The Morning Post - Friday, May 24, 1895

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was no evidence as required by law to corroborate Shelley, and that, therefore, the count affecting him ought to be withdrawn from the Jury, it being the long-established practice of the Courts in criminal cases to decline to invite juries to act on the uncorroborated evidence of an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Sir Edward Clarke moved next to get the count affecting Wood withdrawn on similar grounds.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

The Times - Monday, May 27, 1895

The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40, author, upon a charge of unlawfully committing acts of gross indecency with Charles Parker and Alfred Wood and with persons whose names were unknown, was resumed.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL continued his address on the part of the prosecution. In the course of his speech there was a laugh in the portion of the Court set apart for the public, whereupon the Solicitor-General expressed his surprise that there should be any stray laughter, and

Mr. JUSTICE WILLS observed that such exhibitions of feeling on the part of people who had no business to be there, and who were only present for the purpose of gratifying their morbid curiosity were most offensive to him, and if there was anything of the sort again he would have the Court cleared.

Tho SOLICITOR-GENERAL referred in detail to the evidence which had been given on the part of the prosecution. With regard to the appeal which Sir Edward Clarke had made as the literary past and the literary future of Wilde, the Solicitor-General observed that with that they had nothing whatever to do. Wilde had a right to be acquitted if they thought he was an innocent man, but if on their consciences they believed that he was guilty of these charges than the jury had only one consideration, and that was to follow closely the obligation of the oath which had been imposed upon them.

Mr, JUSTICE WILLS then summed up, and in the course of his remarks said that the passing of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which made a defendant a competent but not compellable witness, was never intended to alter or to infringe upon the sacred old principle of English law that the prosecution must make out the charge against the accused. His Lordship commented upon the beneficial nature of the provision in that Act of Parliament enabling a defendant to be called as a witness, and went on to say that it would be a bad day for the administration of justice in England when juries ceased to take their direction on points of law from the Judge, or when they surrendered to any Judge in the land--no matter what his learning, experience, or ability was--their own independent judgement on the facts which were before them. It was the province of the jury to decide upon the facts. The learned Judge proceeded to refer in detail to the circumstances of the case.

The Foreman of the Jury said that the jury wanted to know whether a warrant against Lord Alfred Douglas was ever issued.

Mr. Justice Wills replied that he could not say, but he should think not. They had not heard of it.

The Foreman of the Jury.--Or ever contemplated?

Mr. Justice Wills replied that he could not say. He did not think they need discuss that. The issue of a warrant depended always on what evidence there was. The mere production of letters was not sufficient; there must be evidence of some act.

The Foreman of the Jury.--If we are to deduce any guilt from those letters it would apply equally to Lord Alfred Douglas.

Mr. Justice Wills said that they had nothing to do with that. The question which the Jury had to decide was whether Wilde was guilty of the charge made against him. His Lordship reviewed the evidence which had been given in the case, and pointed out to the jury the questions for their consideration. There was only evidence as to one of the counts in reference to St. James's-place.

The jury retired to consider their verdict at half-past 3 o'clock, and at 26 minutes past 5 o'clock they returned and asked a question in reference to the evidence as to St. James's-place.

Mr. JUSTICE WILLS read his note of the evidence of a witness on the subject, and

The jury retired again, but returned into Court about five minutes afterwards and said they found Wilde Guilty on all the counts except that which charged him is respect to Edward Shelley, upon which they found him Not guilty. That count, it will be remembered, was withdrawn from the jury by Mr. Justice Wills on Thursday.

The announcement of the verdict was greeted with a cry of "Shame" in a portion of the Court reserved for the public.

The defendant Taylor was then placed in the dock.

SIB EDWARD CLARKE asked Mr. Justice Wills not to pass sentence until next sessions, as there was a demurrer to be argued in reference to the indictment.

Mr. J. P. GRAIN, who appeared for the defendant Taylor, said that the argument of the demurrer would affect Taylor equally, and he therefore made the same application as Sir Edward Clarke.

The Solicitor-General opposed the application. The passing of sentence now would not interfere with the argument of the demurrer.

MB. JUSTICE WILLS.--There was a verdict of not guilty.

SIK EDWARD CLARKE.--That does not affect it.Mr. JUSTICE WILLS.--What is the objection?SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--That the indictment is bad?

MR. JUSTICE WILLS.--What is the point?SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--The point is the joining of two sets of counts on one set of which the defendant could be called as witnesses and on the other could not.

Mr. JUSTICE WILIS said that, as the passing of sentence now would not affect the argument of the demurrer, be thought it his duty to complete the proceedings here.

MR. JUSTICE WILLS, addressing Wilde and Taylor, said that it had never been his lot to try a case of this kind so bad. One has to put stern constraint upon oneself to prevent oneself from describing in language which he would rather not use the sentiments which must rise in tho breast of every man who had any spark of decent feeling in him and who had heard the details of these two terrible trials. Ho could not do anything except pass the severest sentence which the law allowed, and in his judgment it was totally inadequate to such a case as this. The sentence was that each of them be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years.

On the sentence being pronounced there were cries of "Shame" and hisses in Court.

Highlighted DifferencesNot significantly similar