Bristol Mercury - Thursday, May 2, 1895

At the Old Bailey, London, yesterday, before Mr Justice Charles, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, aged 40, and Alfred Taylor, aged 33, on an indictment charging them with certain misdemeanours.

Mr Justice Charles began his summing up to the jury by remarking that the prosecuting counsel had acted wisely in withdrawing the charge of conspiracy, and upon that part of the case he should direct a verdict of not guilty. It was a rule of law that the uncorroborative testimony of an accomplice could not be accepted, but there was corroboration of the witnesses in this case in the cease in which the law required it. Parker, Atkins, and Wood had been properly described as blackmailers, and being also accomplices, the jury, in considering the details of their evidence, would have to weigh their character. His Lordship briefly commented on Wilde v. Queensberry, and passing to the literary part of the case, said he did not think that in a criminal case the jury ought to place an unfavorable inference upon the fact that Wilde was the author of "Dorien Gray." In the last century noble minded men penned volumes which it was painful for a modest person to peruse. Wilde could not be held responsible for "The Priest and the Acolyte," the work of another. He called particular attention to Wilde's answers given in cross-examination, in which he denied that his letters to Lord Alfred Douglas breathed an unnatural passion. Upon this the jury would exercise their own judgement. The learned Judge next approached consideration of the charges in the order of their dates, Shelley was undoubtedly in the position of an accomplice, but his evidence was sufficiently corroborated to entitle the jury to consider it. Long quotations were read by his Lordship from Shelley's letters, in one of which the writer said, "I am afraid sometimes I am not very sane." To deal with Shelley's evidence would be an interesting and responsible part of the jury's duty. There was proof of excitability, and Shelley had told a nauseous tale, but to talk of him as an insane man would be to exaggerate the effect of the letters. His Lordship severely commented on the character of Frederick Atkins, whose impudent denial and subsequent admission of the facts in the Pimilico blackmailing incident had proved him to be untruthful and unscrupulous. The Savoy hotel incident was a most anxious part of inquiry, and in regard to it he must observe that there was nothing against the the character of the Crown witnesses. After a reference to the part played by Wood in the matter of the Douglas and Wilde letters, his Lordship reviewed the evidence against Taylor in respect of the alleged acts of indecency with Charles and William Parker. The inquiry, said his Lordship in conclusion, was of great importance to the public, and he committed the questions to the jury with perfect confidence.

The jury retired to consider their verdict at 1.35.

At 5.15 the jury returned into Court and informed his Lordship that they could not agree upon certain of the questions submitted to them.

Replying to questions later, the foreman said there was no possibility of agreement.

Upon the count of conspiracy his Lordship had early in the day directed a verdict of not guilty, and a formal finding was now arrived at on this and other minor counts, but the Judge observed that all material questions were unhappily undecided. He discharged the jury and refused to bail Wilde and Taylor, informing Sir E. Clarke that the application must be made in chambers.

Mr Gill, who appeared for the Treasury in the prosecution, notified that the case would be retried next Session.

The prisoners, who had been brought back to court for the purpose of hearing the result, were then removed in custody. Wilde engaged in conversation for a few minutes with one of his legal representatives.

The Morning Post - Friday, May 24, 1895

At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Wills, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours.

The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke and Mr. Charles Mathews defended.

In continuation of the case for the Crown, William Parker gave evidence relative to his association with Wilde. Several witnesses were called, employed at the Savoy Hotel, to speak to alleged incidents which occurred with persons unknown in March, 1893: and a considerable portion of the rest of the time of the Court was engaged in the reading of the transcript of the shorthand note taken of the evidence of Wilde at the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for alleged libel. The evidence of the arrest of Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel after the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry was given by Detective-inspector Richards and Detective-sergeant Brockwell, of Scotland- yard, and the case for the prosecution closed.

Sir Edward Clarke submitted that there was no evidence to go to the Jury on the count relative to the alleged incidents at the Savoy Hotel.

His Lordship admitted that the question was very near the line, and said that, should occasion arise, he would feel justified in reserving the point for the consideration of the Court of Appeal. He felt, however, that it was a matter the responsibility of determining which ought to rest with the Jury.

Sir Edward Clarke submitted next that there was no evidence as required by law to corroborate Shelley, and that, therefore, the count affecting him ought to be withdrawn from the Jury, it being the long-established practice of the Courts in criminal cases to decline to invite juries to act on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice.

His Lordship expressed an opinion that the necessary corroboration required within the meaning of the wording of the rules laid down by the Judges, and in accordance with the general practice of Criminal Courts respecting accomplices, was not present in regard to Shelley, the count in respect of whom he should withdraw from the consideration of the Jury.

Sir Edward Clarke moved next to get the count affecting Wood withdrawn on similar grounds.

The Solicitor-General protested against any decision being given other than by the Jury on these issues, the matters being, in his opinion, purely questions for them to determine.

After some discussion, his Lordship ruled that the case of Wood should go to the Jury.

At this stage the trial was adjourned until to-day, when the defence will be opened. Wilde was released on bail.

Highlighted DifferencesNot significantly similar