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.

Sir. 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. C. F. Gill intimated that he intended to withdraw from the Jury the counts of the indictment for conspiracy. This course would enable his learned friend, Sir Edward Clarke, to put Oscar Wilde in the witness-box.

Mr. Justice Charles said that after the evidence that had been given, he thought that there was not anything to support the counts for the alleged conspiracy.

Sir Edward Clarke said that had he known that the Crown intended to withdraw the conspiracy counts, he should have applied for the trial of his client to be taken separately.

Sir Edward Clarke, in his address to the Jury, on behalf of Oscar Wilde, commented in strong terms on the adverse criticism of a certain portion of the Press on the case affecting his client. It was grossly unfair to an accused person, calculated to imperil the administration of justice, and in the highest degree prejudicial to the case of his client, and disgraceful. In some respects the importing into the case of matters for which Mr. Wilde was not in the least responsible was an unfair proceeding on the part of the prosecution. He invited the Jury to discard every element of prejudice, and to judge the conduct of his client in a fair and impartial manner. Could they believe that, if he were a guilty man, Mr. Wilde would have faced such accusations in a Court, and have invited, as he had done, the fullest inquiry into his relations with the different persons brought forward for the purposes of this prosecution? It was impossible that the Jury could believe the testimony adduced, it being in the highest degree improbable that Mr. Wilde misconducted himself. He gave an unqualified denial to the whole of the accusations. After hearing Mr. Wilde's denial on oath he ventured to think that if any doubt existed in the minds of the Jury as to the guilt or the innocence of Mr. Wilde, it would be at once removed.

Oscar Wilde gave a denial on oath to all the allegations made against him.

Alfred Taylor, called by Mr. Grain, gave also an entire denial to the charges against him. He was, he said, educated at Marlborough, his late father being connected with a very large business. When he came of age he received a legacy of £45,000.

Sir Edward Clarke, continuing his speech, commented on the literature branch of the case, and said that the importance put upon it by the Crown was unwarranted, for Mr. Wilde was not the author, or in any way responsible for its production. The courage that he had shown in facing the charges from the first was in favour of the theory of his innocence. He dealt at some length with the various points in the evidence against his client, and urged the Jury to disregard altogether, as unworthy of belief, the testimony of the tainted witnesses. Did the Jury believe that such evidence was honest and entitled to be regarded as true? They were dealing with matters which happened a long time ago, and in respect of which it was impossible to produce evidence beyond Mr. Wilde's positive denial. He asked the Jury to allow their judgment to be affected only with regard to testimony that was reliable, to guard themselves from the prejudice which floated about the case, but which he trusted had to some extent been dissipated, and to apply their minds to the test to be put upon the evidence. If they did this, he trusted that the the result would be to gratify a thousand hopes, and to release one of the most renowned and accomplished men of letters of to-day from a most grave charge and to clear society of a stain.

Mr. Grain, in defence of Taylor, argued that the evidence of the principal witnesses was tainted and wholly uncorroborated, and that under all the circumstances, as the testimony of these persons was unreliable, it was impossible for the Jury to convict; and, therefore, he asked for an acquittal of Taylor. The case against him rested solely on the statements of a set of blackmailers and on prejudice.

Mr. Gill replied on behalf of the Crown. The trial was adjourned until to-day, when the learned Judge will sum up.

At the Central Criminal Court, London, yesterday, before Mr Justice Wills, Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, 33, of no occupation, were indicted a second time for certain misdemeanours.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q. C. applied that the cases of the two defendants might be taken separately.

The Solicitor General said the results of the defendants being so tried would be that matter would have to be introduced which might be unfair to the other defendant not on his trial.

The Judge said that, having carefully considered the matter, his notion was that the case ought to be taken seperately.

Sir Edward Clarke applied next that the case of Wilde be taken first.

The Judge said that he could not interfere with the discretion of the Solicitor General in this matter.

The Solicitor General elected to proceed with the case of Taylor first.

Sir Edward Clarke desired to make a further application, having in view the course which the Crown had taken—viz, that the trial of Mr Wilde be taken at the next session.

The Judge said that the application had better be made at the conclusion of the case of Taylor.

The Solicitor General opened the case and evidence was taken.

Mr Grain addressed the Court on behalf of Taylor and had not concluded his speech when the Court adjourned.

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.

On Tuesday afternoon, Alfred Taylor was found guilty of committing acts of gross indecency with Charles and William Parker. Sentence was postponed. The Marquis of Queensberry was in attendance during the day and remained in court until the finish of the case.

On Wednesday morning, Oscar Wilde, 40, author, surrendered to take his trial a second time on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours. The Solicitor-General said the charges alleged against the prisoner extended over a period from February 1892, down to about March, 1893. He thought the jury, after they had heard the evidence, would be of opinion that the statements of the witnesses were fully corroborated, so far as they possibly could be. Oscar Wilde gave money to Wood in March, 1893, and Wood went to America. Edward Shelley detailed the circumstances under which he made the acquaintance of Oscar Wilde and as to his relationship with the prisoner, his evidence being a repitition of that given at the last trial. Wood and Charles Parker having given evidence, the case was adjourned.

On Thursday Wm, Parker, brother of Char. Parker, was first called, and was followed by witnesses from the Savoy hotel, some of the evidence not having been given before. The prisoner's evidence in the Queensberry's trial was then read by counsel. At five minutes past three the Solicitor-General intimated that the case for the prosecution had closed.

Sir Edward Clarke, for the defence, first submitted that on the counts charging the prisoner with indecenies with persons unknown at the Savoy hotel on the 9th and 20th March, 1893, there was no evidence to go to the jury, on the ground that the evidence of the chambermaids was uncorroborated.

Mr Justice Wills thought his duty led him to submit these counts to the jury.

Sir Edward Clarke submitted in regard to Shelley that there was no corroboration.

His Lordship said Shelley must be treated as an accomplice, and at present he could see no corroboration. This charge would therefore be withdrawn.

Sir E. Clarke said in the case of Wood he should again submit that there was no corroboration of the charge.

The Solicitor-General protested against the charges being withdrawn other than by the jury under the direction of the Judge. In the case of Wood he submitted that there was sample corroboration.

His Lordship said he should leave this case to the jury, but he should point out to them in what direction it went.

The case was again adjourned.