MK. GrEORGE PAVNK. 117 



Billy's house to breakfast after the trial, and Mr. Greville 

 undertook to carve the roast chicken. Their exultation was 

 considerably abated when Ariosto ran second for the Chesterfield 

 to Sir Joseph Hawley's Teddington, but the confederates wisely 

 took the lesson to heart, and were among the principal winners 

 when Teddington ran away with the Derby of 1851." 



We have said that Mr. Payne was an infatuated gambler, not 

 only on the turf but at the card-table. For upwards of fifty 

 years he spent more nights at play than any man that ever cut 

 a pack of cards, and one eventful incident in his card-playing experi- 

 ence led to a very disagreeable result. In the year 1837 occurred the 

 celebrated trial of "Lord de Eos v. Gumming," a cause celehre which 

 convulsed " society," more than any incident of a Uke nature which 

 has since happened. Lord de Ros had been a constant player, 

 chiefly at whist and ecarte at the West End clubs, and was so 

 steady a winner, that in the winter of 1836, rumours began to 

 circulate that his play was not fair. Hints were given him 

 which he declined to take. He was closely watched on several 

 occasions, and was detected in the act of marking the cards, 

 and performing also the sleight-of-hand feat known as sauter la 

 coupe. He had many accusers, but the chief among them were 

 Mr. Payne, Mr. Brooke Greville, Lord Henry Bentinck and Mr. 

 Gumming. Lord de Ros, who was abroad when the scandal was 

 first set going, returned to England as soon as he heard of it, and 



havinor traced the accusations to their source, was ill-advised 



..1.1 

 enough to bring an action for libel against Mr. Gumming, which 



was tried before Lord Denman and a special jury, on the 10th 

 of February, 1837. The sensation produced by the trial was 

 profound ; the court was crowded with ladies and gentlemen 

 moving in the highest circles of fashion, and the Times gave 

 an actual vei'bativi report of the proceedings. A great many wit- 

 nesses were put into the box, especially for the defence. Mr. 

 Payne's evidence was very important, and, as being calculated to 

 have a great effect on the minds of the jury in days when no second 

 speech was allowed, he was put into the box last. All that could be 

 elicited in favour of Mr. Gumming, and in direct proof that Lord 

 de Ros had cheated at cards on the specific occasions named, having 

 been got from Mr. Payne by counsel for the defence, he was cross- 

 examined by Sir William Follett as follows : 



" You have been a good deal connected with gambling trans- 

 actions, have you not ? " — " Yes, I have." 



"Spent a great deal of money on the racecourse, and also 

 been connected with racing proceedings, and with cards ? " — 

 "Yes, a great deal." 



" Have you been in the habit of playing with Lord de Ros ? " 

 —"Yes." 



" In the early part of your career, Mr. Payne, you were very 

 unfortunate, I think ? " — " Very much so." 



