Bristol Mercury - Tuesday, May 21, 1895

At the Central Criminal Court, London, yesterday, before Mr Justice Wills, Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, 33, of no occupation, were indicted a second time for certain misdemeanours.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q. C. applied that the cases of the two defendants might be taken seperately.

The Solicitor General said the results of the defendants being so tried would be that matter would have to be introduced which might be unfair to the other defendant not on his trial.

The Judge said that, having carefully considered the matter, his notion was that the case ought to be taken seperately.

Sir Edward Clarke applied next that the case of Wilde be taken first.

The Judge said that he could not interfere with the discretion of the Solicitor General in this matter.

The Solicitor General elected to proceed with the case of Taylor first.

Sir Edward Clarke desired to make a further application, having in view the course which the Crown had taken--viz, that the trial of Mr Wilde be taken at the next session.

The Judge said that the application had better be made at the conclusion of the case of Taylor.

The Solicitor General opened the case and evidence was taken.

Mr Grain addressed the Court on behalf of Taylor and had not concluded his speech when the Court adjourned.

Before leaving, his Lordship asked the Jury to keep an open mind on the case, and not to form any conclusion until they had heard everything that had to be said on the case.

The Morning Post - Thursday, May 2, 1895

At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Charles, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, aged 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, aged 33, of no occupation, on an indictment charging them with certain misdemeanours.

Mr. C. F. Gill and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys represented Oscar Wilde; Mr. J. P. Grain defended Taylor.

The speeches for the defence and the reply for the Crown were concluded the previous day.

Mr. Justice Charles, in summing up, commented on the importance of the case to the accused and on the gravity of the charges. No unfavourable impression ought to be drawn from a work like "Dorian Gray," as, in his opinion, a writer ought not to be confounded with the persons he created; nor ought the result of the Queensberry case to weigh with them in the least. The case was an important one to the community. The testimony that had been adduced by some of the witnesses was obviously tainted evidence, and it required strong corroboration. It was a question for the Jury to decide if there existed independent and untainted corroboration. His Lordship dismissed from consideration the literary aspects of the case, being of opinion that Wilde was not responsible for the writings of others. If they were satisfied that the evidence supported the charges, they ought fearlessly to say so by their verdict. Wilde was a man of high intellectual gifts and education; Taylor belonged to a good class of persons, and they might think it unreasonable to suppose that they would have acted in the manner suggested. The Jury, however, could not disregard the evidence, and it was only upon the evidence that their verdict ought to be determined.

The Jury retired to consider their verdict, and, after an absence of three hours and three quarters, they returned into Court, when the foreman said that they were unable to agree to a verdict.

Sir E. Clarke asked that an acquittal be entered on the conspiracy counts, which the prosecution withdrew.

The Jury returned a formal verdict of not guilty in respect of these counts and two other counts.

Sir E. Clarke applied for bail for Wilde. He did not think that the Crown would oppose the application after what had occurred.

Mr. Clarke Hall applied for bail for Taylor.

Mr. Gill did not desire to say anything about the matter of bail.

His Lordship—I do not feel able to accede to the application.

Mr. Gill said that the case would certainly be tried again.

The Jury were discharged, and the case was ordered to stand over until the next Sessions.

The prisoners were removed in custody.

Highlighted DifferencesNot significantly similar