Compare Documents

The criminal proceedings for libel which Oscar Fingall O'Flahertie Wilde has set in motion against John Sholto Douglas, Marquis of Queensberry, commenced on Wednesday at the Old Bailey. Public interest in the case is enormous. Long before the hour appointed for the opening of the court doors their vicinity is thick with humanity, and five minutes after they have been thrown open the court is crammed to suffocation. So it was on Wednesday and Thursday. When the court opened on Wednesday the marquis lost no time in stepping into the dock. The indictment was gabbled over to him and he pleaded "Not guilty," that the libel was true, and that it was for the public benefit that it was printed. Sir Edward Clark opened the case. He told how the marquis had left a card with the hall porter of the Albemarle Club addressed "To Oscar Wilde;" whereon were words gross and libellous. The accusation against Mr. Wilde was one of the gravest that could be made, but the plea put before the court raised a much graver issue. There was no accusation in the plea that Mr. Wilde had been guilty of a criminal offence, but there were given a number of names of persons whom he was accused of inciting to commit such offences, and with whom he was charged with improper conduct. Having said so much, Sir Edward sketched Oscar's career for the benefit of those who knew not Oscar prior to the æsthetic craze period. And then he came to speak of the circumstances under which the various parties in the present action became acquainted, and dwelt upon transactions connected with certain letters and other incidents about which Mr. Wilde spoke freely in his examination later on. One of these letters addressed by Oscar to young Douglas was read by Sir Edward. It ran thus: —

My own dear boy — Your sonnet is quite lovely, and it is a marvel that those red roseleaf lips of yours should be made no less for music of song than for madness of kissing. Your slim-gilt soul walks between passion and poetry. I know Hyacinthus, whom Apollo loved so madly, was you in Greek days. Why are you alone in London, and when do you go to Salisbury? Do go there and cool your hands in the grey twilight of Gothic things, and come here whenever you like. It is a lovely place. It only lacks you. But go to Salisbury first. Always with undying love, yours, OSCAR.

A review of the meetings between the marquis and Oscar concluded a long and able opening.

After the Albemarle porter had proved the marquis's call, &, came the real beginning of the case. Oscar, cool as a cucumber, and fatter than ever, glided gracefully into the box. Sir Edward Clarke having examined him as to his relations with the Douglas family, and as to the attempts of Woods and others to blackmail him on the strength of certain letters found in the pockets of Lord Alfred Douglas's cast-off clothing, and having obtained his denial to the insinuation of the marquis that he was kicked out of the Savoy Hotel on account of disgusting conduct, gave Oscar up to the tender mercies of Carson, Q.C. The learned counsel commenced to cross-examine Oscar somewhat minutely as to his literary output, but more especially in regard to certain poetic contributions to a fin de siècle magazine called The Chameleon. Carson, Q.C., suggested that these contributions would convey improper suggestions, but Oscar said "No." He considered them exceedingly beautiful poems. Regarding a very warm story entitled "The Priest and the Acolyte," which most people attributed to Oscar, the æsthete denied the authorship. He thought it was badly written, but would not call it immoral or blasphemous. As Oscar had already stated that in his opinion there is no such thing as an immoral book, the point of Carson's examination at this juncture was not apparent. But he kept to Oscar's literature, and presently "Dorian Grey" was dragged in. Oscar repudiated the suggestion that Dorian's sin was "unnatural vice," and remarked that the book could only be called vicious when misinterpreted by the vulgar and the illiterate. Oscar said he did not write for the "ordinary individual," which brought from Carson, Q.C., the remark that the novelist did not mind the ordinary individual buying his books. "I have never discouraged him," quoth Oscar loftily. Asked if he had ever experienced the sentiments of the painter Basil, and whether he thought them natural, Oscar made answer, "I should think it perfectly natural to intensely adore and love a younger man. It is an incident in the life of almost every artist." Carson, Q.C., wanted to know if Oscar had himself adored madly a man twenty years his junior? He said he had loved one - not madly, but just loved one. Adoration was a thing he reserved to himself. He had, however, never been jealous; jealousy was, he thought, an intense nuisance. Then Mr. Carson came to the novelist's letter to young Douglas. The one quoted, Mr. Carson suggested, was an improper letter to write to a young man, but Oscar could not see eye to eye with his tormentor. The letter was a "prose-poem," "beautiful," "unique," but not as the Q.C. read it. "You read it very badly, Mr. Carson," said Oscar blandly; "you are not an artist." "I do not profess to be an artist, Mr. Wilde, and sometimes when I hear your evidence I am glad I am not one," responded the lawyer gravely. He then read another of Oscar's "prose-poems," which ran thus: —

Dearest of all boys, your letter was delightful. Red and yellow wine to me. But I am out of sorts. You must not make scenes with me. They kill me. They wreck the loveliness of life. I cannot see you so Greek and gracious, distorted by passion. I cannot listen to your curved lips saying hideous things to me. You break my heart. I must see you soon. You are the divine thing. I want a thing of grace and genius, but I do not know how to do it. Shall I come to Salisbury? There are many difficulties; my bill here (at Goring) is £49 for the week. I have got a new sitting-room, over the Thames. But, you, why are you not here, my dear, my beautiful boy? I fear I must leave. No money, no credit, and a heart of lead. -Ever your own, OSCAR.

"An extraordinary letter," commented Oscar softly. "Everything I write is extraordinary. I do not pose as being ordinary." Mr. Carson then reverted to the episode of the letters upon which a man named Cleburn attempted to blackmail Mr. Wilde, and touched upon the plaintiff's relations with two young men, named Wood and Taylor. Oscar denied improper conduct with these men, but admitted having "dined and wined" them in private rooms at the Café Florence, and to having given Wood various sums of money amounting to over £30 "out of pure kindness." He admitted also that, though believing Wood to be levying blackmail, he privileged him to use his Christian name. But he explained that everybody called him "Oscar." Passing on to another case Mr. Carson questioned the plaintiff as to his friendship for Edward Shelley, sometime an assistant in Messrs. Elkin Lane's office. Oscar repudiated all sinister suggestions in connection with this youth. Shelley had an intellectual face and literary ambitions, so Oscar dined him at the Albemarle Hotel in a private room, and gave him autograph copies of "Dorian Gray" and other Wilde works. Then Oscar's intimacy with a youth named Alphonso Conway was enquired into. Alphonso was a "pleasant creature" whose "simple conversation" attracted Wilde so much that he gave him a silver cigarette case, an inscribed photograph, an autograph volume, a silver-mounted walking-cane, a blue serge suit, and a straw hat, and finally took him for a trip to Brighton. All this Oscar did out of kindness, and not with any idea of subverting the lad's morals.

On Thursday Mr. Carson continued his crusade, and Oscar was called upon to answer an exhaustive series of questions as to his "friendship" for other young men. He admitted that he took to Paris a boy named Atkins, and shared a suite of rooms, all communicating, with the lad. But he denied any impropriety, and waxed very indignant when Mr. Carson made the "monstrous suggestion" that he had "plied Atkins with wine." The case of Ernest Scarth was next on the board. Scarth was, said Oscar, "a pleasant, nice, good fellow," who had been kind to Lord Douglas of Hawick during a voyage from Australia, so he dined the young man. Oscar indignantly denied that he kissed Scarth or had acted improperly with the young fellow. Similarly he denied that he had committed any impropriety with one Sydney Maror, who stayed with him all night at the Albermarle, and to whom he gave a four-guinea cigarette case. He did these things simply for the sake of conversing with "a very charming, nice fellow." Now came a little scene. Oscar was questioned as to his relations with a lad named Granger, who was Lord Alfred Douglas's servant at Oxford. "Have you ever kissed this boy?" demanded Carson, Q.C., abruptly. Oscar replied airily, "Oh, no! certainly not. A peculiarly plain boy." The counsel pounced on this expression instantly, asked if it was only because the boy was ugly that he was not kissed. Oscar for the first time hesitated before answering, and then replied evasively, "No; because it seems such an intense insult on your part. It seems ridiculous to imagine that any such thing could have occurred." "Then why mention his ugliness?" demanded the Q.C. sternly. "I should not like to kiss a boy," replied Oscar, adding hotly, "Am I to be cross-examined as to the reasons I should not like to kiss a boy?" "Well, why mention his ugliness?" reiterated Carson, Q.C., blandly. "Because," exclaimed Oscar shrilly, "you sting me with insolent questions; you try to unnerve me in every way, and make me say things flippantly that I would not say seriously." Carson, Q.C., agreed to take the "ugliness" as a flippant answer, but smiled meaningly at the jury. At 12.30 the cross-examination concluded, and Sir Edward Clarke rose to re-examine. He read several pathetic letters from Lord Queensberry to young Douglas, which it is not necessary to dwell upon. Certainly they tended to show that the marquis deemed his son's close friendship with Wilde a horrible thing, which should be smashed no matter the cost. The re-examination proper enabled Oscar to deny the defendant's statement that Mrs. Wilde was seeking divorce, but Sir Edward did not take his client over the ground covered by Mr. Carson again. The jury having asked a few questions relative to the publication of the Chameleon the case for the prosecution was closed.

Mr. Carson then rose to address the jury on the more serious side of the justification of the alleged libel. He said that Lord Queensberry withdrew nothing that he had said or written, having done everything with premeditation and a determination at all risks and hazards to try and save his son. His conduct has been absolutely consistent throughout. From beginning to end Lord Queensberry had been influenced with regard to Mr. Oscar Wilde by the one hope alone of saving his son. What had been Mr. Wilde's own case? That up to a certain date he had met Lord Queensberry, who had been on terms of friendship with him. Lord Queensberry had heard of Mr. Wilde's character, and of these scandals at the Savoy Hotel, which would be proved before them. Mr. Wilde had been going about with young men who were not his equals either in position or education. He thought it would be proved that some of these men were known as some of the most immoral characters in London, and he specially referred to Taylor, who was the right man to assist Wilde in all these orgies. Had they been able to cross-examine Taylor they would have learned what went on. Taylor was the pivot of the case, for the simple reason that when they heard the witnesses examined — and he would be unfortunately compelled to examine them on the immoral practices of Mr. Oscar Wilde — it would be found that Taylor was the man who introduced them to Wilde. When Mr. Wilde wanted to show that someone was present he mentioned a gentleman who could not be called because he was out of the country; but Taylor was in the country and could have been called. They were told that the friendship of Wilde and Taylor had not been interrupted. With regard to the books, they were being continually told by Mr. Wilde that they were by an artist for artists, but there was the greatest contrast between his books, which were for the select and not for the ordinary individual, and the way he chose his friends. He took up with Charlie Parker, a gentleman's servant, whose brother is a gentleman's servant; with young Conway, whose brother sold papers on the pier at Worthing; and with Scarfe, also a gentleman's servant. Then his excuse was no longer that he was dwelling in regions of art, but that he had such a noble, such a democratic soul, that he drew no social distinctions, and that it was quite as much pleasure to have the sweeping boy from the streets to lunch or dine with him as the greatest literateur or artist. Mr. Carson considered the positions absolutely irreconcilable. He thought if they had rested the case alone upon Mr. Wilde's literature they would have been absolutely justified in the course which Lord Queensberry had taken. Lord Queensberry undertook to prove that Mr. Wilde was posing as guilty of certain vices. Mr. Wilde never complained of the immorality of the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte." He knew no distinction, in fact, between a moral and an immoral book. Nor did he care whether the article was in its very terms blasphemous. All that Mr. Wilde said was that he did not approve of the story from a literary point of view. What was that story? It was the story of the love of a priest for the acolyte who attended him at Mass. Exactly the same idea that ran through the two letters to Lord A. Douglas ran through that story and through "Dorian Gray." Unable to persuade the rector as Mr. Wilde had been unable to persuade the public of the beauty of this love the priest and the acolyte resolved to die together upon the altar. The priest administered poison and they died together on the altar in an embrace after the priest had used the sacred words and forms of the Christian faith. When asked if that was not blasphemy Mr. Wilde said that he did not think it was. The same idea ran through those two letters which Mr. Wilde called beautiful, but which he called disgusting. Moreover, there was in this same Chameleon a poem which showed some justification for the frightful anticipations which Lord Queensberry entertained for his son. The poem was written by Lord Alfred Douglas, and was seen by Mr. Wilde before its publication. Was it not a terrible thing that a young man on the threshold of life, who had been for several years dominated by Oscar Wilde, and who had been "adored and loved" by Oscar Wilde, as the two letters proved, should thus show the tendency of his mind upon this frightful subject? What would be the horror of any man whose son wrote such a poem?

This (Friday) morning the case came to an abrupt but perhaps not unexpected ending. Mr. Carson was continuing his rigorous denunciation of Wilde and his works (Oscar was not in court) when Sir Edward Clarke touched his arm and whispered in his ear. Mr. Carson sat down, and Sir Edward, rising, said he was prepared to accept a verdict of "not guilty" on behalf of his client. The judge put two things to the jury, viz., that the justification set up by the Marquis of Queensberry was true in substance and in fact, and that the Marquis's statement was published in such a manner as to be for the public benefit. Amid loud applause the jury intimated that they considered both these things to be fact, and a few minutes later the court was empty.

The Aesthete Gives Characteristically Cynical Evidence, Replete with Pointed Epigram and Startling Paradox, and Explains His Views on Morality in Art.

Not for years has the Central Criminal Court at the Old Bailey been so densely crowded as it was this morning. People begged, bullied, and bribed for admission and the junior Bar passed in on its wig and choked all the passage ways. The indictment charges John Sholto Douglas, marquess of Queensberry, with writing and publishing a false and defamatory libel of and concerning Oscar Fingall O'Flaherty Wilde. This, however, will become the smallest part of the case. The defendant has undertaken to justify the libel, and if rumor is to be trusted in the smallest degree the plea of justification, which was delivered on Saturday, involves charges of the most serious kind against Mr. Wilde. Counsel for the plaintiff are Sir Edward Clarke Q.C., and Mr. Charles Mathews. Lord Queensberry is represented by Mr. Carson, Q.C., C.F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill, M. Besley Q.C., with whom is Mr. Monckton holds a watching brief for Lord Douglas of Hawick, elder son of the Marquess. The judge, Mr. Justice Collins, arrived at half-past ten. Mr. C. F. Gill was the first of the councel to arrive.

MR. OSCAR WILDE ENTERED

the court accompanied by Mr. C. F. Humphreys, his solicitor about a quarter past ten. He wore a dark Chesterfield coat and silk hat and a dark tie. He did not on this occasion sport the white flower which was conspicuous in his lapel at the police-court. So crowded was the court that some difficulty was experienced in finding a place for a mere principal. A commonplace-looking jury was sworn in. As soon as the judge had taken his seat, the defendant was called upon to surrender, and entered the dock by the steps at the left-hand side of the dock. Standing there in a dark-blue overcoat, short and dark, and mutton chop whiskered, with his arms on the ledge at the front of the dock, while the clerk read to him the indictment. He pleaded not guilty to the charge of libelling the plaintiff, and that the publication of the words complained of was for the public benefit.

Sir Edward Clarke plunged at once in medias res. He first read to the jury the card which Lord Queensberry left open with the porter of the Albemarle Club for the plaintiff - containing a very grave and serious allegation against Mr. Wilde's character - and pointed out that it seemed to stop short of actually charging the plaintiff with the commission of one of the most serious of offences. By the plea which the defendant had put before the court

A MUCH GRAVER ISSUE

was raised. He said the statement was true, and that it was for the public benefit it was made, and he gave particulars. There was no allegation that Mr. Wilde had been guilty of the offence mentioned, but there was a series of accusations, mentioning the names of a number of persons and alleging that Mr. Wilde had solicited them to the commission of the offence and had been guilty of indecent practices with them. The statement, Sir Edward added, was put in this form in order that the persons named, while they would assist much in cross-examination, might not have to admit that they had been guilty of the gravest possible offences. It was for those who had taken the grave responsibility of putting in such a plea to justify it. Mr. Oscar Wilde was a gentleman 43 years of age, the son of Sir William Wilde, a very distinguished Irish surgeon and oculist who died some years ago. The plaintiff's mother, Lady Wilde, is still living. The plaintiff went first to Trinity College, Dublin, where he

GREATLY DISTINGUISHED HIMSELF

for classical knowledge. He passed to Magdalen College, Oxford, and again greatly distinguished himself, taking the Newdigate Prize among other honors. Leaving the university, he devoted himself to literature in its artistic side, and many years ago became a very public person indeed, laughed at by some, appreciated by many, as representing a particular aspect of culture -the aesthetic cult. In 1884 he married the daughter of the late Mr. Horace Lloyd, Q.C., and has lived with her and their two children at Tite-st, Chelsea. Both are members of the Albemarle Club, to the porter of which the offensive card was delivered. Here he made the acquaintance of lord Alfred Douglas, and from 1891 had been friend of that young gentleman as well as of his mother, the Lady Queensberry who was the wife of the defendant till she obtained release on the ground of the defendant's misconduct. Mr. Wilde had repeatedly been her guest at Wokingham, and at Salisbury, and Lord Alfred Douglas has been the accepted friend in Mr. Wilde's own house in Chelsea, and at Cromer and Worthing and elsewhere. Until the early part of 1893 Mr. Wilde did not know the defendant except that they met once, about 1890 or 1891, an incident of which Lord Queensberry reminded Mr. Wilde when they met at luncheon. In November, 1892, Mr. Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas were

LUNCHING TOGETHER

at the Café Royal when Lord Queensberry came into the room. Mr. Wilde was aware there had been strained relations between Lord Alfred and his father, and he suggested that this was a good opportunity of making it up. Lord Alfred acted on the suggestion, brought Lord Queensberry to the table and introduced him to Mr. Wilde and the three lunched together. Lord Queensberry remained chatting with Mr. Wilde after his son left, and invited the prosecutor to visit him at Torquay. After that they saw nothing of each other till the early part of 1894 when Mr. Wilde became aware that certain statements were being made -not by Lord Queensberry - affecting his character. A man named Wood had been given some clothes by Lord Alfred Douglas, and he alleged that he found in the pocket of a coat four letters from Mr. Wilde to Lord Alfred Douglas. Whether he did find them there or whether he stole them was a matter for speculation, but the letters were handed about, and Wood asked Mr. Wilde to buy them back. He represented himself as being in need and wanting to go to America. Mr. Wilde handed him £15 or £20, and received from him three of somewhat ordinary importance. It afterwards appeared that only the letters of no importance had been given up (Sir Edward Clarke made the remark quite innocently), and the letter of some importance had been retained. At that time "A Woman of No Importance" was in rehearsal at the Haymarket Theatre and there came to Mr. Wilde through Mr. Beerbohm Tree a document which purported to be a copy of the retained letter. It had two head-names, one Babbicombe Cliff, Torquay, and the other 16, Tite-st. Shortly afterwards a man named Allan called on Mr. Wilde, and demanded ransom for the original of the letter Mr. Wilde

PEREMPTORILY REFUSED.

He said "I look upon the letter as a work of art. Now I have got a copy I do not desire the original. Go." Almost immediately afterwards a man named Claburn brought the original and surrendered it, saying it was sent by Mr. Wood. Mr. Wilde gave him a sovereign for his trouble it was supposed to be a letter of an incriminating character, and someone had taken the trouble to copy it, with mistakes, and put it about. Mr. Wilde still says that he looks upon this letter as being a kind of prose sonnet, and on 4 May, 1893, it was published in sonnet form in the Spirit Lamp, an aesthetical and satirical magazine, edited by Lord Alfred Douglas. Here is the letter:-

"My Own boy,-Your sonnet is quite lovely, and it is a marvel that those red-roseleaf lips of yours should be made no less for the madness of music and song than for the madness of kissing. Your slim-built soul walks between passion and poetry. No Hyacinthus followed Love and so madly as you in Greek days. Why are you alone in London, and when do you go to Salisbury? Do go there and cool your hands in the grey twilight of Gothic things. Come here whenever you like. It is a lovely place and only lacks you. But go to Salisbury first. Always with undying love. -Yours, OSCAR."

When Sir Edward Clarke read this letter there was a momentary and involuntary outburst of merriment. Sir Edward said it might provoke mirth in those used only to the terms of commercial correspondence, but Mr. Wilde denied that it was open to any unclean interpretation, or was more than the letter of

ONE POET TO ANOTHER.

On 14 Feb. another play of Mr. Wilde's, "The Importance of Being Earnest," was about be produced at the St. James's Theatre. In the course of the day certain information was given to the management of certain intentions of Lord Queensberry. It is a matter of history, said Sir Edward, that when the late Laureatic play, "The Promise of May," was produced Lord Queensberry got up in the theatre and in his character as an agnostic took objection to the exposition which had been made of agnostic principles in that play in the character played by Mr. Hermann Vesin. It would have been still more serious to have had a scene, and charges affecting Mr. Wilde's character made in the theatre. Lord Queensberry had booked a seat, but his money was returned and police retained at the theatre. In the evening Lord Queensberry attended, with a large bouquet made of vegetables. His intention can only be conjectured, but when he was refused admission to the theatre he left the bouquet at the box office "for Mr. Wilde." Sir Edward could not understand how his lordship could condescend to such a pantomimic expedient, even if he had cause for attacking the character of Mr. Wilde, and whether, Lord Queensberry was always and

ALTOGETHER RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS ACTIONS

would be open in doubt on the part of the jury before the case ended. No notice was taken of this intended insult. He tried to get into the gallery, but the police had their instructions and he was not able to get into any part of the theatre. On 23 Feb. Mr. Wilde went to the Albemarle Club, where the porter, a very sensible man, handed him an envelope containing the card he had received from Lord Queensberry as long before as the 18th. This was the first publication by Lord Queensberry of the accusation he was making against Mr. Wilde, and it was now incumbent on Mr. Wilde to take action in the matter. Short of actual publication Mr. Wilde would not have done anything to bring into prominence the relations between Lord Queensberry and his family, and would not now do so more than was actually necessary.

The next day Lord Queensberry was arrested. The police-court proceedings are already public property.

Sir Edward said he would not refer in detail to the accusations made against Mr. Wilde, and mention the names which he believed must have been hastily included. He would do

NOTHING TO EXTEND THE RANGE

of the case beyond the radius which was inevitable. But two of the allegations were so strange that he was bound to notice them. The first was that in July, 1890, Mr. Wilde published "a certain immoral and obscene work entitled 'The Picture of Dorian Grey,'" designed and intended to describe the relations, intimacies, and passions of certain persons of unnatural habits, tastes and practices. The second was that in December, 1894, he published a certain other immoral and obscene work in the form of a magazine entitled "The Chameleon," containing similar references and "certain immoral maxims entitled 'Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young.'" With regard to the magazine, Mr. Wilde was only a contributor, and in no way responsible for any part of it except the "Phrases," which were only such epigrammatic sentences as lent brillancy to his plays. But on seeing the magazine he found that it contained a story, "The Priest and the Acolyte," which was a disgrace to literature, an amazing thing to be written by anyone, or published by any decent publisher, and he at once saw the editor and insisted on its withdrawal. As to "Dorian Grey," it has been for five years on bookstalls and in libraries and all Sir Edward need say of it was that it was the

STORY OF A YOUNG MAN,

of good birth, whith great wealth and much personal beauty, whose friend, a distinguished painter, paints a portrait of him. He expresses the strange wish that as life goes on he might be allowed to possess the undiminished beauty of his youth, while the picture should age and fade. The strange wish is granted, his conduct in life leaves its record on the picture not on himself. He plunges into dissipation and crime, and the portrait, which is locked up from every eye but his own, grows more hideous till he can stand it no longer, but takes a knife and strikes at the picture. He instantly falls dead himself, and those who come into the room find the picture again amazingly beautiful, and on the floor a hideous and unrecognisable body of an old man. "I have read the book - for the purposes of this case," said Sir Edward," and I shall be surprised if my learned friend can point to any passage other than such as the novelist must write to describe life and produce a work of art."

This was all Sir Edward had to say.

Sidney Wright, porter, of the Albemarle Club, was the first witness. He deposed that on 18 Feb. the defendant handed to him a card on which were written the words complained of saying "Give that to Oscar Wilde." Witness made a note of the day and hour at the back of the card, and placed it in an envelope, which he handed to Mr. Wilde on 28 Feb., which was the first occasion on which he saw the prosecutor.

Mr. Oscar Wilde was himself the next witness. Ponderous and fleshy, his face a dusky red, and his hair brushed away from a middle-parting in smooth waves, he folded his hands on the front of the witness-box, and replied in carefully modulated monosyllables, accentuated by nods of the head, to Sir Edward Clarke's leading questions about his early life, already described. In 1882 he added, he published a first volume of poems, and he had since lectured both in America and England. During the last few years he had devoted himself to such dramatic literature as "Lady Windermere's Fan," A Woman of No Importance," "The Importance of Beig Earnest," and "The Ideal Husband," all of which were written between February, 1892 and February, 1895,

AND HAD ALL BEEN SUCCESSFUL.

He had also written a French play, "Salomé," which is at the present time in preparation in Paris, and had also written essays and occasional articles. He made the acquaintance of Lord Alfred Douglas in 1891 when he was brought to Tite-st. by a friend of Lady Queensberry, whose acquaintance he made later. He also came to know Lord Douglas of Hawick, and the late Lord Drumlaurig, who was the eldest son. Mr. Wilde went on to describe the Café Royal luncheon party in November, 1892, and repeated that it was at his suggestion Lord Alfred made friendly overtures to his father, from whom he had been estranged. After that he did not see Lord Queensberry till March, 1894. In the meantime the episode of the four letters had begun. The man Wood said he had found them in a suit of clothes which Lord Alfred Douglas had given to him. "I read the letters," said Mr. Wilde, "and I said, I do not consider these letters of any importance.'" Wood said, "They were stolen from me by a man named Allan, and I have been employed to get them back as they wished to extort money from you." Witness repeated that they were of no use and Wood procreded, "I am very much afraid, as they are threatening me. I want to get away to America." "He made a very strong appeal to me to enable him to go to New York, as he could find nothing to do in London. I gave him £15." Long afterwards, on 23 April, 1893,

MR. BEERBOHM TREE

handed him the copy of the other letter which has been read, and a man named Allan afterwards called and witness said, "I suppose you have come about my beautiful letter to Lord Alfred Douglas. If you had not been so foolish as to send a copy of it to Mr. Beerbohm Tree I would gladly have paid a very large sum of money for the letter, as I consider it is be a work of art." He replied, "A very serious construction has been put on that letter." Witness replied, "Ah, art is rarely intelligible to the criminal classes." Allan said he had been offered £80 for it. Witness said,"Take my advice. Go to that man and sell my letter to him for £80. I myself have never received so large a sum for any prose work, and that very small work, but I am glad to find there is anyone in England who considers that a letter of mine is worth £80." "He was somewhat taken aback," added Oscar. "I said 'I can only assure you on my word of honor that I will not pay one penny for that letter, so if you dislike this man very much you should sell my letter to him for £80.' He then, changing his manner, said he hadn't a single penny, was very poor and had been many times to try and find me. I said I could not guarantee his expenses but I would gladly give him half a sovereign. He took it and went away. I also told him, 'This letter, which is a prose poem, will shortly be published in sonnet form in a delightful magazine and I will send you a copy.' In fact the letter was made

THE BASIS OF A SONNET

in French, which was published in the Chameleon. Allan had no sooner gone than the man Cliburn came with the letter. He said, 'Allan said you were kind to him, and there is no good trying to "rent" you, as you only laugh at us. The letter was very much soiled and I said, "I think it quite unpardonable that better care was not taken of a manuscript of mine." He said he was very sorry, but it had been in so many hands I said to him 'I am afraid you are leading a wonderfully wicked life.' He said, 'There is good and bad in every one of us.' I told him that was more than possible."

All this Oscar told with the blandest air of sangfroid, caressing his tan gloves between his hands. Sir Edward passed on to the incidents of 1894. At the end of June there was in interview at 16, Tite-st. with Lord Queensberry and another gentleman -"whose name is of no importance." Lord Queensberry said, "Sit down" Oscar replied, "I don't allow you to talk to me like that. I suppose you have come to apologise for the statements you have made about my wife and me in relation to your son. I could have you up any day I choose for criminal libel for writing such letters. How dare you say such things about your son and me?" Lord Queensberry replied, "You were both kicked out of the Savoy Hotel at a moment's notice for your scandalous conduct." Oscar said, "That is a lie!" Lord Queensberry continued,"You have taken and furnished rooms for him in Piccadilly." Oscar replied, "Someone has been telling you a series of lies." Lord Queensberry said, "I hear you were thoroughly well blackmailed last year for a disgusting letter that you wrote to my son." Oscar replied, "The letter was

A BEAUTIFUL LETTER,

and I never write except for publication." Oscar said, "You accuse me of leading your son into vice." Lord Queensberry replied, "I don't say you did it, but you look it and you pose as it."

An applausive tapping in the gallery followed this statement. "If I hear the slightest repetition of that noise I will have the court cleared," said the judge.

Mr. Wilde continued, "Lord Queensberry said, 'If I catch you and my son together again I will thrash you." I said, 'I do not know what the Queensberry rules are, but the Oscar Wilde rule is to shoot at sight.' I then told him to leave my house. He said he would not do so. Itold him I would have him put out by the police." The scene ended with recriminations of a similar kind. Mr. Wilde went into the hall and said to his servant, "This is the Marquess of Queensberry, the most infamous brute in London. Never allow him to enter my house again. Should he attempt to come in you may send for the police."

Was it for that you had taken rooms in Picadilly for his son? - No.

Was there any foundation of any kind for the statement that you and any of his sons were expelled from the Savoy Hotel? -It is perfectly untrue.

Next Sir Edward turned to the production of "The Importance of Being Earnest," and the incident of

THE VEGETABLE BOUQUET.

He said the production was very successful, and he was afterwards called, and bowed his acknowledgments. Mr. Wilde briefly denied responsibility for the character of the Chameleon, and said he knew nothing about the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte" till he saw the magazine, and expressed his disapproval of it to the editor. As to "Dorian Grey," the moral of that was that the man who tried to destroy his conscience destroyed himself. There was no truth whatsoever in any one of the accusation of misconduct made in the plea of justification.

Then Mr. Carson rose to cross-examine. He began by demonstrating to Mr. Wilde's surprise, that Mr. Wilde is over 40, having been born in October, 1854. Lord Alfred Douglas, he said, is 24. Witness said he was aware of Lord Queensberry's wish that the intimacy with his son should cease, but it had continued -down to the present moment.They had stayed together in various places, including several London hotels. Witness, in addition to his house at Tite-st, had had rooms at 10 and 11 St. James's-place, from October, 1894, to the beginning of April 1894. Lord Alfred Douglas had stopped there. They had been abroad together too. In the Chameleon there was not only the prose poem, but also contributions by Lord Alfred Douglas, written, witness believed, at Oxford.

Did you approve of them? - They were

EXCEEDINGLY BEAUTIFUL POEMS.

The one "In Praise of Shame"? - Yes.

The other "The Two Loves"? - Yes.

"I have a love but dare not speak his name"? - Yes.

You think that did not convey any improper suggestion? - Yes.

You think, I believe, that there is no such thing as an immoral book? - Yes.

Then you do not think "The Priest and the Acolyte" was immoral? - It was worse; it was badly written. (Laughter.) I thought the end of it violated every artistic art of beauty.

Did you think it blasphemous? - I thought it wrong.

Being pressed, the prosecutor said he did not think it blasphemous. For some reason Mr. Carson labored this point. Oscar denied absolutely that because his poem was in the same magazine as this story, the magazine of an undergraduate, he was guilty of Lord Queensberry's accusation. He stroked and fondled his nose and cheeks, while Lord Queensberry remained immovably fixed in his position at the front of the dock. Presently the cross-examination got into deeper waters still, and Oscar was found saying, "I don't believe that any book or work of art ever produces any effect on conduct at all" -and was forthwith launched upon a long discussion of the art and morals question with Mr. Carson. He presently said that his writings must not be tested by truth in the sense of correspondence with fact. Anything was good, he said, which stimulated thought. To realise oneself through pleasure was finer than to realise oneself through pain. And so forth, and

DEEPER AND DEEPER STILL,

till the Irish Q.C. was left hopelessly floundering. Oscar blandly ran his fingers through his hair, and beamed on his cross-examiner, while overwhelming him with metaphysical definitions and "half-truths put in an amusing paradoxical form."

"What the sins of 'Dorian Grey' are no one knows," Mr. Wilde had written in answer to a reviewer. "People might think it meant unnatural vice?" suggested Mr. Carson. "Every man would see his own son in 'Dorian Grey'" said Mr. Wilde.

The case is proceeding.