Compare Documents

It is an almost unprecedented thing for a trial of any importance to begin on the first day of a sessions of the Central Criminal Court. Monday and Tuesday are usually devoted to the finding of true bills and the consideration of cases of minor importance by the Recorder and the Commons Sergeant. Judges' cases are seldom touched before Wednesday, when the judge of assize whose name stands first on the rota leaves the decorous precincts of the High Court for the dingy and ill-ventilated court in the Old Bailey. It was by special arrangement, therefore, that Mr. Justice Wills attended at the Central Criminal Court this morning to begin the second trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor on charges of gross indecency and offences against the Criminal Law Amendment Act with regard to which the jury at the last sessions disagreed. No fresh indictment having been preferred, it was not necessary to send the case a second time to the grand jury.

The preliminary task of swearing and charging the grand jury was performed, as usual by the Recorder, who was supported by the Lord Mayor and sheriffs, and an unusually large muster of aldermen, all in their robes of office. In honor of the month, the bouquets were larger and gayer than usual. And the little heaps of sweet herbs, first provided as a defence against gaol fever in the days of unreformed prisons, seemed bigger than common.

While the case against the prisoners has been reduced by the

ELIMINATION OF SEVERAL COUNTS

of the indictment and the disqualification of one of the witnesses, it has been strengthened by the action of the Solicitor-General himself taking up the case for the Crown. Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory make a destructive trio in the Treasury prosecution,. On the side of the defence there is no change. In Sir Edward Clarke, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys, Wilde possesses as powerful a defensive combination as could be desired. Taylor is again represented by Mr. Grain.

Wilde, during the past fortnight, has been on bail. Taylor, however, has remained in Holloway Prison, and was brought to the Old Bailey with other prisoners in the van this morning. He was placed at once in the dock, but, sitting at the back, was scarcely observed. He looked much paler than when last before the Court, and seemed to have lost something in his air of jaunty self-confidence. Wilde reached the court shortly before eleven o'clock, and, sitting at the solicitor's table, held a whispered consultation with Mr. Charles Mathews. All the counsel in the case were early in attendance. When Mr. Justice Wills arrived, he and the Lord Mayor tried to sit down simultaneously on the same seat. It was the Lord Mayor's seat -- and the Lord Mayor had it. Mr. Justice Wills is not used to playing second fiddle to lord mayors, but he took the second best seat with a good grace.

When the Clerk of Arraigns called upon Wilde to surrender to his bail, he stepped ponderously into the dock, with a slight, almost imperceptible, bow towards the Bench, but no discoverable recognition of his fellow prisoner. There is little improvement in Wilde's appearance. Mental trouble has cut very deeply into his face.

Before the jury were sworn,

Sir Edward Clarke said he desired to make

A PRELIMINARY APPLICATION

that the defendants might be tried separately.

His Lordship: Unless the Solicitor-General has anything to say --

Sir F. Lockwood: I have, my lord.

Sir Edward Clarke said the ground of his application practically was that it was the prisoners' right to be tried separately. A the last trial there was an indictment of conspiracy. That had now been withdrawn, and there was no single count now standing on the indictment on which both prisoners could be convicted.

Sir F. Lockwood strenuously opposed the application. He pointed out that one of the counts charged Taylor with procuring certain persons to commit illegal acts with Wilde. The history of these cases cases was so bound up together that it was impossible to inquire into one without inquiring into the other. It was, therefore, the fairest course towards the accused that there should be but one inquiry.

His Lordship said he had anticipated this application, and had already considered it carefully with regard to the evidence. His own opinion was-- his lordship did not put it higher than an opinion -- that it was much fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.

Sir F. Lockwood: As your lordship pleases. In that case I propose, my lord, to take the case of

TAYLOR FIRST

Sir Edward Clarke at once objected on behalf of Wilde on the ground that he would be prejudiced in the eyes of the jury by having the case against Taylor heard first.

His Lordship assured the learned counsel that, whatever the result of the first trial might be, he and the jury would endeavor to insure that it should have no influence on the second. Moreover, he thought it was within the right of the prosecution to elect in what order the cases should be taken.

Sir Edward Clarke: Then I make a further application, which I shall repeat at the end of Taylor's trial, and that is that Wilde's case may stand over till the next sessions.

His Lordship said the application had better be postponed till the end of the first trial, significantly adding, "if there should be an acquittal, so much the better for the other prisoner."

The jury was thereupon sworn to try Taylor, whose plea of "Not guilty" was of course taken at the last sessions. In the meantime his lordship

AGREED TO RELEASE WILDE

on the same bail as before till to-morrow. His sureties had left the court, however, Sir Edward Clarke said they would be sent for at once. Pending their return Wilde was taken downstairs to renew his acquaintance with the Old Bailey cells.

The beginning of the Solicitor-General's opening was distinctly moderate in tone and he echoed Sir Edward Clarke's appeal against prejudice, expressing a hope that Taylor too might have a most impartial trial." "But I believe," he added, "that such an appeal is absolutely and entirely unnecessary." He described Taylor as a young man of good family who had been educated at one of the large public schools, and at his majority inherited a large sum of money. For a short time he held a commission in a militia regiment. But apparently, his fortune being exhausted, for some time before the events with which the jury would have to deal he had followed no occupation of any sort or kind. Wilde (and the distinguished counsel's voice took a deeper and stronger inflection in mentioning him) was a man of high literary attainments, a man who had

ACHIEVED SOME DISTINCTION

by his dramatic works, and apparently, at the time of which counsel was speaking, had a house in Tite-st., Chelsea, suited to his condition and life, in which he lived with his wife and children, and had also a sitting room and a bedroom at the Savoy Hotel. Taylor lived at 13, Little College-st., Westminster, and the first charge with which counsel would deal was that Taylor attempted to procure the commission of certain acts by Oscar Wilde with Charles Parker.

Sir Frank then went over the well-known details of the intimacy of the Parkers and Wood with Taylor and Wilde, and called Charles Parker.

The witness (Charles Parker) is a fresh-colored lad with a face that would rather attract than repel a stranger. Neatly dressed in blue serge, he rather gruffly followed Mr. C. F. Gill's questions, which were, as his lordship presently pointed out, rather leading in character. the old story was gone through again to the last detail.

The prisoner Taylor is not of a literary turn. At the former trial he made no notes, but sat with folded arms and a complacent mien, leaving the literary department to his more distinguished companions. Being now left blooming alone, he obtained a few sheets of foolscap and scribbled notes to his counsel.

Parker concluded his evidence by stating that after his arrest with Taykor in 1894 he made up his mind to leave London, and enlisted.

"His arrest?" his lordship interposed. "On what charge?"

Mr. Gill hummed and hawed till the judge added, "I only want to know, you know. You leave the impression that there is something mysterious. What were you arrested for?"

Witness: For being in a house in Fitzroy-st.

Mr. Gill: Really for being there for a felonious purpose. There were men there dressed as women.

His Lordship: Then I suppose they were charged with consorting together to commit acts of indecency. Much better to have the whole thing out.

In that case, said Mr. Grain, better at the same time have it out that both Taylor and Parker were

DISCHARGED BY THE MAGISTRATE.

He proceeded to cross-examine Parker with a view to showing that he was introduced to Taylor by a man named Harrington. This he denied. Then, as to blackmailing, Mr. Grain asked, "Have you ever taken hush money from anyone?"

Witness: No

Be careful, you know. You have been in that box before. Have you threatened to charge people with offences unless they paid you money? - No.

You know Wood and Allen? - Yes.

Have you not admitted you received £30 for your share of hush money obtained by them? - They never told me it was hush money. They gave it to me.

That was just before you enlisted? - Yes.

Did either of them tell you how they obtained that money? - Yes, they got it out of some gentleman.

Had you committed the acts mentioned with the man they got the money out of? - Yes.

Do you know a person of the name of Macklin? - I have heard the name. I have heard Taylor speak of him.

Do you know a person named Clarke, who lived at 3, Northumberland mansions? - Yes.

Macklin came to your rooms when you were living at Camera-sq. about May, 1894? - I know the man you mean. I did not know his name was Macklin.

Did you take a number of letters from Clarke out of his pocket? - No. I think he gave me one of Clarke's letters.

Did you, about Whitsuntide, 1894, go to Clarke's rooms and ask him for £10? - Yes.

Did you take his letter with you? - No, nothing.

What did you go to Clarke for? -

I WANTED THE MONEY

to go away to America.

Where is Clarke now? - I don't know.

His Lordship: What is he?

Witness: A silver-broker, I think, or something in the silver trade. He was then in the business with his brother-in-law at Bond-st.

Mr. Grain: Did you at that interview take his watch from his pocket? - No

Did he not threaten to charge you with stealing his gold watch and chain? - No. He said if I did not go away he would send for the police.

The witness denied point-blank that Clarke introduced to him another man named Durnbach, or that he had ever threatened Clarke about letters he had written to Durnbach. His story was that Taylor introduced him to Durnbach, whom he afterwards introduced to Clarke.

Mr. Grain left it at that, He had obtained enough for his purpose.

William Parker, the elder brother, and a coarser copy of the last witness, generally corroborated his evidence about the introduction to Wilde, and his selection of Charlie as "the boy for me." he also gave positive evidence of misconduct of a grave nature with Taylor.

Before adjourning for lunch Mr. Lockwood put out a feeler as to the length of time his lordship was prepared to sit. Mr. Justice Wills had a heart for any fate, and suggested that the case should be

FINISHED TO-DAY,

early or late. To facilitate this desirable end the adjournment for lunch was curtailed.

In the afternoon the first witness was Alfred Wood, with regard to whom the indictment alleges an introduction of the witness by Taylor to Wilde for an illegal purpose. Wood, who is a smooth-tongued fellow with a deliberate, non-committal manner of speech, which does not make him seem any the more ingenuous, described his acquaintance with Taylor, and visits to the snuggery at Little College-st. It was not at all clear, however, that Taylor was responsible, at least directly, for the introduction to Wilde. This was effected by a third person, whose name was not now given. At the last trial it was openly stated that the third person was Lord Alfred Douglas who, while at Salisbury, arranged the meeting at the Café Royal by correspondence with Wilde, and telegraphed to Wood the time of the rendezvous.

The case is proceeding.

London, May 20.

To-day was appointed for the second trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor for offences under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and proceedings commenced at the Old Bailey before Mr. Justice Wills. The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood), Mr. Sutton, Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. H. Avory appeared to prosecute, and Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. T. Humphreys again defended Wilde, the counsel for Taylor being Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Sydney Knox. The defendant Wilde, who was present with his sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and the Rev. Stewart Headlam, at once went into the dock on the arrival of the judge, Taylor, who had not been admitted to bail, being already there. Wilde, who was much bronzed, looked considerably better in health than at the end of the last trial, but Taylor's pale face showed the effects of incarceration.

Before the swearing of the jury, Sir E. Clarke made an application that the two defendants should be tried separately. His lordship asked whether the Solicitor- General had any objection to this course.

Sir F. Lockwood: I have.

Sir E. Clarke pointed out that on the occasion of the trial last sessions the indictment upon which the defendants were charged contained 23 counts. Upon many of these counts a verdict of not guilty was entered, and there remained now a certain number charging them with certain offences. There were only eight of these counts which affected Oscar Wilde, but in none of these was any charge made against Taylor. The other counts were against Taylor, and in none of them was any charge made against Wilde. Therefore, there was no single count now standing upon the indictment upon which Wilde and Taylor could be both convicted. He therefore submitted that they should be tried separately.

Mr. Grain, on behalf of Taylor, agreed with everything which Sir E. Clarke had said.

Sir F. Lockwood objected to the cases being tried separately.

Sir E. Clarke said that he and his learned friend who represented Taylor were distinctly of opinion that the trying of these two cases together would result in injustice being done to both defendants.

His lordship: I need hardly say that this is a matter which had been present to my mind before I came here. I anticipated that this application would be made, and I have considered it carefully with regard to the evidence put before me. Having in view what that evidence is, I think it would be much fairer that they should be tried separately.

The Solicitor-General said he proposed, then, to take the case of Taylor.

Sir E. Clarke urged that the trial of Wilde should proceed first. His name stood first on the indictment, and he believed it would prejudice his case if he were tried after Taylor.

The judge said it ought not to make the least difference. He and the jury would do their best to see the interests were not prejudiced.

Sir E Clarke thought there never was a time nor a case in which that duty was more difficult to discharge.

The judges: I think it would be convenient to take the course suggested. Sir E. Clarke: Then I apply that Mr. Wilde's case should stand over until the next sessions. The judge: Don't you think that application had better be made when we see what the result of this trial is? If it should be an acquittal, then all the better for the defendant Wilde.

The case of Taylor was then proceeded with.

Sir Frank Lockwood, in opening the case for the prosecution, referred briefly to Taylor's career, and to his connection with "a person called Oscar Wilde." He went through the charges in which Taylor alone was concerned; and said that in some sense, for the purpose of establishing the case of this man, it was necessary that other persons should come under the notice of the jury. He said, however, that he would join with Mr. Grain to obtain the fairest and most impartial trial for the prisoner who now sat in the dock. Dealing with the history of the charges, he went back to the meeting between Taylor and the two Parkers, at the St. James's Restaurant in March, 1893. He described the two Parkers as men in humble life and of no education, who could have had no legitimate attraction for a man of intellect. Taylor, he said, had offered to introduce the Parkers to Wilde, and had asked them to call on him at 13, Little College-street. They did this; and they found at that address an establishment which he went on to describe. When they called on Taylor, he told them that he had arranged to introduce them to Wilde at a restaurant--either Kettner's or the Solferino--that evening The ex-groom and the ex-valet went, neither of them having previously seen Oscar Wilde, and dined with him in a private room. He repeated the conversation which took place at the conclusion of that dinner, the subsequent visit which it was alleged was made to the Savoy Hotel, where Wilde was staying, by Wilde and Charles Parker; and mentioned the acts which, it was charged, took place there. Parker stayed there, he said, a couple of hours, and Wilde gave him £2. Parker visited Wilde there again a week later, and similar acts took place, after which Wilde gave him £3. Wilde had on other occasions given Parker a silver cigarette case and a gold chain-ring. He regretted the necessity under which he found himself of going in detail into the conduct of a man who was not now on trial--Oscar Wilde. Wilde was a man of some literary distinction, who had attained some eminence as a dramatist. Wilde lived at that time in Tite-street Chelsea; but he had also occupied rooms at the Savoy Hotel and at 10, St. James's-place, where he was visited by Parker. He had taken Parker to the Crystal Palace and to other places of amusement, he had dined alone with him at restaurants, and he had visited Parker at his lodging in Park-walk, Chelsea. If all this were proved it would be established beyond all doubt that the object of Taylor in introducing the Parkers to Oscar Wilde was an improper one. He next referred to the visit of the Parkers to Taylor at Little College-street, where they stayed for some time. Taylor afterwards moved to an address in Chapel-street, and there Charles Parker stayed with him for a fortnight. Taylor was also charged with introducing Alfred Wood to Wilde in the same way, and with similar motives. Wood was a clerk, in a humble position in life, who was out of occupation, as the Parkers had been when Taylor met them. Wood had no ostensible means of getting his living; in January, 1893, he found that Wood was staying with Taylor in Little College-street. He referred to Wood's meeting with Wilde by an appointment made by telegram by the person who had introduce I Wood to Taylor, and to the supper at the Florence Café which followed. Wilde gave Wood money and presents, and took him to his house in Tite-street.

The first witness called was Charles Parker. Examined by Mr. Gill, he repeated in substance the evidence given by him at the previous trial. He again described his meeting with Taylor and his visit to Taylor, and described Taylor's rooms. He said that Taylor had taken them to dine with Oscar Wilde, at a restaurant somewhere near the Palace Theatre, and he mentioned in detail what occurred at the Savoy Hotel, where he went with Wilde the same night after dinner. He gave similar evidence as to his second visit to the Savoy Hotel, a week later; and also repeated the evidence given at the previous trial tending to incriminate Taylor.

Mr. Grain cross-examined with a view to discrediting the witness, who, however, denied that he had been concerned with Wood and Allen in blackmailing. He knew how they had got that money, but they gave him £30 as a present--not as his share of hush-money. He admitted having got £10 from a man named Clark, one of whose letters he had in his possession, but he denied having obtained that letter improperly. Clark had never, he said, threatened to charge him with stealing a gold watch and chain; and he did not know that Clark had sent for a policeman. Clark had, he admitted, threatened to send for a policeman if witness did not leave his rooms. He had told Taylor that his father was a horse-dealer of Datchet; and that was true.

William Parker was next called, and examined by Mr. Horace Avory. He corroborated his brother's evidence, so far as it concerned him. When his examination-in-chief was concluded, the court adjourned for luncheon.

Upon resuming, the first witness was Alfred Wood, with regard to whom the indictment alleges an introduction of the witness by Taylor to Wilde for an illegal purpose. Wood, who is a smooth-tongued fellow with a deliberate, non-committal manner of speech which does not make him seem any the more ingenuous, described his acquaintance with Taylor, and visits to the snuggery at Little College-street. It was not at all clear, however, that Taylor was responsible, at least directly, for the introduction to Wilde. This was effected by a third person, whose name was not now given. At the last trial it was stated that the third person was Lord Douglas who, while at Salisbury, arranged the meeting at the Café Royal by correspondence with Wilde, and telegraphed to Wood the time of the rendezvous.

As to the blackmailing episode, it would be remembered that simultaneously with the attempt of the man Allen to extort money from Wilde by the instrumentality of the "red rose-leaf lips" and the "red and yellow wine" letters, this witness, who had given the letters away, applied to Wilde for assistance in getting away to America.

"Why did you go to Mr. Wilde?" asked Sir Frank, and the witness replied, "I was not quite fit to mix with people in that position of life, with plenty of money, and I wanted to get away abroad and into a situation." "I suppose," his lordship presently interrupted, "the purport of this evidence is that Wilde was anxious to get Wood out of the way?" "Yes," said Sir Frank Lockwood, "and that he paid money to do it."

Wood proceeded that to enable him to go to America Wilde gave him £20. At the same interview he returned some letters to Wilde. He would not admit that it was a case of barter. On the following day he lunched with Wilde, who gave him another £5. Then came the letter from New York to Taylor with the reference to "telling Oscar he might send" the witness "a draft for an Easter egg if he liked." His lordship again displayed symptoms of wanting to know you know; and Sir F. Lockwood put the question plainly: "From whom came the telegram in consequence of which you went to the Café Royal to meet Wilde?" The witness: From Lord Alfred Douglas. His lordship: Had you any acquaintance with Lord Alfred Douglas at the time when you first met Wilde? Yes. Sir F. Lockwood: Where had you met Lord Alfred Douglas first? At Taylor's rooms at Little College-street. Who introduced you to him? No one. He was in the room, and he shook hands with me.

Upon this his lordship said the evidence of procuration against Taylor seemed no stronger than it might be against three or four other persons, and Mr. Grain attached so little importance to the witness's evidence that he did not trouble to cross-examine.

This completed the evidence of principals in the alleged misconduct. It was not till a quarter to three that Wilde's bail was renewed and he was released from custody. The Rev. Stewart Headlam had been in attendance for some time, but there was difficulty about finding Lord Douglas of Hawick, the second surety.

Sir Edward Clarke has, of course, no locus standi before the court in respect to the case against Taylor. He remained in his place all day, however, closely watching the proceedings.

Mrs. Grant, the landlady at 18, Little College-street, described the Oriental stuffiness of Taylor's rooms, with their draperies, perfumes, and midday oil. At half-past three the prosecution, in spite of the protests of Mr. Grain, called a new witness, Emile Becca, waiter at the Savoy Hotel, to prove that in March, 1893, Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas stayed there, and that Wilde was visited by young men. He further deposed to serving such meals as young Parker swears he shared with Wilde there; but he was unable to identify any particular young man as having been there. Similar evidence with regard to Wilde's rooms at 10, St. James's place, was given by Thomas Price, who was able to identify Taylor as one of the callers.

Mrs. Gray, landlady of 3, Chapel-street, Chelsea, deposed that Taylor stayed in her house from August, 1893, to the end of that year. Charles Parker used to come there to see him, and for three weeks shared his room. Oscar Wilde came there once.

Frederick Kearley, a pensioned police inspector, deposed to receiving from the last witness a hat box full of papers left by Taylor in her house. Among the papers was a slip of paper hearing Parker's address, and two telegrams from Wilde to Taylor putting off appointments with young men.

Mrs. Rumsby deposed that Charles Parker lodged in her house at 50, Park-walk, Chelsea, for a fortnight, and Mrs. Bancroft, who lives in the same house, swore that she had seen Wilde come there in a cab.

The evidence of Mr. Robinson, bookkeeper at the Savoy Hotel, Sergeant Harris, the detective officer who kept observation on 13, Little College-street, and arrested Taylor; and Inspector Richards, who charged him, concluded the case for the prosecution, which had occupied so much time that the intention of completing the whole case to-night was abandoned.

Mr. Grain proceeded to open his defence with the understanding that thereafter the hearing should be adjourned. He urged that so far as the case against Taylor went there was an almost entire absence of corroboration. He claimed that the counts charging Taylor with procuring should be struck out altogether, while, in regard to the charges of committing acts of indecency with the Parkers, there was again absolutely no corroboration of the stories of the lads, who must themselves have been consenting parties if the acts took place.

The Solicitor-General, on the other hand, contended that there was ample corroboration to go to the jury.

His lordship held that there was sufficient corroborative evidence to get rid of technical difficulty, and he thought it better there should be a verdict, for reasons which would appear in his summing up.

Mr. Grain therefore addressed the jury, opening the case for the prisoner, whom he intimated he would call to give evidence in his own behalf. He promised that Taylor would deny upon his oath that he had committed any act of indecency with either of the Parkers, or had procured either of them to commit acts of indecency with Mr. Oscar Wilde.

The hearing was then adjourned till tomorrow.

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.