Arizona republican., 1898-08-26

meet on the allowance of $100,000 a year, which they receive from the prince of Wales. Moreover, it is inn possible for the duke of Teck to remain at the palace known as the White Lodge at Richmond, which is a very expensive place to keep up, and far be- yond the means of his children. So that what with one thing and another, nobody seems to know what to do with him. Of course, the queen is the per son who should really attend to the
 matter, besides being the only one who can really afford to do so. But she dislikes the duke so much, besides regarding him as an interloper in the royal family, owing to his non-royal birth, that she is not inclined to do anything for him.
 The police hold a theory, based on experience, to the effect that convicts seldom, if ever, reform. And it would appear that if this rule, if rule it can be called, likewise holds good with people of rank and family, who have involved in the tolls of the law, they
 
 selves and are forever turning up again in connection with offenses eith- CT civil or criminal. Thus we have re- gently seen Alfred Monson, the grand son of the late Lord Monson, sentenced to five years penal servitude for forgery after having been repeatedly charged with one offense or another during the eight years which have elapsed, since he so narrowly escaped conviction for the murder of his pupil, young Cecil HambrOugh.
 And now Arthur Sebright, younger brother of Sir Edward Sebright, has come once again before the public in connection with his arrest for the criminal offense of obtaining goods on credit to a large amount without in- forming the vendor that he was an un- discharged bankrupt. In fact the case against Arthur Sebright looks so black that it is difficult to see how he can possibly escape sentence to pretty long term of Imprisonment with hard labor. For not only did he buy horses to the tune of $5,000 on credit, but on being pressed for payment gave notes for the amount backed by the late Lord de L'Isle, representing that the latter was worth $150,000 a year. all though the peer in question was insol- vent at the time. Finally when the notes were dishonored, the plaintiff found that Sebright had sold the horses for S2,000 and pocketed the money
 Arthur Sebright is the same individ ual who played so very unsavory q role in the disgraceful Scott vs. Se- bright nullity case in the divorce court He, who was a young stock broker at the time, having made the acquaint- ance of the two daughters of Lena Lady Scott, and finding that eacn of them had inherited a fortune of $150, 000 ill their own right, induced the elder of the girls, who was known in London society by the name of ''Bahy Scott. to raise money in her name for the purpose Of ertrusting it 10 him for profitable investment. He either lost tEe money on change or else squan- dered it, and fearing criminal prosecu- tion on the part of the girls guardians or trustees, terrorized her into mar riage as the only means of avoiding being called to account
 The girl few months later discov- cred that she had been swindled both financially and matrimonially, and thereupon by the advice of her mother instituted proceedings in the divorce court in order to have her marriage annulled. The trial was one of the most scandalous and unsavory that has taken place in the divorce court in many years, and was quite as disgrace full for the fair plaintiff, as for the de fendant. For if it proved that the latter had no honesty, it likewise show