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 yesterday, before Mr. Justice Wills, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours.

The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke and Mr. Charles Mathews defended.

In continuation of the case for the Crown, William Parker gave evidence relative to his association with Wilde. Several witnesses were called, employed at the Savoy Hotel, to speak to alleged incidents which occurred with persons unknown in March, 1893: and a considerable portion of the rest of the time of the Court was engaged in the reading of the transcript of the shorthand note taken of the evidence of Wilde at the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for alleged libel. The evidence of the arrest of Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel after the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry was given by Detective-inspector Richards and Detective-sergeant Brockwell, of Scotland- yard, and the case for the prosecution closed.

Sir Edward Clarke submitted that there was no evidence to go to the Jury on the count relative to the alleged incidents at the Savoy Hotel.

His Lordship admitted that the question was very near the line, and said that, should occasion arise, he would feel justified in reserving the point for the consideration of the Court of Appeal. He felt, however, that it was a matter the responsibility of determining which ought to rest with the Jury.

Sir Edward Clarke submitted next that there was no evidence as required by law to corroborate Shelley, and that, therefore, the count affecting him ought to be withdrawn from the Jury, it being the long-established practice of the Courts in criminal cases to decline to invite juries to act on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice.

His Lordship expressed an opinion that the necessary corroboration required within the meaning of the wording of the rules laid down by the Judges, and in accordance with the general practice of Criminal Courts respecting accomplices, was not present in regard to Shelley, the count in respect of whom he should withdraw from the consideration of the Jury.

Sir Edward Clarke moved next to get the count affecting Wood withdrawn on similar grounds.

The Solicitor-General protested against any decision being given other than by the Jury on these issues, the matters being, in his opinion, purely questions for them to determine.

After some discussion, his Lordship ruled that the case of Wood should go to the Jury.

At this stage the trial was adjourned until to-day, when the defence will be opened. Wilde was released on bail.