Compare Documents

The trial of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours, was resumed on Saturday. The Marquess of Queensberry was again in attendance, as also were the gentlemen who had been the Prisoners sureties, Lord P. Douglas and the Rev. Stewart Headlam.

The Solicitor General, resuming his speech in his reply on behalf of the Crown, dealt in detail with the arguments laid before the Jury by Sir Edward Clarke in defence of Wilde, and he commented in strong terms on observations that were made respecting the lofty situation Mr. Wilde in connection with his literary accomplishments for the purpose of unduly influencing the judgment of the Jury in considering the issue before them, and said the Jury ought to discard absolutely any such appeal, to apply their common sense to the testimony, and to form a conclusion on the evidence, which he submitted fully established the charges. He was commenting on another branch of the case when Sir E. Clarke interposed on the ground that the Solicitor General was alluding to incidents connected with another trial. The Solicitor General maintained that he was strictly within his rights.

The Judge held that the Solicitor General was entitled to make the comments he was making.

An observation from the Solicitor General bearing on the interruption of Sir Edward Clarke evoked laughter in court.

The Judge said this sort of thing was most offensive to him. It was painful enough to have to try such a case as the present and keep the scales of justice evenly balanced, and when the Court was pestered with the applause and other expressions of the feelings of senseless people, who had no business with the case, but came only to satisfy the cravings of a morbid curiosity, it was intolerable. If it were repeated he would have the court cleared.

The Solicitor General criticised the answers given by Wilde to the charges, which explanations, he submitted, were not worthy of belief. The Jury could not fail to put the interpretation on the conduct of the Prisoner that he was a guilty man, and they ought to say so by their verdict.

The Judge, in summing-up, referred to the difficulties of the case in some of its features. He regretted that, if the conspiracy counts were unnecessary, or could not be established, they should have been placed in the indictment. The Jury must not surrender their own independent judgment in dealing with the facts, and ought to discard everything which was not relevant to the issue before them, or did not assist their judgment. He did not desire to remark any more than he could help about Lord Alfred Douglas or the Marquess of Queensberry, but tbe whole of this lamentable inquiry arose through the Defendant's association with Lord Alfred Douglas. He did not think that tbe action of the Marquess of Queensberry, in leaving the card at the Defendant's club, whatever motives he had, was that of a gentleman. The Jury were entitled to consider that these alleged acts happened some years ago. They ought to be the best judges as to whether the testimony of the witnesses was worthy or not of belief. The letters written by the Prisoner to Lord Alfred Douglas were undoubtedly open to suspicion, and they had an important bearing on Wood's evidence. There was no corroboration of Wood as to the visit to Tite-street, and if his story had been true he thought that some corroboration might have been obtained. Wood belonged to the vilest class of persons that society was pestered with, and the Jury ought not to believe his story unless it was satisfactorily corroborated. Their decision must turn on the character of the first introduction of Wilde to Wood. Did they believe that Wilde was actuated by charitable motives or by improper motives ?

The Foreman of the Jury, interposing, asked whether a warrant had been issued for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas, and it not whether it was contemplated that a warrant should be issued.

The Judge. — l cannot tell ; nor need we discuss that, because Lord Alfred Douglas may yet have to answer a charge. He was not called. There may be a thousand considerations of which we may know nothing that might prevent his appearance in the witness-box. I think you should deal with the matter upon tho evidence before you.

The Foreman.— If we are to deduce any guilt from these letters, it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the Defendant.

The Judge. — Quite so ; but how does that relieve the Defendant ? We have got the testimony of his guilt to deal with now. I believe that to be the recipient of such letters, and to continue the intimacy, is as fatal to the reputation of the recipient as to the sender ; but that you have really nothing to do with at present. Our present inquiry is about the man who is in the dock, whether the guilt is brought home to him.

After a brief adjournment, the Judge alluded to the Parker case. He said the Jury had seen the Parkers as they had seen Wood, and the same question must arise in their minds. Were those the kind of young men with whom they themselves would care to sit down to dine ? Were they the sort of persons one expected to find the companions of men of education ? It was a very long time ago for the waiter to remember having served the supper at the Savoy, and the sums that appeared in the bill were high for such a supper. He (the Judge) knew nothing of the Savoy ; but he thought "chicken and salad for two, 16s." very high. He was afraid he would never have supped there himself. Having considered the whole of the evidence, he concluded that the question was whether this was evidence of guilt or of suspicion, and this question would have to be answered by the Jury, whom he desired to thank for the patience displayed through the prolonged inquiry.

The Jury retired at 3.30, taking with them a series of questions which had been written for them by the Judge.

Two hours later the Jury sent a request to the Judge that he would read certain of his notes in reference to Charles Parker. The Judge did so, and the Jury again retired. They were not absent many minutes, and returned with a verdict against Wilde on each of the six counts of the indictment. Upon the count relating to Shelley, the verdict was Not Guilty.

Alfred Taylor was then brought into the dock to receive sentence.

Sir E. Clarke asked that sentence might be postponed to the next Sessions, on the ground that a demurrer stood on the record alleging that the indictment was bad.

Mr. Grain, for Taylor, made a similar application on behalf of his client.

The Solicitor General opposed the application, on the ground that sentence being passed could not prejudice any future argument.

The Judge. — It is not a matter about which I entertain any doubt, and to pass sentence now would in no sense prejudice the result of the inquiry. I think it may be well to complete the proceedings here on the other count.

In passing sentence, the Judge, speaking with great emotion, said — Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor, it has never been my lot to try a case of this kind so bad. One has to put a certain constraint upon oneself to prevent one from describing in language which I would rather not use the sentiments which must arise in the breast of every man who has a spark of decent feeling left in him, and who has heard the details of these two terrible trials. That the Jury have arrived at a correct verdict I cannot persuade myself to entertain a shadow of a doubt ; and I hope that at all events those who sometimes imagine that a Judge is half-hearted in cases of indecency and immorality, because he takes care that no prejudice shall enter into them, may see that that is consistent at least with the utmost sense of indignation at the horrible crimes brought home to both of you. It is of no use my addressing you. People who can do these things must be dead to every sense of shame, and one cannot hope to produce any effect upon them. It is the worst case I have ever tried. That you, Taylor, kept an infamous house it is impossible to doubt, and that you, Wilde, have been the centre of a circle of extensive corruption among young men of the most hideous kind, it is equally impossible to doubt. I shall, under such circumstances, be expected to pass the severest sentence that the law allows ; in my judgment it is utterly inadequate for such cases. The sentence upon each of you is imprisonment with hard labour for two years.

As the Judge concluded, Wilde, clutching the front of the dock and holding himself back at arms' length, said, "May I say nothing, my Lord ? "

The Judge looked at him, but did not speak. For a moment the silence in court was painful, and then there burst forth loud hisses and cries of "Shame!" which the ushers failed to suppress. Before the convict Wilde could repeat his question, two warders seized him, and hurried him below to tbe cells.

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.