The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-06-03
WASHINGTON WEDNESDAY 1884,

evidence in halting, hesitating manner.
ana ne seemed to be very glad and ex-
ceeolngiy relieved when his examination
was over.
ueherai Owen Williams was the next
witness. He related everything connected
Win the games, his testimony in the main
concurring with the previous witnesses.
On cross-examination by Sir Charles Rus
ssH ne SAID that on the second night of the
Piaysng ne heard the Prince of Wales
seii plaintiff that he should keep his hands
further back because he (the prince) could
not see the stakes. The general said that
ne and others who were present at Tranby-
Croft told the plaintiff that signing doc
uInent agreeing never to play cards again
was the only way out of the difficulty, and
y ne oid not do so he would have to leave
the house and would be warned off every
race course In England or elsewhere.
ms last piece of testimony caused a de-
clded sensation. When Sir Charles Russell
asked Williams why he continued to ad-
dress plaintiff as Dear Bill'' in letters
aiter the scandal, witness explained that
piaintin was suffering agony of mind and
snat ne lWilliamsl did not wish to add to
his old friends grief
AT another part of the ecross-examination
the general admitted that the plaintiff had
reproached Lord Coventry and himself for
giving plaintiff bad advice.
Sir Charles cross-exaniination of Sir
William Gordon Cumming is pronounced
TO be very successful effort. What Sir
Charles wanted was that plaintiff should
admit that he remained quiet so long as
ne thought the facts in connection with
the scandal would.not get about, and the
TACT that they did get out and no loftier
motive led Sir William to take the present
proceedings. But between Sir Charles
and the plaintiff there was long and
stubborn contest, Sir William parrying
the lawyers thrusts skillfully. FL
nally, alluding to the compact of
secrecy, plaintiff said: Yes, lived in
fools paradise for time. At least had
to act so, because had / not done SO the
thing would have been taken up by my
club, by my friends and my regiment"
THAT is what wanted" remarked Sir
Charles.
Sir Charles cross-examined the Prince of
Wales with some show of airiness. The
word "you" in Sir Charles cross-examina-
ton took the place of ''your royal high
ness" and "sir," which had plentifully in
terlarded Sir Edward Clarke's questions
Bat, though Gladstone's attorney general,
Russell, showed to a certain degree
his liberal tendencies, he was
manifestly tender in his handling
OF the royal witness. In fact, the general
opinion formed in the courtroom was that
there was evidently a tacit agreement be-
tween leading counsel that they were to
fish for and get nothing from the prince
which any other witness could supply.
Only once did the Prince of Wales betray
any open sign of impatience. and that was
when Sir Charles asked, "What did Mrs.
Wilson say to you about Sir William Cor
don Cumming cheating?"
The prince replied shortly, somewhat
angrily, it appeared: "She said very
little" and there the subject was dropped,
as any lawyer can see, at the most i'm
portant stage. The prince had admitted
that Mrs. Wilson told him something
about Sir Williams cheating, and Sir
Charles wanted to find out what she said
to the prince, but the latter's show of an
noyancc at the question caused the counsel
to turn his legal mind to other matters.
Though it only lasted twenty minutes
| the examination of the prince evidently
wearied him exceedingly and made
him extremely nervous. He kept
changing his position, and did not
seem able to keep his hands still. When a
question more pressing, more to the
point than usual, was put to him, the
princes face was observed to flush consid-
erably and then to turn pale again, show
ing the state of nervousness in which he
found himself. Except the lord chief JUS
tice, counsel, jurors, press representatives
and others in proximity to the witness
box, only about a couple of the princes
answers were audible throughout the
courtroom.