Compare Documents

The trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor, on an indictment charging them with certain misdemeanours.

The Judge summed up the case. He said the allegations made against the two Prisoners, both of whom were gentlemen of good education, whilst one held a very high position as a man of letters, were of a very grave and important character, and required of the Jury their most patient and careful investigation. They ought to discard absolutely from their minds everything that they had read or heard about the case outside the evidence that had been given, and consider the matter solely on the testimony that had been submitted by the Crown in support of the charges. Undoubtedly, if the acts suggested were committed, the persons who had been called to relate them were accomplices ; but by a longstanding and wholesome practice of our Criminal Courts no Prisoner could be convicted by a Jury of a criminal charge on the uncorroborated evidence of accomplices. If Juries were to act on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice in an alleged crime, to what terrible dangers might innocent persons be exposed by designing persons ! In this case, therefore, they had to see if there had been any corroboration of the testimony of the young men who had been called ; and had there been none, it would have been his duty to direct the Jury to acquit ; but undoubtedly there was a certain amount of corroboration as to the acquaintanceship of the young men with the Prisoners, and also with reference to some other particulars of the narrative that they told. He would leave the case of each of these young men to the consideration of the Jury. In the case of one of the Parkers, Wood, and Atkins, they were not only accomplices, but they had very properly been called blackmailers, and with regard to Atkins, he himself had, in the hearing of the Jury, proved that he had told the grossest and most deliberate falsehoods.Therefore, when the Jury came to consider the value of their evidence they ought not to overlook the character of these persons. The verdict that was given in the Queensberry case had not the least binding effect on the Jury in the present case. As to what was called the literature branch of the case, the Jury ought not, in his opinion, to form any unfavourable impression by reason of the fact that Mr. Wilde was the author of the book " Dorian Gray," for the author ought not to be confounded with the persons that he creates in his work. Of course, the book was open to criticism ; but in a criminal charge it was very doubtful if it was open to the interpretations put upon it by the prosecution. Before the Jury formed any conclusion in this matter they ought to weigh most carefully the whole of tbe surroundings attending the production of the work, and especially the explanation that Mr. Wilde had given in connection with " Dorian Gray." Whilst some of our greatest writers had passed, long lives in writing literature of the highest genius — literature that nobody could read without advantage — other great writers, perfectly noble-minded men, somehow or another, had committed to paper writings which were most painful for any decent persons with ordinary modesty to read. The Jury ought not, therefore, to be unfavourably influenced in dealing with a work of this nature, having regard to the many other considerations that must not be lost sight of in dealing with the case. As to Shelley, he was no doubt an accomplice, if the acts related by him, in fact, occurred. It was a matter for the Jury to determine what amount of reliance ought to be placed on Shelley's testimony. As to Atkins, who proved himself to be an unscrupulous and untruthful witness, who had impudently told falsehood after falsehood, probably the Jury would think it unsafe to rely upon him at all. The Judge dealt with the other incidents referred to in support of the case for the prosecution, his observations having reference to the questions raised on the letters produced, written by Wilde, and as to the evidence of the men Wood and Parker relative to the various transactions in connection with the Prisoners, and as to the character and the conduct of these persons. He dealt also with the charges against Taylor. The case was an important one to the community, and if the Jury thought that the Prisoners were guilty they ought fearlessly to say so. On the other hand, innocent persons ought not to be convicted of crimes they had not committed. He was confident that the Jury would do justice between the Prisoners and the public. One of the Defendants was a man of high intellectual gifts, and one might reasonably suppose that he would have been incapable of such conduct. The same remark applied to Taylor; but still the Jury had to deal with the evidence, upon which they could alone return their verdict.

The Jury retired to consider their verdict at 25 minutes to two o'clock. At three o'clock a communication was brought from the Jury and conveyed by the Clerk of Arraigns to the Judge. At 3.20 a disagreement seemed probable. At 4.15 the Judge sent for the Clerk of the Arraigns, Mr. Avory, who proceeded to his Lordship's private room. Subsequently Mr. Avory went to the Jury, apparently with a communication from the Judge. Mr. Avory returned in a few minutes, and proceeded at once to the Judge's private room.

The Jury, after a deliberation of three hours and three-quarters, returned into Court, when the Foreman said they were unable to agree upon a verdict. There was no chance, in his opinion, of the Jury agreeing to a verdict.

Sir E. Clarke asked that a verdict of acquittal on the conspiracy counts, upon which no evidence was offered, should be returned by the Jury.

The Judge said he would direct that an acquittal be entered on the record in regard to the conspiracy counts, and with respect of the counts referring to Wood and Atkins.

Sir E. Clarke applied for bail for Oscar Wilde, observing that he did not think the Crown would offer any objection after what had occurred.

Mr. Clarke Hall applied for bail for Taylor.

The Judge. — l do not feel able to accede to the application.

Mr. Gill said the case would certainly be tried again.

The Jury were discharged, and the case was ordered to stand over to the next Sessions. It was arranged that further application for bail should be made in the usual course to a Judge in Chambers. The Prisoners were removed to Holloway Prison.

In our report of the proceedings in this case in Monday's paper, by the accidental omission of the name of the witness Atkins, on his recall, an admission that he had been charged by the police with an offence, was erroneously attributed to the witness Shelley.

LONDON, May 1.

There was a crowded court at the Old Bailey to-day when the trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor for offences under the Criminal Law Amendment Act entered upon its final stage, after having occupied four days, before Mr. Justice Charles and a jury.

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.

Simultaneously with the three loud raps upon the door which announced the approach of the judge the prisoners were brought into the dock. Wilde is grown positively grey in the face, and can no longer keep out of his eyes the haggard consciousness of his terrible position. Taylor has changed less. He still wore a weakly amiable smile.

His lordship embarked at once upon his summing-up, which occupied three hours. He described the charges against the prisoners, of committing acts of indecency, and as against Taylor of procuring the commission of such acts, and expressed satisfaction that the counts charging them with conspiracy had been withdrawn. He was sure he did not know why those counts were ever inserted at all. It was a highly inconvenient course to join counts with regard to one of which the prisoners could give evidence, while with regard to the other they could not, and he should direct an acquittal upon the charges of conspiracy against both the prisoners, as well as upon one count of the indictment against Taylor, to which ho need not now further allude, but as to which there was no evidence proper for the jury's consideration. He asked the jury to apply their minds only to the evidence. For weeks it had been impossible to open a newspaper without reading some reference to the case, and especially to the prisoner Wilde, but his lordship earnestly hoped that the jury would not allow any preconceived opinions to weigh with them in trying two persons, both of good education, and one of high intellectual gifts. As to the witnesses, where acts of indecency were alleged to have been committed with the consent of the witnesses, those persons were accomplices in the wicked act, and by a wholesome practice of the courts for certainly 200 years no defendant could be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice in his crimes. Otherwise innocent people might be exposed to terrible dangers by designing or spiteful persons. In this case, therefore, had there been no corroboration of the evidence of the young men to whom the jury had listened it would have been at once his lordship's duty to direct an acquittal. But he was clearly of opinion that there was corroboration of the kind the law requires in all the cases. His lordship did not propose to deal at any length with the incidents of the Queensberry trial, but it must be remembered that the evidence which Wilde gave at that trial was given upon oath, and must not be lost sight of in considering that he gave yesterday in his own defence. They all knew how the case arose. Lord Queensberry published a card which undoubtedly libelled Wilde, who at once initiated proceedings for criminal libel, which led to the trial on which they were now embarked. The libel referred to occurrences in 1892, but was not published till 1893. After Wilde had been examined and cross-examined, but before any evidence had been called for the plea of justification, Wilde by his counsel agreed to a verdict that Lord Queensberry was not guilty of criminal libel, and that the publication of the card was for the public benefit. That verdict, it was necessary to remember, was in no way binding on the present jury. His lordship referred to the nature of the plea of justification, and to the reason why such offences as it alleged in connection with the lads Conway and Crainger were not included in the present indictment, having occurred out of the jurisdiction of the court. On the conclusion of the Queensberry trial Wilde and Taylor were arrested to answer the charges for which they now awaited the jury's verdict. A very large portion of the evidence of Wilde at the Queensberry trial was devoted to what Sir Edward Clarke had called the literary part of the case. It was attempted to show by cross-examination of Wilde as to works he had published, especially in regard to the book called "Dorian Gray," that he was a man of most unprincipled character with regard to the relation of men to boys; and, secondly, with regard to a magazine called the Chameleon, published in the autumn of last year, and in which it was alleged that Wilde had given the sanction of his name to the most abominable doctrines. His lordship had not read ``Dorian Gray," and assumed that the jury had not, but they had been told that it was the story of a youth of vicious character whose face did not reveal the abysses of wretchedness into which he had fallen, but whose picture painted by an artist friend revealed all the consequences of his passion. In the end he stabs the picture, whereupon he himself falls dead, and on his vicious face appear all the signs which before had been upon the picture. His lordship did not think that in a criminal case the jury should place any unfavourable inference upon the fact that Wilde was the author of "Dorian Gray." Sir Edward Clarke had quoted from Coleridge, "Judge no man by his books," but his lordship would prefer to say "Confound no man with the characters of the persons he creates." Because a novelist put into the mouth of his villain the most abominable sentiments itmust not be assumed that he shared them. As to the Chameleon, the only connection proved between that magazine and Wilde was that it was prefaced by two pages of "Phrases and Philosophies to the Use of the Young" by the prisoner, of which it was sufficient to say that some were amusing, some cynical, some, if his lordship might be allowed to criticise, silly--but wicked, no. The learned counsel who represented Lord Queensberry called attention to a story, a filthy narrative of the most disgusting character, called "The Priest and the Acolyte," of which the author, who signed himself "X.," should be thoroughly ashamed. With that story Wilde had nothing whatever to do, and to impute to him anything in it was quite absurd. To judge him by another man's works, which he had never seen, would be highly unjust. So much for the literary part of the case. His lordship would pass to another phase which had more relevance to the issue the jury were trying. In the same Chameleon were two sonnets by Lord Alfred Douglas, one called "In Praise of Shame" and the other "The Two Loves." It was alleged that these sonnets had an immoral and unnatural tendency, and that Wilde had approved of them. What was it he had said with reference to them? His lordship, with an admirable elocutionary art, read the sonnet in praise of shame. Of the other he only quoted some lines. Wilde looked up with a fresh interest at this judicial appreciation of the literary form, if not of the sentiments of the poems. His lordship proceeded to make a big mistake. He quoted the Wilde letter beginning "Your sonnet is quite lovely, and it is a marvel that your red rose-leaf lips should be made as much for the music of song as for the madness of kissing." He imagined this applied to the sonnet in the Chameleon, but Sir Edward Clarke rose at once to point out that the letter bore a date long antecedent to the publication of the Chameleon, and clearly referred to some other matter.

His lordship recognised the error, but went on to read the letter, as veil as that other from the Savoy Hotel, written in 1893, in which Wilde began, "Dearest of all boys,-- Your letter was delightful red and yellow wine to me," and concluded, "I fear I must leave. I have no money, no credit, and a heart of lead." Abandoning the sonnets and dealing with these letters, his lordship asked if Mr. Carson was right in regarding them as of a horrible and indecent character. Turning next to the charges made against the defendants, his Lordship called the jury's attention to that made in reference to Shelley. Although there was in the letters written by Shelley evidence of excitability, the prosecution denied the argument of Sir E. Clarke that his evidence ought not to be received on account of his mind having become disordered. The decision of this matter must rest entirely with the jury, and their responsibility was very great. His lordship next dealt with the evidence given by Atkins, and expressed the opinion that this witness was most reckless; and the jury would probably be of opinion that if Atkins was the only person who spoke on these matters it would be totally unsafe to rely upon his statements at all. The judge remarked on the impudence of the witness in trying to deceive the jury. There was no doubt that he was a most unscrupulous and untruthful man, and the jury, who were the judges as to the credibility of witnesses, must decide whether or not they would accept his evidence. As to what was alleged to have taken place at an hotel in the Strand, the evidence given by the servants and the masseur was of vast importance. If their story was true, there was evidence which could be acted upon with regard to certain of the charges. The learned judge next referred to the introduction of the two Parkers to Taylor, and to the extraordinary condition of the rooms in Little College-street. He pointed out that at length the attention of the police was directed to this house, but it must be remembered, in favour of Taylor, that although an entrance was effected by means of an artifice, no step was taken with regard to the house, and Taylor continued to live there. Three of the men on whom the greatest reliance was placed with reference to the charges against the prisoners were all affected, in the same way, by the wicked crime of extorting money from persons to whom they were introduced, and whom they had got into compromising positions. In conclusion, his lordship expressed the hope that they would do justice to the public on the one hand and to the defendants on the other. They must deal fairly with the evidence. If they thought they ought not to act on the evidence, then they would acquit prisoners; on the other hand, if they believed the evidence, then they must do their duty.

The jury retired at 1.35.

At three o'clock a communication was brought from the jury, and conveyed by the Clerk of Arraigns to the judge, and shortly afterwards the jury had luncheon taken to them.

The jury, after a deliberation of three hours and three-quarters, returned into court, when the foreman, who had caused a communication to be sent to tho judge, in reply to his lordship, said that they were unable to agree as to a verdict. There was no chance, in his opinion, of the jury agreeing to a verdict.

Sir Edward Clarke asked that a verdict of acquittal on the conspiracy counts, upon which no evidence was offered, be returned by the jury.

The judge said that he would direct that an acquittal be entered on the record in regard to the conspiracy counts, and with respect of the counts referring to Wood and Atkins.

The jury were accordingly discharged.

Sir Edward Clarke applied for bail for Oscar Wilde. Application was made for bail on behalf of Taylor.

The judge: I do not feel able to accede to the application. In reply to Sir Edward Clarke, his lordship said that if another application for bail was to be made, it would be in the usual course, made before a Judge in Chambers.

It is stated that the prisoners, Wilde and Taylor, will be tried again at the next Sessions of the Central Criminal Court.