Compare Documents

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

Mr. C. F. Gill and Mr. H. Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Oscar Wilde; Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Paul Taylor defended Alfred Taylor; Mr. Leonard Kershaw watched the case on behalf of persons interested.

Further evidence was given in support of the case for the prosecution.—A transcript of the shorthand note taken of the proceedings at this Court at the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry was produced and sworn to be correct.—Two employees from the Savoy Hotel gave evidence relative to what happened at the hotel while Oscar Wilde stayed there.—Sergeant Harris said that, acting on instructions, he obtained access to the rooms occupied by the prisoner Taylor in Little College-street. The witness described liow the rooms were furnished, &c. On the morning of the 6th inst. he arrested Alfred Taylor in Denbigh-place. Taylor, when he heard the charge, said "Very well; I expected you last night. What are you going to do with me?" Taylor had in his possession a subpoena for his attendance at this Court as a witness at the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry.—By Mr. Grain: He did not remember that Taylor said that he had heard that a warrant was out for his arrest and was about to surrender himself.—Detective-inspector Richards, of the Criminal Investigation Department, of Scotland-yard, proved the arrest of Oscar Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel, Sloane-street, and to conveying him to Scotland-yard, where the warrant was read to him. He made no answer to the charge. Taylor was also taken to Bow-street. Oscar Wilde applied for bail.—Detective-inspector Brockwell, who held the warrant for the arrest of Wilde, spoke to finding a number of banknotes on the prisoner and certain memoranda.— Reference was made to a sympathetic letter found on Wylde, and written to him by a literary friend, which Sir Edward Clarke asked might be read to the Jury —Mr. Justice Charles did not think that the letter was relevant to the issue.—The transcript of the shorthand note taken of the denial of Oscar Wilde to the charges contained in the plea of justification filed by the Marquis of Queensberry, and of his cross examination by Mr. Carson, Q.C., was put in and read, a proceeding which occupied the Court a considerable time.—The case for the Crown was concluded, and the trial was adjourned.

At the Central Criminal Court this morning Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor were placed in the dock before Mr Justice Charles to answer a series of indictments charging them with committing offences under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. Wilde is described as an author, and Taylor as of no occupation.

Mr. C. F. Gill, Mr. Horace Avory, and Mr. A. Gill appeared to prose­cute on behalf of the Treasury. Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C, M.P., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Wilde, and Mr. J. P. Grain amid Mr. T. Taylor the prisoner Taylor. Mr. Kershaw holds a watching brief in the interests of the witness Sidney Mavor.

Sir Edward Clarke took exception to the prisoners being called upon to plead. There were, he said, twenty-five counts in the indictment. Some of these were taken under the Criminal Amendment Act, and others were charges of conspiracy. He submitted that the defendants were entitled to be put upon their trial on charges of conspiracy, under which they could not give evidence, or else under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, under which they could give evidence. The question had only arisen once before. If the prisoners were called upon to answer certain of the acts, those being conspiracy, they could not be called as witnesses. Nor would it be disputed that under the eleventh section of the Act of 1885 they were rendered competent witnesses. Under the charges of conspiracy where two persons were indicted one was not competent to give evidence for the other. The Act of 1885 made them competent but not compellable witnesses.

Mr. Gill submitted that the decision in the Queen v. Owen applied in this case. There was nothing which prevented tile prisoners from being available witnesses and liable to cross-examination.

Sir E. Clarke contended that they could not join a felony and a misdemeanor, as there was a different mode of trial in each case.

The Judge said unquestionably before the passing of the Act of 1885, these counts might have been lawfully joined together. Sir Edward Clarke's objection was overruled.

Both prisoners then pleaded not guilty.