lord Coleridge spoke in quiet. father,
ly conversational manner TO the jury and
often in an undertone, when II was
only possible for the jurymen and those
in the immediate vicinity Of the Lord
Chief Justice 10 hear what he said When the
Chief Justice defined the law of libel "a dit-
ferent from the law Of SANDER, when he gave
special instructions in regard to the amount
of damages which the jury should if they so
desired assess in event they found the case
for the plaintiff. il was considered that Lord
CoIeridge's instructions decidedly favored Sr