Compare Documents

Sir Edward Clarke instantly and with emphasis exclaimed, "If that had been done in the first instance I should have applied that the defendants should be tried separately. Of course I know my learned friend has the legal right to withdraw the counts at any stage of the case."

His Lordship said the evidence had suggested to his mind that the counts of conspiracy were really unnecessary, and

Sir Edward Clarke said that he must ask that a verdict of not guilty on the conspiracy counts might at once be taken of the jury.

His Lordship: I cannot say that. All I can say at the present stage of the trial is that I feel it my duty to accede to Mr. Gill's application.

Sir Edward Clarke: At some part of the case I shall claim that a verdict of not guilty be entered on these counts.

Before the sensation of this first surprise had died away Sir Edward Clarke was on his feet again. "Have you something more to say?" asked his lordship; and the

SENSATION WAS REDOUBLED

when Sir Edward Clarke replied, "No, my lord, I was about to address the jury," After the announcement that had just been made, he said, an announcement of the importance and significance of which he would have much to say later is the day, he was going to call Mr. Oscar Wilde before the jury as a witness! This decision had not been arrived at in consequence of the decision of Mr. Gill in regard to charges which, if they were not to be proceeded with, should never have been put into the indictment. And Sir Edward was fully alive to all the consequences of the course he had elected to take. To put Mr. Wilde in the witness-box would entitle Mr. Gill to the right of reply in the case, and expose him (Sir Edward) to the consequence of having that evidence and his own observations commented on and replied to. But he had never attached as much importance to "the last word" as the great advocate who taught him his profession used to do.

The court was very hushed and still when the full significance of Sir Edward Clarke's decision was realised. Wilde himself was least moved of anyone, sitting impassive and expressionless in his corner of the dock. But when Sir Edward had fully embarked on an eloquent and most impressive opening of the case for the defence, Wilde leaned forward as if irresistibly drawn out of his habitual attitude of insouciance by their fervor and

DEEP EARNESTNESS

of his advocate. Sir Edward first protected against the notion of Mr. Gill yesterday is insisting on reading, for the purpose of prejudicing Mr. Wilde, the cross-examination in the Queensberry case. I was a cross-examination upon his books and writings, and Coleridge had long ago said, "judge no man by his books. The man is more a greater than his books." But Mr. Wilde had been judged, not by his own books alone, but by articles written by other people which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. Sir Edward would not himself save the smallest hesitation about defending "Dorian Grey," a very simple story which appeared first in Lippincott's, a publication in the highest class of American periodical literature, and which, in book form, had since been in constant circulation and on sale in every English bookshop. As to Mr. Carson's cross-examination of Wilde as the French work, "A Rebours," Sir Edward described it as genuinely unfair, and a violation of every canon of justice. He described Wilde's responsibility for any of the views expressed in that book or in the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte," about which Wilde was one of

THE FIRST TO PROTEST.

Then, passing from the literary part of the case, Sir Edward pointed out that the latest date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was September, 1893, 18 months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry which had brought this matter before the public and placed him in his present peril. Wilde had long been, and was now, a friend of Lady Queensberry and her son. Lord Queensberry had been divorced from his wife.

Mr. C.F. Gill interrupted that this was irrelevant and in no way material to the present case, and he should protest against any attack on Lord Queensberry, who was not represented here.

There was a laugh when Sir Edward replied that Mr. Gill rebuking irrelevance was rather amusing. He did not further describe Lord Queensberry's position, but proceeded that he, Sir Edward, was responsible for the advice given to Mr. Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly because of that fact that he was here again on Wilde's behalf to meet an accusation which could not be properly tried then. Men charged with offences like those alleged against Mr. Wilde, he said, when they know themselves to be guilty, shrink from investigation. Men guilty of such offences suffer from

A SPECIES OF INSANITY.

What then would they think of the mental condition of a man who, knowing himself to be guilty, and that evidence of his guilt would be forthcoming from half-a-dozen different places, insisted on bringing his case before the world. On 30 March, before the previous trial, Mr. Wilde knew this catalogue of accusations against him. He nevertheless went into the witness box, as he would now go into the witness box again, to deny absolutely that there was the least truth in any of them.

Mr. Grain said he would also call Taylor to give evidence on his own behalf, but he did not propose to make more than one speech to the jury.

Wilde was then called and sworn. He stepped alertly from the dock to the witness-box, and then, standing erect, or leaning in an easy attitude on the front of the box he

QUIETLY ANSWERED

Sir Edward Clarke's questions. He repeated once more the story of his classical distinctions at Dublin and Oxford, where he took his degree in 1878. Since that year, he said, he had devoted himself to literary work. Recently he had devoted himself specially to dramatic literature, and his first play, "Lady Windermere's Fan," was produced in the early part of 1892. He had since produced "A Woman of No Importance," "An Ideal Husband," and "The Importance of Being Earnest," and had also written "Salomé," a tragedy in French, and contributions for various magazines. In 1884 he married Miss Lloyd, and has two sons. His wife and sons have always lived with him at 16, Tite-st. He also had between October, 1893, and April, 1894, rooms at 10, St. James's-place. They were taken for literary work, and he very rarely slept there. His house at Tite-st. was very small, and he always found it most convenient to work elsewhere, that he might not be disturbed. It was entirely and solely for that purpose he took the rooms at St. James's-place. At his previous examination in the Queensberry case he denied every one of the charges made against him.

Was the evidence that you gave on that occasion absolutely true? - Entirely true evidence.

Is there any truth in any of the allegations made against you in the evidence in this case? - There is

NO TRUTH WHATSOEVER

in any one of the allegations. No truth whatsoever.

With this emphatic declaration the examination in chief was concluded, and Mr. C. F. Gill tose with the weightier purpose of cross-examining. He spoke first of "Dorian Grey," and the letters to Lord Alfred Douglas, the originals of which were handed to the witness. He reminded the witness that he had said Lord Alfred Douglas contributed two poems to the "Chameleon," and that they were beautiful poems. "Yes," said the witness. The first, Mr. Gill continued, was "In Praise of Shame," concluding, "Of all sweet passions, shame is the loveliest."

"May I---," said Mr. Wilde.

"No!" Mr. Gill sharply replied. "Kindly answer my questions!"

"Certainly," said Mr. Wilde; but Mr. Justice Charles interposed, "If you have any explanations to add to your answer you may do so."

"It is not for me to explain anyone else's work," said Mr. Wilde, "but the explanation given to me by the person who wrote that sonnet was that the word shame was used in the

SENSE OF MODESTY--

to feel shame, or not to feel shame. It seemed to me obscure."

The other sonnet was entitled "The Two Loves." It concluded, "'I am true love, I fill the heart of girl and boy with mutual flame.' Then, sighing, said the other, 'Have your will. I am the love that dares not speak its name.'"

Witness: That is clear.

Mr. Gill: Clear that it refers to natural love and unnatural love?

"Oh no," said the witness, "most certainly not," and entered upon the explanation which unfortunately was not at times perfectly audible. The love that dare not speak its name, he said, was the great affection between an elder and a younger man, as between David and Jonathan, such as Plato made the basis of his philosophy, such as you find in the sonnets of Michael Angelo and Shakespeare, "and these two letters of mine." It was a love so misunderstood that it might be described as "the love that dare not speak its name." There was

NOTHING UNNATURAL

about it. It was beautiful, it was fine, it was noble, it was intellectual, this love between an elder man, with his experience of life and a younger with all the joy and hope of life before him.

This long explanation was delivered with a dramatic emphasis that drew a burst of spontaneous applause from the small public gallery, His lordship was deeply annoyed. "If there is the slightest manifestation of feeling," he said, "I shall certainly have the court cleared."

Mr. Gill tried to apply this definition to the two letters to Lord Alfred Douglas--the first containing the references to the slim gilt soul and the red rose-leaf lips, and the second saying, "You are the most divine thing I want," and describing Lord Alfred Douglas's letter as being "delightful red and yellow wine to me."

"There is nothing in that," said the witness, "of which I am ashamed. It is full of deep affection. The other letter was more of a prose poem, more of a literary answer to a sonnet he had sent me."

Passing to the incidents at the Savoy Hotel, Mr. Gill asked if the witness would contradict the evidence of the hotel servants. "It is entirely untrue!'' he replied, and with some temper added, "Can I answer for what hotel servants say years after I left the hotel?

IT IS CHILDISH.

I am not responsible for hotel servants." He denied that Charles Parker ever went with him to the Savoy Hotel at all, while admitting that he had lunched at St. James's-place. Edward Shelley's accusations of impropriety were equally untrue.

"Did you see no impropriety is kissing him?" asked Mr. Gill, and the witness replied, "I certainly do not think that one should kiss a young man." It was true that the lad Atkins went to Paris with him, but quite untrue that that any impropriety occurred, as was suggested, there. Schwabe was certainly there, but there were three bedrooms.

Atkins never tried to blackmail you in any way? - No.

And you have no complaint to make of Barton? - No.

Do you know him? - No.

Apart from the suggestions of indecency Atkins's statements were in the main true, and the same remark applied to Wood's evidence. He was introduced to Taylor by Schwabe, and at his rooms in Little College-st., met actors and singers, chiefly young men. the only men ever introduced to him by Taylor to whom his had given money were Charles Parker and Ernest Scarfe.

A rather

CURIOUS ESTABLISHMENT,

wasn't it, Taylor's? - I didn't think so. I thought it Bohemian.

Not the sort of place you usually visit at? You had no other friends in that street? - Of no; merely a bachelor's place. Did you notice that no one could see in through the windows? - No, that I didn't notice.

He burned incense, did he not? - Pastilles, I think.

What did you go there for? - To amuse myself sometimes--smoke a cigarette--music--singing--chat--nonsense.

What was Taylor's occupation? - I understood he had private means.

Then I may take it that you never saw anything at Little College-st. to excite suspicion? - The witness nodded.

And up to the time of the trial nothing had occurred to shake your faith in Taylor? - Nothing.

Mr. Gill now introduced

A NEW NAME

to the case. He asked, "After the Queensberry case was committed for trial did you not see, at Calais, a boy named Tankard, who used to be page at the Savoy Hotel?" "Yes," said the witness, that was when Lord Alfred Douglas and he were going abroad for a few days (the occasion of the flying visit to Monte Carlo) and before the plea of justification, which introduces Tankard's name, had been put in. As to Alphonso Conway, the boy of the beach at Worthing, he was such a happy, bright boy, it was a pleasure to talk to him.

Did you feel this deep affection of an elder man to a younger man towards all these boys?" asked Mr. Gill, and the witness replied with a kind of exaltation. "Certainly not! one feels that once in one's life, and only once, towards anyone."

This practically concluded the cross-examination, which had not been very fruitful of results. Sir Edward claim briefly re-examined. The witness explained that passing through the Calais he recognised the boy Tankard, who was doorkeeper at the buffet. He merely asked him how he was getting on, and he replied that he was learning French. At that time witness knew nothing of the plea of justification. Taylor was an

ACCOMPLISHED PIANIST,

and there was always music at his rooms. When the witness heard that Wood had letters of his he communicated with Sir George Lewis, and Taylor arranged a meeting at his rooms. Witness was anxious to get back those letters (which have not been produced) because they contained some slighting references to other people, which he would not have liked to have published. Then he received an anonymous letter saying that Wood had other letters, and intended to try and extort money by means of them. Witness did not give any money for them at all, but he gave Wood money to enable him to go to America.

In reference to the two poems by Lord Alfred Douglas in the "Chameleon," the witness denied that he had anything to do with their publication, and this concluded his re-examination.

"Alfred Taylor," cried Mr. Grain, whose client changed places with Wilde, nervously struggling to get off his right glove for the purpose of being sworn. Hitherto little has been heard of Taylor's antecedents. He now described himself, in a clear and not unpleasant voice, as 33 years of age, and the son of a manufacturer whose business was now being carried on as a limited company. Up to the age of 16 or 17 he was

EDUCATED AT MARLBOROUGH

School, afterwards going as a private tutor to a house at Preston, near Brighton. He afterwards entered the militia, 4th Batt. Royal Fusiliers, City of London Regiment, with the idea of going into the Army. On coming of age in 1883 he came into a fortune of £45,000, and since that time had had no occupation, living a life of pleasure. The charges of gross misconduct being put to him seriatim, he denied them categorically as "Certainly not true," "Absolutely untrue."

Cross-examined by MR. C. F. Gill, he admitted that the witnesses who had sworn to it had slept at his rooms at Little College-st., and that he had there certain articles of female apparel.

At the time you were living at Chapel-st., were you in serious money difficulties? - I had just gone through the Bankruptcy Court.

Alluding to the depraved life of certain lads, Mr. Gill asked, "You know what I mean?" and the witness replied, "Yes, I thoroughly understand," but

ABOSLUTELY DENIED

that he had been in any way associated with them.

Did you know Wilde well? - Yes.

Did you ever tell them he was fond of boys? - No, never.

Do you know that he is? - I believe he is fond of young people.

Taylor corroborated the story that it was to celebrate his birthday that Wilde invited him to dine at Kettner's, and bring any friends he liked. He took the Parkers, but there was no impropriety of any kind. Asked if he knew a man named Marven who was concerned in the Fitsroy-st. raid, Taylor said yes. Whether he knew what Marven was, that he had "heard a good deal." Witness and Parker were both captured in that raid, but were discharged from custody. Taylor described with every appearance of candor the way in which he made the acquaintance of the various lads who had given evidence in the case, and the tea parties in which they indulged at Little College-st. The cross-examination did not materially advance the case or evoke any kind of damaging admission.

The Court was adjourned for lunch.

Having forfeited the last word, sir Edward Clarke was now required to address the jury on behalf of Wilde. It was so close upon the usual time of adjournment however, that his lordship suggested luncheon first and speech afterwards. Breathing space was very welcome, and gave people

TIME TO REALISE

1. That the withdrawal of the conspiracy indictment has solved the difficulty in regard to which Sir Edward Clarke last night lodged his demurrer.

2. That the defendants, contrary to expectation, had not suffered, even if they had not gained, by going into the witness-box, while they had disarmed the obvious criticism which would have been passed had they not given evidence.

Sir Edward Clarke began in measured terms a careful analysis of the case for the prosecution. Appealing to the jury to set aside prejudice, and regard only the evidence which had been laid before them, he asked if they could possibly find Wilde guilty of the terrible offences with which he was charged. He complained of the embarrassment caused by the action of the Crown in allowing the conspiracy counts of the indictments to stand till late in the case, and pointed out what he said was the cruel hardship of trying the prisoners conjointly on charges, many of which affect them individually only. Taylor, for example, could not possibly be concerned in the charges made by Edward Shelley against Wilde, nor Wilde in the misconduct alleged to have taken place in Taylor's rooms. Dealing then with the evidence, Sir Edward pointed out that in cross-examining Mr. Gill had dealt, not with Wilde's own writing, but with two

POEMS WRITTEN BY LORD ALFRED

Douglas, with which Wilde had no more to do than Sir Edward--or the jury.

The case is proceeding.

LONDON, April 30.

As usual, there was again a big crowd at the Old Bailey this morning to witness the closing scenes in the terrible drama known as the Wilde trial.

Before the arrival of the Judge, Taylor was brought into the dock, and, hanging in an uncomfortable attitude over the ledge, conferred earnestly with Mr. J. P. Grain, his leading counsel, while Mr. Charles Mathews, as usual, passed down into the cells to see Wilde. A most serious conference with Sir Edward Clarke followed, and the counsel for the prosecution were equally closely engaged at their side of the court. As soon as his lordship had taken his seat Mr. Gill sprang upon the court the first surprise of what was to be a day of surprises. Having considered the indictment, he said, he had come to the determination not to ask for a verdict on the two counts of the indictment charging the defendants with conspiracy.

Sir Edward Clarke instantly and with emphasis exclaimed: "If that had been done in the first instance I should have applied that the defendants should be tried separately. Of course, I know my learned friend has the legal right to withdraw the counts at any stage of the case."

His lordship said the evidence had suggested to his mind that the counts of conspiracy were really unnecessary, and

Sir Edward Clarke said he must ask that a verdict of not guilty on the conspiracy counts might at once be taken of the jury.

His Lordship: I cannot say that. All I can say at the present stage of the trial is that I feel it my duty to accede to Mr. Gill's application.

Sir Edward Clarke: At some part of the case I shall claim that a verdict of not guilty be entered on these counts.

Before the sensation of this first surprise had died away Sir Edward Clarke was on his feet again. "Have you something more to say?" asked his lordship; and the sensation was redoubled when Sir Edward Clarke replied: "No, my lord, I was about to address the jury." After the announcement that had just been made, he said, an announcement of the importance and significance of which he would have much to say later in the day, he was going to call Mr. Oscar Wilde before the jury as a witness! This decision had not been arrived at in consequence of the decision of Mr. Gill in regard to charges which, if they were not to be proceeded with, should never have been put into the indictment. And Sir Edward was fully alive to all the consequences of the course he had elected to take. To put Mr. Wilde in the witness-box would entitle Mr. Gill to the right of reply in the case, and expose him (Sir Edward) to the consequence of having that evidence and his own observations commented on and replied to. But he had never attached as much importance to "the last word" as the great advocates who taught him his profession used to do.

The court was very hushed and still when the full significance of Sir Edward Clarke's decision was realised. Sir Edward first protested against the action of Mr. Gill yesterday in insisting on reading, for the purpose of prejudicing Wilde, the cross-examination in the Queensberry case. It was a cross-examination upon his books and writings, and Coleridge had long ago said: "Judge no man by his books. The man is more and greater than his books." But Mr. Wilde had been judged, not by his own books alone, but by articles written by other people which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. Sir Edward would not himself have the smallest hesitation about defending "Dorian Grey," a very simple story which appeared first in Lippincott's, a publication in the highest class of American periodical literature, and which, in book form, had since been in constant circulation and on sale in every English bookshop. As to Mr. Carson's cross-examination of Wilde on the French work, "Á Rebours," Sir Edward described it as grossly unfair, and a violation of every cannon of justice. He denied Wilde's responsibility for any of the views expressed in that book or in the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte," about which Wilde was one of the first to protest. Then, passing from the literary part of the case, Sir Edward pointed out that the latest date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was September, 1893, 18 months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry which had brought this matter before the public and placed him at his present peril. Wilde had long been, and was now, a friend of Lady Queensberry and her son. Lord Queensberry had been divorced from his wife.

Mr. C. F. Gill interrupted that this was irrelevant, and in no way material to the present case, and he should protest against any attack on Lord Queensberry, who was not represented here.

There was a laugh when Sir Edward replied that Mr. Gill rebuking irrelevance was rather amusing. He did not further describe Lord Queensberry's position, but proceeded that he, Sir Edward, was responsible for the advice given to Mr. Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly because of that fact that he was here again on Wilde's behalf to meet an accusation which could not be properly tried. Men charged with offences like those alleged against Mr. Wilde, he said, when they know themselves to be guilty, shrink from investigation. Men guilty of such offences suffer from a species of insanity. What then would they think of the mental condition of a man who, knowing himself to be guilty, and that evidence of his guilt would be forthcoming from half-a-dozen different places, insisted on bringing his case before the world? On March 30, before the previous trial, Mr. Wilde knew this catalogue of accusations against him. He nevertheless went into the witness-box again, to deny absolutely that there was the least truth in any of them.

Mr. Grain said he would also call Taylor to give evidence on his own behalf.

Wilde was then called and sworn, He stepped alertly from the dock to the witness-box, and then, standing erect, or leaning in an easy attitude on the front of the box, he quietly answered Sir Edward Clarke's questions. He repeated once more the story of his classical distinctions at Dublin and Oxford, where he took his degree in 1878. Since that year, he said, he had devoted himself to literary work. Recently he had devoted himself specially to dramatic literature, and his first play, "Lady Windermere's Fan," was produced in the early part of 1892. He had since produced "A Woman of No Importance," "An Ideal Husband," and "The Importance of Being Earnest," and had also written "Salomé," a tragedy in French, and contributions for various magazines. In 1884 he married miss Lloyd, and has two sons. His wife and sons have always lived with him at 16, Tite-street. He also had between October, 1893, and April, 1894, rooms at 10, St. James's-place. They were taken for literary work, and he very rarely slept there. His house at Tite-street was very small, and he always found it most convenient to work elsewhere, that he might not be disturbed. It was entirely and solely for that purpose he took the rooms at St. James's-place. At his previous examination in the Queensberry case he denied every one of the charges made against him.

Was the evidence you gave on that occasion absolutely and in all respects true? Entirely true evidence. Is there any truth in any of the allegations made against you in the evidence in this case? There is no truth whatsoever.

With this emphatic declaration the examination in chief was concluded.

Cross-examined by Mr. Gill, first with regard to Lord Alfred Douglas's poems in the Chameleon, he said that the one "In Praise of Shame'' had reference to modesty; the word shame was to be taken in that sense. As to the words in the sonnet "Two Loves," they referred to a deeply spiritual affection that was as pure as it was perfect. There were those who would not understand it and mocked at it, and sometimes put one in peril.

At the conclusion of this explanation there was handclapping in the public gallery.

The judge: I shall have this court cleared if there is the slightest manifestation of feeling.

Witness went on to say that there was nothing in the letter written to Lord A. Douglas of the Savoy Hotel of which the was ashamed. It was one full of deep affection, but the other letter was more of a literary answer to one addressed to him. The Savoy letter was direct and simple, and was not literature, he repudiated the evidence of the chambermaid at the Savoy as entirely untrue, the same remark applying to the evidence of the "masseur." He heard that the jury found the libel justified in the last case, but he was not in court nor did he read any account of it. The evidence of Edward Shelley was untrue in respect to the allegations.

Mr. Gill: With regard to the evidence of Charles Parker, what part is untrue? I say he never came to the Savoy Hotel at all, but it is quite true he came to lunch once or twice at St. James's-place. The allegations were untrue. Witness also denied the allegations of Atkins and of Alfred Wood.

Re-examined: Taylor was an accomplished pianist, and there used to be music at his rooms. Atkins wanted to go on the music-hall stage, and witness brought him his first song.

Sir E. Clarke: You produced the letter known as the "prose poem" in your examination in chief during the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry? Yes.

Alfred Taylor was next placed in the box, and examined by Mr. Grain. He said he was 33 years of age. His father was in a large way of business up to the time of his death, and that business was now carried on as a company. He was educated at Marlborough up to the age of 17, and then went to a private tutor, and afterwards entered the militia, with the idea of getting through to the army. In 1883 witness came into a sum of £45, 000, and lived a life of pleasure in town, having no occupation. Witness denied the accusations of Charles Parker. Witness in cross-examination said he had no knowledge that the Parkers were servants our of a place. He discovered a good deal afterwards.

After lunch Sir Edward Clarke began in measure terms a careful analysis of the case for the prosecution. Appealing to the jury to set aside prejudice, and regard only the evidence which had been laid before them, he asked if they could possibly find Wilde guilty of the terrible offences with which he was charged. He complained of the embarrassment caused by the action of the Crown in allowing the conspiracy counts of the indictments to stand till late in the case, and pointed our what he said was the cruel hardship of trying the prisoners conjointly on charges, many of which affected them individually only. Taylor, for example, could not possibly be concerned in the charges made by Edward Shelley against Wilde, nor Wilde in the misconduct alleged to have taken place in Taylor's rooms. Dealing then with the evidence, Sir Edward pointed out that in cross-examining Mr. Gill had dealt, not with Wilde's own writing, but with two poems written by Lord Alfred Douglas, with which Wilde had no more to do than Sir Edward--or the jury. As to the affection which Mr. Oscar Wilde had expressed in the letters which had been put in, he had himself described it as a pure and true affection, absolutely unconnected with, alien to, irreconciliable with, the filthy practices which this band of "blackmailers" had been narrating. He had gone into the witness-box fearless of what might be produced against him. He himself produced the first of the two letters which had been used against him, with regard to which Sir Edward said, "Mr. Wilde is not an ordinary man. He is a man who has written poetry, brilliant dramas, charming essays; a man who from his youth has been trained in the study of the literatures of the world--not of this England of ours alone, but of those empires whose glories are to us now only a name. He writes letters in a tone which to others may seem high-flown, exaggerated--absurd, if you like, but, said Sir Edward, he was not afraid or ashamed to produce those letters. I spoke to you before of the cowardice of guilt. I reminded you that these men--the Woods, the Parkers, the Atkinses, the whole tribe of them--flourished in so frightful a trade because a man who has been tempted into any sort of guilt would rather give his whole fortune, rather exile himself from his country, than allow the thing to be suggested against him. Contrast this instinctive shrinkage of the guilty man with the courage that brought Mr. Wilde into the witness-box in this court to face, once and for all, and as he hoped, and I hope, to dispose of the accusations which were being made against him. Dealing with detail with the evidence, Sir Edward insisted strongly on the facts that Wilde's movements had always been open, and the hotels at which he stayed were not small houses of ill-repute in back streets, but important and well-known hotels.

Under the strain of these last hours of his trial, Wilde's remarkable phlegm is rapidly breaking down. During the afternoon he restlessly changed his position, scribbled repeatedly with a quill pen on a piece of blotting-paper, but always haggardly regarding the counsel who was so brilliantly pleading his cause, or the jury who were absorbed in Sir Edward Clarke's advocacy. "Fix your minds," Sir Edward Clarke concluded, "firmly on the tests which ought to be applied to evidence before you can condemn a fellow-man on a charge like this. Then I trust the result of your deliberations will be to gratify those thousand hopes which are waiting upon your verdict; I trust that that verdict will clear from this fearful imputation one of our most renowned and accomplished men of letters."

The conclusion of a remarkably earnest and effective address was followed by irrepressible applause.

Wilde was visibly affected by the peroration of Sir E. Clarke, and on becoming more composed wrote a note which was passed to the learned counsel.

Mr. Grain followed on behalf of Taylor. In regard to the charge of procuring, Mr. Grain showed that the two lads named Parker were the only witnesses who claimed to have been introduced by Taylor to Wilde, and that all the resources of the Crown and of the eminent solicitors employed by Lord Queensberry had been unable to produce any corroboration of their story of misconduct. He explained that Taylor, having got through his own large fortune, was living at Little College-street on an allowance from his father's firm.

Mr. C. F. Gill replied on behalf of the Crown, going laboriously through every point at some length, and at the conclusion of his speech the court adjourned until to-morrow.