Compare Documents

The jury in the Wilde prosecution were early in attendance at the Old Bailey this morning, and sat with their heads together talking of the case.

Wilde stood in the gangway between the dock and the jury-box, sometimes leaning against one or the other, and every now and then exchanging a word with the Rev. Stewart Headlam, who was with him. No one looked at him.

When Mr. Justice Wills arrived Wilde stepped into the dock, and William Parker was called. He is more unmistakably of the groom type than his brother. He went through the now familiar story of how he and his brother met Taylor at the St. James’s Restaurant, how they visited Taylor at his rooms, and subsequently went with him to dinner at Kettner’s, where they met Wilde. Once more the Court listened to the description of the intellectual and material treat afforded on the occasion of "Kettner’s best," and once more William Parker told how Wilde put his arm on his brother, and said, "Charlie is the boy for me," and asked him to go to the Savoy Hotel with him.

Sir Edward Clarke cross-examined: Did you understand that your brother was going to the Savoy for an improper purpose?—Yes.

And you in no way interfered?—No.

You had intended to do the same sort of thing yourself?—Yes (in a low tone).

The Solicitor-General tried to lessen the force of these admissions by asking what Taylor had said to the witness previously, but Sir Edward Clarke objected, and the learned judge upheld him.

AT THE SAVOY.

The next part of the case was that which has been grouped together as "the Savoy evidence":first a bookkeeper, to prove the stay at the hotel of Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas; next the chambermaid, Jane Margaret Cottar. The latter said that on the third day of Wilde’s stay there the bell rang about 11 o’clock in the morning. She went upstairs, and in the lobby met Wilde, who asked her to light the fire. In the room she saw a boy, apparently asleep; he was about 18 or 19, dark, of sallow complexion.

Sir Edward Clarke opened his cross-examination with an extraordinary question: "Why do you wear eyeglasses?" The witness explained that she was shortsighted; and in answer to further questions she said she never wore glasses at her work, though she could not see well without them.

Another chambermaid, Alice Saunders, corroborated Cottar’s evidence in some points.

When Miss Saunders was in the box Lord Douglas of Hawick came into court. The Marquis of Queensberry had not arrived.

Migge, the masseur, next came, and repeated the evidence he has already given more than once. He attended Wilde to massage him on two occasions, and on one occasion he saw a young man in the room.

In cross-examination witness contradicted himself on a minor point as to whether the door was locked or not. He finally said it was not locked, and he had gone at the usual time when Wilde was expecting him.

A waiter at the Savoy testified to seeing young men visit Wilde’s rooms. He had served drinks in the rooms, and once supper, while a young man was there.

Wilde listened to the whole of the Savoy evidence with an air of stolid indifference, occasionally looking round at the clock as if it bored him. But every now and then his right hand stole in front of his face, and concealed in the palm was a small bottle of smelling salts.

Sir Edward cross-examined vigorously, and extracted admissions that the witness first made a statement to the Treasury on Friday last, that he had read the reports of the previous trial, that he had seven sitting-rooms to look after, that the Savoy was a busy place, and there were plenty of suppers to serve. But he thought he could remember the particular supper.

The calling of Mrs. Perkins, the housekeeper, closed the Savoy evidence.

THE VISIT TO PARKER.

Margery Baucroft, the young woman who saw Wilde come to Park-walk to visit Charles Parker, next went in the box, and once again told her story. To the best of her belief Wilde stayed 20 minutes or half an hour, and, looking out of her window, she saw him go away in a cab which had been waiting.

Margery was composure itself under cross-examination. She knew Wilde perfectly well by sight; had seen him in the street. She was certain Parker went away with Wilde the night she saw them, if he had come back her little dog would have barked. At the mention of Margery’s little dog the Court laughed.

As Margery, after finishing her evidence, left the court, the Marquis of Queensberry came in, the length of the court separated him from his son.

The calling of two landladies and an inquiry agent formed a dreary interlude, and Wilde’s glances round at the clock became frequent. He was beginning to look weary and oppressed, and the strain seems telling on him more and more as the trial drags on. The St. James’s place evidence, perfectly familiar by repetition, was given next, and then Inspector Richards told the story of the arrest, and while he was in the box the rumblings of distant thunder filled the court.

The notes of the Queensberry trial were then proved and put in, and the old weary process of reading the evidence was commenced after the little squabble between Sir Frank and Sir Edward as to the way in which it was to be done. The commencement of the reading was the signal for a general exodus.

At half-past one the Court adjourned for luncheon.

The bells of St. Paul's were ringing merrily on Ascension Day, and their music filled the Old Bailey and rather interfered with the proceedings when Wilde's trial was resumed this morning. The case had reached a dull stage. All the accomplices in the acts alleged against Wilde had been examined yesterday. It now only remained for the prosecution to make the most of their corroboration, and to tell such evidence as they have of the Savoy Hotel episodes, in which the alleged accomplices are unknown. After the damaging cross-examination of two at least of the principals, it was certain that the Solicitor-General would put into the scale every ounce of corroboration he could find, and that this would tend to lengthen the proceedings.

When Wilde was called upon to surrender he stumbled on mounting the steps leading to the dock, and seemed

WEAK AND UNCERTAIN

on his feet. There is no truth whatever in the report which was yesterday circulated that the prisoner was seized with illness in the dock, but he is very obviously enfeebled and upset by his recent experiences. His fixed attitude, when he wedges himself in the angle of the dock, with his head resting heavily on his right hand, bespeaks unutterable weariness.

Witnesses to Corroborate.

The first witness was William Parker, a dull-looking young fellow in a brown tweed suit, the elder brother of Charles Parker. His examination-in-chief was not a long business. He could only say that Taylor invited himself and his brother to dine with Wilde at Kettner's, that the dinner was a particularly good one, and that after dinner Wilde took Charles Parker to the Savoy Hotel.

"Did you know your brother was going there for an indecent purpose?" asked Sir Edward Clarke in cross-examination, and the witness replied, "That is what Taylor gave us to understand."

Did you hear a proposal made to your brother and not interfere to prevent it? - No, I couldn't then.

Had you intended to do the same sort of thing yourself? - Yes, perhaps.

"What had Taylor said to you?" asked Sir Frank Lockwood in re-examination, but Sir Edward Clarke was immediately on his feet with an objection that the question was irregular, and the objection was sustained.

Evidence of Hotel Servants.

Then came a branch of the case on which the prosecution seem inclined to rely largely. Mr. C. F. Gill called the bookkeeper of the Savoy Hotel to produce the records of Wilde's stay there in March, 1893, and then examined the hotel servants as to things seen and heard in his rooms. Jane Cotter, a chambermaid, deposed that at first Wilde occupied bedroom No. 632, Lord Alfred Douglas occupying No. 361, which adjoined the other chamber. She found it necessary to call to the attention of Mrs. Perkins, the housekeeper, to the condition of Wilde's room. On the third morning of his stay, about eleven o'clock, Wilde rang the housemaid's bell. She met him in the doorway of No. 361, and he told her he wanted a fire in his own room, No. 362. There she saw a boy 18 or 19 years of age, with dark close-cropped hair and a sallow complexion. Some days later Lord Alfred Douglas left the hotel, and Wilde then removed into rooms in the front of the hotel.

Cross-examined by Sir Edward Clarke, the witness said the condition of the room was much worse on the first two nights Wilde was there than subsequently. Then Sir Edward perpetrated a

VERY NEAT

bit of cross-examination. "Why do you wear eyeglasses?" he asked; and the imposing young lady in the lace fichu and the pince-nez replied, with a bashful giggle, that it was because she was short-sighted. Then she always wore them about her work? Oh, dear, no (and she snatched off the glasses at the bare thought of what the housekeeper would say) she only wore them to-day because she thought she might have to recognise somebody. Then she did not wear them when she saw the boy in Wilde's room, and had to put them on if she wanted to recognise anybody? Yes, that was about the size of it. Sir Edward seemed quite satisfied.

While Alice Saunders, another chambermaid, was corroborating this evidence Lord Douglas of Hawick came into the court looking rather blue and puffy about the eyes.

Antonio Miggz, a masseur employed at the Savoy Hotel, repeated his evidence that he too had seen a boy in Wilde's room. In cross-examination he professed to have

NO RECOLLECTION

whether the door of the room was locked or not, but Sir Edward Clarke succeeded in convincing him that at the last trial he was asked, "Was the door locked?" and replied, "No; the door was not locked." He could not remember whether the boy he saw was fair or dark.

Emil Becca, the dark, handsome young waiter from the Savoy Hotel, who was first called as a witness on Monday in the case against Taylor, repeated his evidence that while Wilde was staying in the hotel he had seen young men in his rooms. He had probably seen about five young men in all. He had taken champagne and whiskies and sodas to the bedroom and seen young men there, and after Wilde had the sitting-room in the front of the hotel, he had served there a supper of chicken and champagne for Wilde and a dark young man.

Sir Edward Clarke cross-examined with a view to show that the excellence of this witness's recollection might be due to having read reports of the last trial. "It was a matter of considerable interest to everybody at the Savoy Hotel?" - Yes, it was.

Did you read in the papers that Parker said he had chicken and champagne for supper? - I don't remember seeing it in the paper.

Mrs. Perkins, who now lives at Southsea, was called to prove that in 1893 she was

HOUSEKEEPER AT THE SAVOY

Hotel, and that her attention was called by the housemaids at the time to the condition of Wilde's room. To further prove the intimacy between Wilde and Parker, Mrs. Margery Bancroft deposed that, while the latter was living at Park-walk, Chelsea, in the spring of 1893, she saw Wilde come there ina cab one night, and the two go away together. Taylor lived close by, at Chapel-place, and was constantly in and out of Parker's lodging.

Cross-examined, the witness became less confident that Parker went away with Wilde.

Just after noon Lord Queensberry arrived, with a yellow rose in his button-hole and carrying his silk hat on the head of his umbrella. He nodded familiarly to acquaintances in the reserved enclosure--the guinea ring, so to speak-- and took a seat there himself, the cynosure of all eyes in the stands and the minor rings, and an object of lively curiosity to the Junior Bar.

THE LANDLADIES

from Park-walk and Chapel-place, who began to be cross about having to waste so much time at the Old Bailey, repeated their reminiscences of their interesting young lodgers, and Mr. Kearley, the ex-detective inspector who conducted the inquiries for Lord Queensberry, produced the papers which he found in an abandoned hatbox at Taylor's old lodgings.

Thomas Price, servant at No. 10, St. James's-place, deposed that during Wilde's tenancy of rooms in that house he only slept there about a dozen times. A play of his was running at The St. James's Theatre at the time. The witness had seen Taylor only once. Parker was at the rooms several times.

Inspectors Richards and Brockwell, of Scotland-yard, described once more the arrest of Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel, Sloane-st., and some formal evidence of shorthand writers and others concluded the case for the prosecution, with the exception of the reading of long tracks of evidence from the previous trials. This provoked a fresh encounter between Sir Frank Lockwood and Sir Edward Clarke, who submitted that if the prosecution were going to put in Wilde's cross-examination in the Queensberry trial, they should also in fairness put [...] and cross-examination in the last trial of this case.

The Solicitor-General would not admit that he was in any way bound to do this, but said he was perfectly willing to put in examination, cross-examination, and re-examination if Sir Edward Clarke desired it.

His lordship suggested as

A COMPROMISE

that the learned counsel should read such portions of the evidence at the earlier trials as they desired.

This suggestion being adopted, Sir Edward Clarke began, to an accompaniment of thunder-claps, the reading of Wilde's evidence-in-chief in the prosecution of Lord Queensberry for libel. This rapidly cleared the court.

Sir Frank Lockwood had promised that his reading should be confined to passages which relate to Wood, Shelley, Parker, and Taylor. But he first read, sonorously and appreciatively, the sparring between Wilde and Mr. Carson about the prisoner's correspondence with Lord Alfred Douglas, skipping, with a dry little joke, the passage in which Wilde complained of Carson's elocutionary deficiencies. In the light of all the subsequent blackmailing revelations it is worthwhile to recall that in the second of the stolen letters, the "red and yellow wine" letter, Wilde wrote, "I had

SOONER BE RENTED

all day than have you bitter, unjust, and horrible." It was explained at the time that "rented" was a cant word meaning blackmailed. Another passage has become notable, that in which Wilde asked, "Why are you not here, my boy? I fear I must leave. No money, no credit, and a heart of lead." It was suggested that if Sir Edward Clarke were permitted to read Wilde's examination-in-chief at the last trial he would not call him to give evidence again. It is, of course, to the interest of the prosecution to refuse to read the notes of the last trial, so as to get Wilde in the witness-box, subject to the cross-examination of the Solicitor-General. The situation had therefore become critical, and during the luncheon interval both Mr. C. Mathews and Mr. Travers Humphreys went down to the cells to confer with Wilde.

When the judge returned from his lunch he tripped and almost fell, reaching his place on the bench with an undignified kind of hop, skip, and jump.

At a quarter past two the prosecution had only begun to read the second day of the Queensberry trial.

The case is proceeding.