St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-06-05
"sHowING HIS TEETH"
The Accused NObIeman Means TO
Get Even.

LONDON. June "A decided heart.
raising feeling was inspired IN many
breasts to-day when, during the cross
examination of Mr.. Wilson, it was
shown that the counters used in the
fateful baccarat game were the personal
property of the Prince of Wales, that
they belong to the set which the prince
carried about with him when visiting
the country houses Of his intimate
the apparently indispensable game.
This fact has been well known
all along, but the fact that
this ownership of the counters has been
dragged out in court by Sir Edward
Clarke, the leading counsel for the
plaintiff, is looked upon as being direct
and positive evidence that Sir William
Gordon-Cumming is showing his
teeth" and that he is not inclined to
spare his former friend the Prince Of
Wales, any further, for as everybody
admits, the heir-apparent up to the
present has been very tenderly treated
by both parties to this interesting suit.
Young Mr.. Wilson, for the first time,
felt uneasy in the witness box when Sir
Edward Clarke quietly asked Had
you ever before the evening OF Sept 8
used the counters you played with dur
ing the course of that EVENING"" Upon
hearing this question Wilson flushed
neryously, glanced toward the Prince
of Wales, who was closely following
the testimony, and replied somewhat
hesitatingly: mo, never"
do you know whose property they
are?" finally said the solicitor general,
amid painful silence throughout the
court, and during which the witness
again glanced i'll the direction of the
chair where the Prince of Wales was
seated. Yes" Mr.. Wilson answered.
Whose property are they?" was Sir
Edward Clalke'S next question. After
a moments hesitation, Mr.. Wilson re-
piled: They belong to the Prince OF
Wales"
Sir Charles Russell then addressed
the lord chief justice, remarking: Both
Sir Edward Clarke and |, my lord, are
agreed that if the acts were committed,
the plaintiff alone profited by them"
Berkeley }. T.. sLeyett, one Of the de.
PENDANTS III the case, was the next wit
ness. Lieut.. LeYett appeared to be pale
and very nervous. Replying to Sir
Charles RusselPs questions, the witness
said he had known Sir William Gordon
Cumming intimately since 1885. The
lieutenant in substance then confirmed
young Mr.. Wilson's testimony in regard
to what took place at Tranbycroft on
Sept. s, 9 and 10. He repeated in sub
stance the conversation which took
place between Mr.. Wilson and himself
in his bedroom, where he asked young
Mr.. Wilson not to say anything about
what they had seen ''tOr the sake of Sir
William Gordon Cumming, and for the
sake of the regiment" TO this request,
according to the witness, young Viii
son replied: Il must tell my mother. [
sign ed the undertaking by which the
nj
play cards on the morning OF
gave a detailed account of his
visit to Sir William Gordon Cummings
room, and told of the Iatter's request.
Gould not you say you were mistaken"
TO this, the lieutenant said that he re-
piled: Il would say was mistaken for
your sake, and for the sake of the regi-
ment, but | know one man who would
not do so. and that is Lycett Green"
The plaintiff replied you surely can
not believe this Of me?" My answer
was, Il must believe my own ewes. [
saw you adding counters to your stakes"
At the end of the interview between Sir
William Gordon Cumming and myself,
found that the door Of his room had
been locked. When the plaintiff noticed
nay surprise at this proceeding he said
i'll explanation, that lie did not wish the
servants TO hear our conversation. and
again urged me to do all L could This
pr omIsed to do"
Subsequently" the lieutenant con.
tiuued, Il received a letter from the
plaintiff, reminding me Of nv promise
to do all | could for him. After receiy-
ing letter from the plaintiffs lawyer,
threatening legal action 10 the matter, |
met the plaintiff in Picadilly, and, after
some preliminary conversation, he said
to me: How is it that you are all
actarDe (5loodthirsty) against me?' |
replied 'AchaTne has nothing to do
with it, and added that | mad received
a letter from his (Jhe plaintiffs lawyer.
The plaintiff then said: That does not
matter. Tie case will not be gone on
with" The crOSS-eXaminatiOn of
Lieut.. Leyett by Sir Edward Clarke did
not result in developing any important
points, and utterly failed to shake the
lieutenant's testimony.
Again was there decided sensation
10 court when, during Lieut.. Berkeley
LeTettS croSS-eXaminatiOn, Sir Edward
Clarke asked questions in regard to the
liquid refreshments which were par
taken OF during the baccarat PLAYING at
IranbycrOft, and apparently reached
such dangerous ground that the lord
Chief justice felt himself compelled to
interrupt the crOSs-eXamination by in
curing, rather severely. whether he de
sired toeonyey TO the jury the impress
sion that the hospitality of Tranbycroft
IN September last was of the nature Of
disturbing hospitality so far as re-
garded the game" Sir Edward admit
tel that lle did