Compare Documents

English files by the latest mail state that in the Central Criminal Court on the 2nd of April, before Mr. Justice Collins, John Sholto Douglas, Marquis of Queensberry, was indicted for unlawfully and maliciously writing and publishing a false, malicious, and defamatory libel of and concerning Mr. Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde. The case excited great public interest, and the court was crowded. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and put in a plea alleging that the libel was true, and that it was published for the public interest. Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Matthews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys appeared for the prosecution; Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C.F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill defended. Mr Besley, Q.C., and Mr. Monckton watched the case for a person interested.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., in opening the case, said that the libel was published in the form of a card, which was left by Lord Queensberry at a club to which Mr. Oscar Wilde belonged. It was a visiting card of Lord Queensberry's with his name printed upon it and it had written upon it certain words which formed the libel complained of. The words of the libel were not directly an accusation of the gravest of all offences - the suggestion was that there was no guilt of the actual offence, but that in some way or other the person of whom those words were written did appear - nay, desired to appear and pose to be a person inclined to the commission of that gravest of all offences. But in the plea which defendant has brought before the Court there were a series of accusations mentioning the names of persons, and it was said with regard to those persons that Mr. Wilde had solicited them to commit with him the grave offence, and that he had been guilty with each and all of them of indecent practices. In 1893 a man named Wood, to whom some clothes had been given by Lord Alfred Douglas, alleged that he had found in the pocket of a coat four letters addressed by Mr. Wilde to Lord Alfred, and called upon Mr. Wilde in 1893, representing that he was in great distress and was in need of monetary assistance to go to America. He produced some of the letters, and Mr. Wilde, more out of sympathy than anything else, gave him £15 or £20 for them. They were mere ordinary letters of no consequence or importance whatever. But, as generally happened, a further demand for an alleged suppressed letter was made later on, when it became known that Mr. Oscar Wilde's play A Woman of No Importance was about to be produced at the Haymarket Theatre. That letter was in the nature of a prose sonnet, and Mr. Wilde had ideas of publishing it - in fact, it was paraphrased in an æsthetic magazine called the Spirit Lamp, edited by Lord Alfred Douglas. The letter was as follows:

"My own Boy, - Your sonnet is quite lovely, and it is a marvel that those red-rose leaf 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 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 gray 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."

The words of that communication, Sir Edward Clarke continued, might seem extravagant to their more prosaic and commercial experiences, but Mr. Wilde was a poet, and the letter was considered by him as a prose sonnet, and as an expression of true poetic feeling, and had no relation whatever to the hateful and repulsive suggestions incorporated in the plea in this case. Early in 1894 Mr. Wilde became aware that the marquis was writing letters which affected his character, and during the year Mr. Wilde ordered that Lord Queensberry should never be admitted to his house. On February 28th Mr. Wilde went to the Albemarle Club, and there received from the hall-porter the libellous card left by Lord Queensberry on the 18th of that month. Sidney Wright, hall-porter of the Albemarle Club, of which Mr. and Mrs. Oscar Wilde are members, having given evidence, Mr. Oscar Wilde was examined by Sir Edward Clarke. In November, 1892, he was lunching with Lord Alfred Douglas at the Café Royal. He knew there had been some estrangement between Lord Queensberry and Lord Alfred Douglas. On that occasion Lord Queensberry was at the Café Royal, and at the suggestion of witness Lord Alfred Douglas went across and shook hands with Lord Queensberry, and a friendly conversation ensued. In 1893 witness heard that some letters which he had addressed to Lord Alfred Douglas had come into the hands of certain persons. A man named Wood told witness that he had found some letters in a suit of clothes which Lord Alfred Douglas had given him. When Wood entered the room he said to witness "I suppose you will think very badly of me." Witness replied, "I heard that you had some letters of mine to Lord Alfred Douglas, which you certainly ought to have handed back to him." Wood then handed him three or four letters, and said that they had been stolen from him by a man named Allen, and that he had had to employ a detective to get them back. Witness read the letters and said he did not think them of any importance. Wood said he was very much afraid of staying in London on account of the men who had taken the letters from him, and he wanted money to go to America. Witness asked him what better opening he would have as a clerk in America than he had in England. Wood repeated that he wanted to go to America, as he was afraid of the men who had taken the letters from him. Witness handed him £15 and retained the letters. In April, 1893, Mr. Beerbohm Tree handed witness what purported to be a copy of a letter. A man named Allen subsequently called upon the witness, who felt that Allen was a man who wanted money from him, and he said, "I suppose you have come about my beautiful letters to Lord Alfred Douglas? If you had not been so foolish as to send a copy to Mr. Beerbohm Tree I should have been very glad to pay you a large sum for the letter as I consider that it is a work of art." Allen said a very curious construction could be put on the letter. The witness said in reply, "Art is rarely intelligible to the criminal classes." Allen said, "A man had offered me £60 for it." Witness said, "If you take my advice you will go to him and sell my letter to him for £60. I myself have never received so large a sum for any prose work of that length, but I am glad to find that there is someone in England who will pay such a large sum for a letter of mine." Allen said the man was out of town. The witness said the man would come back and added, "I assure you on my word of honour that I shall pay nothing for the letter." Allen changing his manner, said he had not a single penny and was very poor, and that he had been on many occasions trying to find witness to talk about the letter. Witness said he could not guarantee his cab expenses, but handed him half a sovereign. Witness said to Allen, "The letter will shortly be published as a sonnet in a delightful magazine, and I will send you a copy." That letter was the basis of a sonnet which was published in French in the Spirit Lamp in 1893. Allen went away. About five or six minutes after a man called Clyburn came in. Witness said to him, "I cannot be bothered any more about the letter. I don't care two pence about it." Clyburn said, "Allen has asked me to give it back to you." Witness said, "Why does he give it me back?" Clyburn said, "Well, he says that you were kind to him, and that there is no use trying to rent you, as you only laugh at us." Witness looked at the letter, and, seeing that it was extremely soiled, said, "I think it quite unpardonable that better care was not taken of an original letter of mine." He said he was very sorry - it had been in so many hands. Witness took the letter then, and said, "Well, I will accept the letter back, and you can thank Mr. Allen from me for all the anxiety he has shown about the letter." He gave Clyburn half-a-sovereign for his trouble. Witness said, "I am afraid you are leading a wonderfully wicked life." He replied, "There is good and bad in every one of us." Witness told him he was a born philosopher. He then left. That letter had remained in witness' possession ever since, and he now produced it. Witness afterwards became aware that Lord Queensberry was making suggestions with regard to his character and behaviour. Those suggestions were not made in letters addressed to witness. On June 16th, 1894, Lord Queensberry and a gentleman called upon witness. The interview took place in his library. Lord Queensberry said to him, "Sit down." Witness said, "I don't allow any man to talk to me like that. I suppose you have come to apologize for the letter you have written. I could have you up any day I chose for a criminal libel for writing such a letter." He said, "The letter is privileged, as it was written to my son." Witness said, "How dare you say such things about your son and me." He said, "You were both kicked out of the Savoy Hotel at a moment's notice for your disgusting conduct." Witness said, "That is a lie." He said, "You have taken furnished rooms for him in Piccadilly." Witness said, "Some one has been telling you an absurd lot of lies about me and your son. I have not done anything of the kind." He said, "I hear that you were thoroughly well blackmailed for a letter which you sent to my son." Witness said, "The letter was a beautiful letter, and I never write except for publication." Witness then said to him, "Do you seriously accuse your son and me?" He said, "I don't say you are it; but you look it, and you pose as it. If I catch you and my son together again at any public restaurant I will thrash you." Witness said, "I do not know what the Queensberry rules are. The Oscar Wilde rule is to shoot at sight," and he then told Lord Queensberry to leave his house. He said he would not do so. Witness told him he would have him put out by the police. He said that it was a disgusting scandal. Witness said: - "If it is so, you are the author of that scandal and no one else. The letters you have written about me are infamous, and I see that you are merely trying to ruin your son through me. I will not have in my house a brute like you." Witness went into the hall, followed by Lord Queensberry and the gentleman. He said to his servant, pointing to Lord Queensberry, "This is the Marquis of Queensberry, the most infamous brute in London. You are never to allow him to enter my house again, and should he attempt to come in you must send for the police." Lord Queensberry then left. It was not the fact that witness had taken rooms in Piccadilly for his son. It was perfectly untrue that witness had been required to leave the Savoy Hotel. Witness had nothing whatever to do with the Chameleon except to send his contribution, and he knew nothing whatever about the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte" contained in it. He highly disapproved of "The Priest and the Acolyte," and expressed that disapproval to the editor. Witness' attention had been called to the allegations in the plea impugning his conduct with different persons. There was not the slightest truth in any one of those allegations.

Replying to Mr. Carson, Q.C., in cross-examination, Mr. Oscar Wilde said that he was 40 years of age in October last, and Lord Alfred Douglas was about 24. He had known the latter since he was 20 or 21. Notwithstanding Lord Queensberry's protest, his intimacy with Lord Alfred Douglas continued to that moment, and he had stayed with him at many places, and very recently at Monte Carlo. Lord Alfred Douglas wrote poems for the Chameleon which he himself thought beautiful, and which contained no improper suggestions whatever. Witness considered that not only was the story "The Priest and the Acolyte" immoral, but worse, inasmuch as it was badly written. (Laughter). It was altogether offensive, and perfect twaddle. He took no steps to express disapproval of the Chameleon, because it would have been beneath his dignity as a man of letters to associate himself with the mere effusions of an illiterate undergraduate. He did not believe that any book or work of art had any effect on morality whatever. In writing he did not consider the effect of creating or inciting morality or immorality; he aimed neither at good nor evil, but simply tried to make a thing with some quality of beauty. Being questioned as to the morality of some of his expressions in the Chameleon article, Mr. Wilde said there was no such thing as morality or immorality in thought, but there was such a thing as immoral emotion. The realisation of one's self was the prime aim in life, and to do so through pleasure was finer than through pain. On that point he was on the side of the Greeks. He still believed that, as he then wrote, a truth ceased to be true when more than one person believed it. That would be his metaphysical definition of truth - something so personal that could never be appreciated by two minds. The condition of perfection was idleness; the life of contemplation was the highest life. There was no such thing as a moral or an immoral book, to his mind. Books were either well or badly written. Well written, they produced a sense of beauty - the highest sense of which a human being could be capable - and badly written, a sense of disgust. No work of art ever put forward views, for views belonged to people who were not artists. The views of the illiterate were unaccountable; he was concerned only with his own views, and not with those of other people. He had found wonderful exceptions to the rule that the majority of people were Philistines or illiterates, but he was afraid that as a rule most people did not live up - for want of culture - to the position he asserted in these matters, and were not even cultivated enough to draw a distinction between a good and a bad book. He had no knowledge of the views of ordinary individuals, and was therefore unable to say whether the sentiments enunciated in "Dorian Gray" might lead ordinary individuals to see a certain tendency in them. Being vigorously cross-examined by Mr. Carson as to certain passages in "Dorian Gray," he denied that he had suggested anything to which exception could be taken, adding, amid laughter, in which everyone joined, that he had never given adoration to anyone except himself. There were people in the world, he regretted to say, who could not understand the intense devotion, affection and admiration that an artist could feel for a wonderful and beautiful personality. Being brought to the facts of the case, apart from these generalities, Mr. Wilde said he wrote the letter to Lord Alfred Douglas from Torquay, the latter being at the Savoy Hotel. He thought it a beautiful and a poetical letter - the letter of an artist and a poet. He had never written to other people in the same strain, nor even to Lord Alfred Douglas again, for he did not repeat himself in style. Mr. Carson here read a letter to Lord Alfred Douglas from the witness in similar terms to the other, which the witness explained by saying that it was a tender expression of his great admiration for Lord Alfred. Being interrogated as to various allegations in the plea of justification, Mr. Wilde gave them an indignant and emphatic denial. On the 4th of April, in the course of further cross-examination, Mr. Wilde was questioned about his intercourse with the man Taylor, and also about his acquaintance with young men named Mavor, Scarfe, Conway, Atkins, Parker, and Granger, of inferior social position, with whom he had dined several times, and to whom he had given presents. He remarked on several occasions that he cared nothing for "social position"; and he denied that he had ever misconducted himself with any of the young men named. In the witness's re-examination, letters were put in and read which had passed between Lord Queensberry and Lord Alfred Douglas with regard to the intimacy of the latter with Mr. Wilde. One telegram addressed to the Marquis by Lord Alfred was as follows: - "What a funny little man you are. -A.D." Mr. Carson, Q.C., in opening the case for the defence, said that Lord Queensberry withdrew nothing of what he had said or written. All he had done had been with premeditation and a determination to try and save his son. The learned counsel commented on the prosecutor's familiarity with young men who were gentlemen's servants and in similar positions, and also on the tendency of the prosecutor's writings. Eventually the charge against the Marquis of Queensberry was dismissed, and Mr. Wilde and Taylor, as the result of the revelations made in the case, were arrested and charged with grave criminal offences. [As our cablegrams have shown, the jury empannalled to try their case disagreed and were discharged. Accused will be placed upon their trial again. Meantime Mr. Wilde has been admitted to bail, himself in £2,500 and two sureties of £1,250 each.]

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.