Compare Documents

The Importance of Being Early was never better [...] than at the Old Bailey this morning, when long before 10 o’clock every seat where a pressman could sit had at least a couple of competitors for it and the body of the court was grey with the [...] of the [...] ones come to [...] the prosecution of John Sholto [...] Marquis of Queensberry, for [...] Oscar Fingal O’Flahertie Wilde.

[...] miserable hovel, known [...] as the Old Court have not been [...] demonstrated since the Neill- [...] drew everyone to the Old Bailey. The building seems to have been constructed upon the principle of affording space where it is not wanted, and the roomiest place of all is the dock, where 10 people could sit in comfort.

The counsel in the case formed quite a numerous body. Sir Edward Clarke, Q. C., Mr. Charles Mathews and Mr. Humphreys for the prosecution, Mr. E. H. Carson, Q. C., C. F. Gill, and A. Gill for the defence; Mr. Besley, Q. C., and Mr. Monckton watching the case on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of his defendant.

OSCAR ENTERS.

Soon after 10 o’clock the tall figure of Oscar Fingal O’Flahertie Wilde was to be seen squeezing its way through the thronged court towards the solicitors’ table. He wore a long Melton cloth overcoat and a colonial-shaped top-hat, but did not sport the white flower which he affected at the police-court proceedings.

After an interval that seemed like a day the three knocks were heard that herald the approach of the judge, and Mr. Justice Collins entered and took his seat.

The Marquis of Queensberry at once stepped into the dock, had the indictment road to him, and pleaded Not guilty, that the libel was true, and that it was for the public benefit that it was printed.

THE CASE OPENED.

Sir Edward Clarke at once rose and began the case. He told how the Marquis called at the Albemarle Club and left a card "To Oscar Wilde," which contained words that were gross and libellous. The accusation against Mr. Wilde was one of the gravest that could be made. But the card was not the only matter with which they would have to deal. By the plea put before the Court a much graver issue was raised. There was no accusation in the plea that Mr. Oscar Wilde had been guilty of a criminal offence, but there were given the names of a number of persons whom he was accused of inciting to commit such offences and with whom he was charged with improper conduct. Sir Edward could understand that, for if such witnesses were called and cross-examined no doubt they would be compelled to admit much, but probably they would not be prepared to admit that they themselves had committed such offences as were the subject of the present inquiry. Then, briefly, Sir Edward sketched Oscar Wilde’s career, his parentage, his career at Trinity College, Dublin, and Magdalen, at Oxford, where he obtained the Newdigate, and his subsequent literary and artistic career. He became a public character "laughed at by some, appreciated by many, but representing a particular phase of an artistic movement." He married the daughter of Horace Lloyd, Q. C., and had spent a happy, domestic life. At his house in Tite-street he first made the acquaintance of Lord Alfred Douglas, of whom he ever since had been the friend, and not only his friend but the friend of his brother and of his mother, Lady Queensberry, who was the wife of the defendant until she obtained release owing to the defendant’s misconduct.

AN INCIDENT AT THE CAFE ROYAL.

In November, 1892, Mr. Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas were lunching at the Café Royal, when Lord Queensberry came in. He was introduced to Mr. Wilde, and recalled to him that they had met some 10 years before. They chatted, discussed a probable visit to Torquay, and parted. From that time Mr. Wilde saw nothing more of Lord Queensberry until 1894, but during that time he became aware that statements were made affecting his character. There was a man named Wood, who had been given some clothes by Lord Alfred Douglas, who alleged that in the pockets he found some letters of Mr. Oscar Wilde to Lord Alfred. Early in 1893 Wood came to Mr. Wilde with these letters, and represented that he was in trouble, and wished to go to America. Mr. Wilde gave him £15 or £20 for the letters, mere ordinary letters, of no importance. Then the time changed to during the run of Oscar’s first stage success. Mr. Beerbohm Tree handed Mr. Wilde what purported to be a copy of a letter of Mr Wilde’s. Soon afterwards a man named Allen called and offered to tell him the original. Mr. Wilde refused. He said, "I look upon that letter as a work of art. I should have desired to possess a copy, but as I have that I have no desire to possess the original." He gave Allen a sovereign for his trouble, and Allen was so gratified that he sent the original to Mr. Wilde. Mr. Wilde told Allen that he looked upon the letter as a "prose sonnet," and should probably publish it.

A PROSE SONNET.

Presently Sir Edward read the letter. Here it is:

"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 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."

After the sensation of the letter the story came back to the more dull, prosaic fact that Mr. Wilde became aware that Lord Queensberry was writing letters about him that were not exactly prose sonnets, but which made imputations against him of a serious character, in 1894 matters came to a head in an interview at which Mr Wilde forbade Lord Queensberry his house. Next Sir Edward briefly sketched the circumstances surrounding the first sight of "The Importance of Being Earnest," the appearance of Lord Queensberry with his bouquet of vegetables, and his ejectment from the theatre after an unsuccessful attempt to escalade the gallery. Cleverly, Sir Edward made a point of the laughter which followed. He could not complain of it, he said, whether Lord Queensberry was entirely responsible for his action was a point they would have seriously to consider before the end of the case.

THE DAY OF THE LIBEL.

The story was now brought up to the fateful day of the libel, the last day of February this year, when Oscar called at the Albemarle and found the card, which had been lying there since the 18th. In the last stages of a splendid opening speech Sir Edward made a slip of the tongue in saying Rosebery for Queensberry, and almost fiercely rebuked the laugh which followed. "I feel some resentment," he said, "at the action taken of a slip unworthy of notice."

In a few sentences Sir Edward dealt with the pleadings ; he would say nothing about the names mentioned therein, but there were two clauses dealing with the publication of "Dorian Gray" and the "Chameleon," the presence of which he was unable to explain. He could only suppose that the defence, fearing their case might break down, had dragged those publications in to have something to cling to in case their witnesses failed them. So far as the "Chameleon" was concerned Mr. Wilde was responsible only for his own contribution. In that magazine there was a story—"The Priest and the Acolyte"—which was a disgrace to literature, which it was extraordinary anyone could write, which it was more extraordinary anyone could publish, a story which Mr. Wilde condemned as bad literature, and induced the editor to withdraw so soon as he saw it. Then with a wonderful beauty of expression and felicity of language Sir Edward sketched the strange story of Dorian Gray, while the Court listened enthralled with the weird, imaginative force of the picture.

It deals with the story of a young man, of good birth, with 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 door a hideous and unrecognisable body of an old man.

"I have read the book," concluded Sir Edward, "and I defy the defence within those covers to find anything more than a writer must write if he wishes to portray such a story."

OSCAR IN THE BOX.

As in the former proceedings, the hall porter of the Albemarle was the first witness. He was shown the card with the words written on the back. He identified it as the one left by Lord Queensberry for Mr. Wilde. He put it in an envelope and wrote Mr. Wilde’s name and the date.

This witness was not cross-examined, and at once Mr. Wilde was called and examined by Sir Edward Clarke.

He said he was 39 years of age, and was briefly taken through his Dublin and Oxford career. He took his degree in 1873, came down at once, and has since then devoted himself to Art and Literature. He published poems, and lectured in England and America. Lately he had devoted himself to dramatic literature, has produced four plays, and has another, "Salome," in which Sarah Bernhardt is to appear in Paris. He was taken all over the ground covered by Sir Edward’s opening, the only additional fact being that the two sons of his marriage are aged nine and 10.

THE PEER IN THE DOCK.

Lord Queensberry, who disdained a seat, stood in front of the dock with his arms folded, occasionally changing his attitude to make a note of something that occurred to him. While Oscar was in the box the peer looked implacably across the court to where the poet, with his hyacinthine locks and air of easy abandon, almost lolled in the witness-box.

OSCAR’S EVIDENCE.

The story followed closely on the lines of the opening, but the incident of Wood and the letter was elaborated. Wood said, "I suppose you think very badly of me." He replied "I hear you have letters of mine, you should certainly have given them back to me." Wood then took out three or four letters, said they had been stolen from him and had cost him money to get back. Witness replied he did not think the letters of any value at all. Wood then said he did not want to stay in London, he wanted to go to America as he was being threatened, and after some conversation, and a very strong appeal by Wood, the witness advanced him £15 to go the New York.

The examination passed on to the visit of Allen. He knew Allen at once by description, and 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 you a very large sum of money for the letter as I consider it to be a work of art.

He said : "A very curious construction could be put upon that letter."

Witness replied, "Ah! were it not for a criminal process."

The conversation proceeded.

Allen : A man has offered £60 for it.

Wilde : If you take my advice you will go and sell it. I myself have never received so large a sum for so small a piece of prose, but I am glad to find that someone considers a letter of mine worth £60.

Allen : The man is out of town.

Wilde : But he is sure to come back. As far as I am concerned I can assure you that I will not pay one penny for the letter.

Mr. Wilde then refused to discuss the matter further, whereupon Allen said he was poor, and begged. Witness gave him half a sovereign and he went away.

One additional thing he told Allen. He said :

"This letter is a prose poem and will shortly be published in sonnet form in a delightful magazine. I will send you a copy."

AN ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT.

About six minutes after Allen went a man named Clyburn came, brought the letter and said Allen had asked him to give it back to him, saying it was "no good try to ‘rent’ him, he only laughed."

He took the letter back, and, seeing its condition, said, "It is a great pity better care is not taken of an original manuscript of mine."

He then said to Clyburn, "I am afraid you are leading a very wicked life."

He replied, "There was good and bad in every one of us," and Oscar rejoined, "It is more than possible."

The letter had been in his possession ever since, and he produced it to-day. After these epigrammatic conversations between Mr. Wilde and the casual callers at Tite-street the resumption of the main story fell rather flat. It was after the return of Lord Alfred Douglas from Cairo, Mr. Wilde said, that he became aware that Lord Queensberry was making injurious suggestions about him.

AN INTERVIEW WITH THE MARQUIS.

Later on in June he had an interview with Lord Queensberry and a Mr. "Pip" at 16, Tite-street. The interview took place in the library.

Lord Queensberry said, "Sit down."

Mr. Wilde said, "I don’t allow you to talk to me like that. I suppose you have come to apologise for the statement you made about myself and my wife in a letter you wrote to your son. I could have you up for criminal libel for writing such a letter."

Queensberry replied, "That letter was privileged."

"How dare you say such things about your son and me?" asked Oscar.

"You were both kicked out of the Savoy for your scandalous conduct," said Queensberry.

"That is a lie," replied Oscar.

Lord Queensberry then said : "I hear you were thoroughly well blackmailed last year for a disgusting letter you wrote to my son."

"The letter was a beautiful letter,' replied Oscar, "and I never write unless for publication."

After some further conversation between the Marquis and witness, Queensberry said :

"If ever I catch you with my son again I will thrash you."

"I do not know what the Queensberry rules are," retorted Oscar, "but the Oscar Wilde rule is to shoot out right."

He then ordered Lord Queensberry out of the house, and threatened him with the police.

Lord Queensberry repeated the charge, saying the scandal was all over London.

"If it were so," witness replied, "Lord Queensbery was himself the author of the scandal." The letters he had written were infamous, and he was merely trying to ruin his son through him. He added, "You have got to go. I won’t have in my house a brute like you." He pointed out Lord Queensberry to his servant and said "This is the Marquis of Queensberry, the most infamous brute in London, never allow him to enter my house again, should he attempt to come in, send for the police."

Lord Queensberry then left with violent language.

It was absolutely untrue that he, with or without Lord Alfred Douglas, was ever required to leave the Savoy Hotel.

(Proceeding.)

John Sholto Douglas, Marquis of Queensberry, surrendered and 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 in the form of a card directed to him.

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 benefit.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, 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 jury had heard the charge against the defendant, which was that he published a false and malicious libel in regard to Mr. Oscar Wilde. That 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. In respect of that libel so published this charge was brought against the defendant. Of course it was a matter of serious moment that such a libel as that which Lord Queensberry had written upon that card should be in any way connected with the name of a gentleman who had borne a high reputation in this country. 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 the words were written did appear--nay, desired to appear and pose to be of a person inclined to the commission of that gravest of offences. The leaving of such a card openly with the porter of a club was most serious and likely gravely to affect the position of the person as to whom that injurious suggestion was made. If they had to deal only with the publication--simply the question of whether that libel was published, and with the further question which would arise, not for the jury, but for the learned Judge, as to what amount of blame as for a criminal action should be thrown upon the defendant in respect to the matter--there would be considerations, some or probably many of which might be brought to their notice before this case ended, which would not have justified such action, because it could not be justified unless the statement were true but which, at all events in regard to a person in the position of the defendant, with such characteristics as the evidence would probably show that he had, might to some extent have gone to extenuate the gravity of the offence. But the matter did not stop at the question whether that card was delivered, or whether the defendant could in any way be excused by strong feeling--mistaken feeling--for having made that statement. By the plea, which the defendant had brought before the Court that day a graver issue was raised--the defendant said that the statement was true and that it was for the public benefit that the statement was made, and he gave particulars in the plea of matters which he alleged showed that the statement was true in regard to Mr. Oscar Wilde. The plea had not been read to the jury, but there was no allegation in the plea that Mr. Oscar Wilde had been guilty of the offence of which he himself had spoken, but there were a series of accusations in it 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 the plea Mr. Oscar Wilde was stated to have solicited the offence, and that, although that offence was not alleged to have been committed, he was guilty of indecent practices. It was for those who had taken the responsibility of putting into the plea these serious allegations to satisfy the jury if they could be credible witnesses, or evidence which they thought worthy of consideration and entitled to belief, that the allegations were true. Mr. Oscar Wilde was the son of Sir William Wilde, a very distinguished Irish surgeon and oculist, who did public service as chairman of the Census Commission in Ireland. His father died some years ago, but Lady Wilde was now living. He went in the first instance to Trinity College, Dublin, where he greatly distinguished himself for classical knowledge, earning some conspicuous rewards which were given to its students by that distinguished University. His father wished him to go to Oxford, and he went to Magdalen College, Oxford, where he had a brilliant career, obtaining the Newdigate prize for English poetry. After leaving the University he devoted himself to literature in its artistic side. In 1882 he published a volume of poems and wrote essays on artistic and aesthetic subjects. Many years ago he became a very prominent personality, laughed at by some but appreciated by many, representing a form of artistic literature which recommended itself to many of the foremost minds and the most cultivated people. In 1884 he married a daughter of Mr. Horace Lloyd, Q.C., and had since lived with his wife and two sons in Tite-street, Chelsea. He was a member of the Albemarle Club. Among the friends who went to his house in Tite-street was Lord Alfred Douglas, a younger son of Lord Queensberry. In 1891 Lord Alfred Douglas went to Tite-street, being introduced by a friend of Mr. Wilde's. From that time Mr. Wilde had been a friend of Lord Alfred Douglas and also of his mother, Lady Queensberry, from whom, on her petition, the Marquis had been divorced. He had again and again been a guest at Lady Queensberry's houses at Wokingham and Salisbury, being invited to family parties there. Lord Alfred Douglas had been a welcome guest at Mr. Wilde's house and at Cromer, Goring, Torquay, and Worthing when Mr. and Mrs. Wilde were staying there. Lord Alfred Douglas was a frequent and invited visitor. Until 1893 Mr. Wilde did not know the defendant, with the exception that he met him once about 1881. In November, 1892, Mr. Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas were lunching together at the Cafe Royal in Regent-street. Lord Queensberry came into the room. Mr. Wilde was aware that, owing to circumstances which he had nothing to do--owing to unhappy family troubles which he himself only mentioned because it was absolutely necessary--there had been some strained feelings between Lord Alfred Douglas and his father. Mr. Wilde suggested to Lord Alfred Douglas that it was a good opportunity for him to speak to his father and for a friendly interview. Lord Alfred Douglas acted on the suggestion and went across to Lord Queensberry and spoke to him and had a friendly conversation. Lord Alfred Douglas brought Lord Queensberry to the table where he and Mr. Wilde sat at lunch, and Lord Queensberry was introduced to Mr. Wilde and shook hands with him. Lord Queensberry sat down and had lunch with them. Lord Alfred Douglas was obliged to leave at half-past 2 o'clock, and Lord Queensberry remained chatting with Mr. Wilde. Mr. Wilde said that he and his family were going to Torquay. Lord Queensberry said he was going to Torquay too, to give a lecture, and asked Mr. Wilde to come and hear it. Lord Queensberry did not go to Torquay, and he sent a note to Mr. Wilde telling him that he was not going there. Mr. Wilde never met Lord Queensberry from that time until the early part of 1894. Mr. Wilde had then become aware that certain statements were being made affecting his character. 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 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 the,. 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. Mr. Wilde was shown a copy of a letter which had been sent to Mr. Beerbohm Tree which Mr. Wilde was alleged to have written to Lord Alfred Douglas, and was asked to buy the original. He absolutely and peremptorily refused, saying that he himself had a copy of the same letter, as he considered it a work of art, and even the original was of no use to him. He sent the messenger, a man named Allen, away, giving him a sovereign for his trouble, and Allen was so gratified that he immediately send Mr. Wilde the original letter, which he had retained and now produced. Ut was in the nature of a prose sonnet and Mr. Wilde had ideas of publishing it--in fact, it was paraphrased in an aesthetic 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-roseleaf lips 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 a prose sonnet, and as an expression of true poetic feeling, and had no relation whatsoever to the hateful and repulsive suggestions incorporated in the plea in this case. Early in 1894 Lord Queensberry met Mr. Wilde and his son, Lord Alfred, again at lunch at the Cafe Royal. Shortly after that Mr. Wilde became aware that the marquis was writing letters which affected his character and contained suggestions injurious to him. Though he might then reasonably--and probably would if his own interests alone were concerned--have brought the matter at once to public notice, Mr. Wilde abstained for reasons which would possibly be elicited before the case was over. During 1894 Mr. Wilde--in Lord Queensberry's hearing--ordered that he should never be admitted to his house. Last February Mr. Wilde produced at St. James's Theatre another play called The Importance of Being Earnest. He heard of certain intentions of Lord Queensberry, who had previously created a scene in a theatre when a new play of Lord Tennyson's--The Promise of May--was produced for the first time, and when, as an Agnostic, he publicly denounced a certain character of the performance from his seat in the stalls. Of course a disturbance on the night of a new play would be a very serious matter to author and actors, and would have been especially serious if--as it probably would--it had developed into a personal attack on the private character of Mr. Wilde. Lord Queensberry booked a seat at St. James's Theatre, but his money was returned to him and the police were warned about him. On the night of the play the marquis made his appearance carrying a large bouquet of vegetables. Whether that was consistent with Lord Queensberry's sanity would be for the jury to decide. Being refused admission at the box-office Lord Queensberry, with his vegetable offering, tried to enter by the gallery, but the police refused him admittance. On February 28 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. Hitherto the accusations had been made in letters to Lord Queensberry's family on which, if he had chosen, Mr. Wilde could have taken action, but in consideration of the family he refrained. Here, however, was a public charge made openly against him at his club, and Mr. Wilde could no longer refrain or sit still. Hence, these criminal proceedings. The plea of justification contained two curious assertions--one, that in July, 1890, Mr. Wilde wrote and published an immoral work called "The Picture of Dorian Gray," and secondly, contributed to a magazine called the Chameleon, of which he was the mainstay, certain prurient articles on ``Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young." He himself defied his learned friends to suggest from these contributions anything hostile to the character of Mr. Wilde, but it was due to him to say that directly he say the disgraceful and abominable story in the Chameleon "The Priest and the Acolyte" in which same number of his own article appeared he indignantly insisted on the copies being suppressed and the magazine withdrawn. Sir E. Clarke concluded by reading extracts from ``The Picture of Dorian Gray'' and contending that nothing in that work or the other would justify the pleas alleged against Mr. Wilde.

Sidney Wright, hall porter of the Albemarle Club, of which Mr. and Mrs. Oscar Wilde were members, deposed that on February 13 the Marquis of Queensberry handed the card produced to him. Before handing the card to him Lord Queensberry had written some words. Lord Queensberry said he wished witness to give that to Mr. Oscar Wilde. Witness looked at the card, but did not understand it, and made an entry on the back of it of the date and the time at which it was handed to him. Witness put it in an envelope which he addressed "Mr. Oscar Wilde" and when Mr. Oscar Wilde came to the club on February 28 the witness handed it to him, saying that Lord Queensberry had wished him to give it to Mr. Wilde.

Mr. Oscar Wilde was then called and examined by Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C. He deposed that he was 39 years of age. His father was Sir William Wilde, surgeon, of Dublin, who was chairman of the Census Commission. He died when witness was at Oxford. He himself was a student at Trinity College, Dublin, where he took a classical scholarship, a first in "mods" and a first in "greats," winning the Newdigate Prize for English verse. He took his degree in 1878, and from that time had devoted himself to art and literature. In 1882 he published a volume of poems, and afterwards lectured in England and America. He had written many essays, and during the last few years had devoted himself to dramatic literature. In 1884 he married miss Lloyd, and from the date of his marriage he had resided with his wife in Tite-street, Chelsea. He made the acquaintance of Lord Alfred Douglas in 1891, and also made the acquaintance of Lady Queensberry, at whose house in Wokingham and Salisbury he had been a guest. He also knew other members of Lord Queensberry's family. Lord Alfred Douglas had dined with him at the Albemarle Club, of which Mrs. Wilde was also a member, and had stayed with them at Goring, Cromer, Worthing, and Torquay. In November, 1892, he was lunching with Lord Alfred Douglas at the Cafe Royal. He knew there had been some estrangement between Lord Queensberry and Lord Alfred Douglas. On that occasion Lord Queensberry was at the Cafe Royal, and at the suggestion of witness Lord Alfred Douglas went across and shook hands with Lord Queensberry and a friendly conversation ensued. Lord Alfred Douglas had to go early, and Lord Queensberry remained talking to witness. Lord Queensberry said he was going to Torquay, but he did not go. From November, 1892, until March, 1894, witness did not see Lord Queensberry. 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 handed him three or four letters and said that they had been stolen from him by a man named Allen, and that he had to go 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 letter 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 the 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. O don't care twopence about it." Clyburn said "Allen has asked me to give it back to you." Witness said, "Why does he give it back to me?" 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 with 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. The letter had remained in the witness's possession ever since, and he produced it in Court to-day. Lord Alfred Douglas went to Cairo at the end of 1893, and on his return witness was lunching with him at the Cafe Royal when Lord Queensberry came in and shook hands. They chatted about Egypt and various subjects. 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 16, 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 one to talk to me like that. I suppose you have come to apologize for that 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 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 then he 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 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. One the day of the production of his piece, The Importance of Being Earnest, at the St. James's Theatre, certain information reached him. Witness knew what had occurred at the production of The Promise of May. The piece was very successful, and witness appeared before the curtain to bow his acknowledgements. The police were on duty and Lord Queensberry was not admitted, but he handed in a bundle of vegetables. Witness consulted a solicitor with regard to that, but did not take any other step. On February 28 witness went to the Albemarle Club and the porter handed him the card which had been left by Lord Queensberry. Witness at once instructed his solicitor to take these proceedings. Witness had nothing whatever to do with the Chameleon except to send him contribution, and he knew nothing whatever about the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte," and expressed that disapproval to the editor. "The Picture of Dorian Gray" was originally published in a magazine, and it was afterwards, in 1891, republished in book form, and it had been on sale from that time to this. Witness's 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. Down to the interview in Tite-street Lord Queensberry had been friendly. He did not receive a letter in which the Marquis desired his acquaintance with his son to cease, but he gathered after the interview that that was so. 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.) 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 effects 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 that there was no such thing as morality or immorality in thought, but there was such a thing as immoral emotion. The realization of one's self was the prime aim of 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 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 those 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 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 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 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.

The cross-examination of the witness was unfinished when the Court rose, and the hearing was adjourned until to-morrow (Thursday), the Marquis of Queensberry being admitted to bail on his own recognizances.