Compare Documents

In the Court of Queen's Bench to-day, before Justice Sir Alfred Wills and a Grand Jury, the case of Oscar Wilde and the man Taylor, alleged to be his confederate, charged with flagrant criminal immorality, was brought up for retrial.

Justice Wills suggested in his charge to the Grand Jury that Wilde and Taylor, in whose case the jury in the first trial on 1st May failed to agree, should be tried separately.

The Grand Jury accepted the suggestion of the judge, and it was decided that Taylor's case should be tried first.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., who appeared for Wilde, supported the judge's suggestion that the cases of Wilde and Taylor should be tried separately, but urged that the hearing of Wilde's case should be postponed til next session.

Counsel for the Crown opposed the application, and Justice Wills stated that he would await the result of Taylor's trial before finally deciding on the application to postpone the hearing in Wilde's case.

The evidence given by Parker in the first trial as to the conduct of Wilde, in Taylor's room, remains unshaken.

There was an enormous public interest taken to-day in the proceedings before the Criminal Court, and a very large attendance at the Old Bailey.

The occasion was the presentation for re-trial of Oscar Wilde, the famous dramatic author, and his alleged accomplice, Alfred Taylor.

These men underwent trial at the beginning of the month, when two accusations were preferred. Oscar Wilde was charged, under the provisions of the 11th section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, with committing an abominable offence, and also with conspiring with Alfred Taylor for the purpose of the commission of similar offences. Like charges were made against Taylor. The conspiracy case utterly broke down and the jury, under direction, found the accused not guilty. On the other charge the jury were unable to agree in regard to either of the accused, and the latter were consequently remanded.

The re-trial, which opened to-day, was before Mr Justice Wills.

Charging the Grand Jury, to whom, in the first instance, the cases are sent, Sir Justice Wills suggested that as the jury had failed to agree in the former trial, and the charge of conspiracy no longer stood, Wilde and Taylor ought now to be presented separately.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., who appeared for Oscar Wilde, approved of his Honor's suggestion, and further agreed that the case of Wilde ought to be postponed until the next session of the Court.

The Grand Jury accepted the learned judge's view and decided that Taylor should be tried first.

Sir Edward Clarke renewed his application that Wilde's trial be postponed until next session. Mr F. Lockwood, Q.C., who appeared to prosecute for the Crown, opposed the application.

Mr Justice Wills said that he would not deal with the matter at all at that stage. He preferred to await the issue of the trial of Taylor, when he would finally decide whether there seemed to be reason for granting a postponement of the trial of the other prisoner.

Oscar Wilde was then admitted to bail.

The taking of evidence was at once proceeded with in the case against Taylor. The principal witness again was the young man Charles Parker, a valet out of place, who figured so prominently in both the first trial and as a witness for the defence in the abortive proceedings taken by Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry. Parker again testified to the character of Taylor's three rooms in Little College street, Westminster. These apartments were sumptuously furnished, and ever heavy with perfumes, and from them daylight was always excluded. The witness remained steadfast, under cross-examination, as to the visitations to and conduct of Oscar Wilde at these rooms.

The other witnesses repeated their several stories, in much the same terms as reported in connection with the previous trial.

Counsel for the defence of Taylor claimed the discharge of the accused on the ground that the only material evidence against him came from a tainted source — from the mouth of the witness Charles Parker.

The case was not concluded when the Court adjourned for the day.