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.

London, Saturday Evening.

The trial of Oscar Wilde was resumed at the Old Bailey today before Mr Justice Wills. The prisoner, who looked ill and anxious, having entered the dock, the Solicitor-General resumed his speech in reply for the prosecution. He asked what was the relationship of the prisoner with Lord Alfred Douglas, and said though Lord Queensberry resented the intimacy between the prisoner and Lord Alfred, the prisoner continued the intimacy and flaunted Lord Alfred at hotels in London and the country. He contended that it had been shown that the prisoner was closely intimate with Taylor.

Sir Edward said that was not borne out by evidence.

The Solicitor-General said that it appeared as if counsel for the defence desired that one man should go down and another be saved because of a false glamour of art.

Sir Edward Clarke protested against this mode of appeal to the jury.

The Solicitor-General next referred the letter which referred to the "rose leaf lips and madness of kissing." The jury were tried to be put off with the story that this was a prose poem which they could not appreciate. They must thank God they could not. They could only appreciate it as its proper level which was somewhat lower than a beast’s. His learned friend had warned the jury lest by their verdict they should enable blackmailing to rear its head unblushingly. The jury must believe the evidence of Parker and Wood, because no motive had been shown why they should deceive them. He submitted that the conflict of testimony only happened at the point where admission stopped and actual confession commenced. In conclusion, he said he had pointed out the strength of the case, and he now had to ask the jury to do their duty in the case. They had nothing to do with Oscar Wilde’s literary past or future. He had a right to be acquitted if they believed him innocent. But if, on their consciences, they believed that he was guilty of these charges, then they had only to follow closely the obligation of the oath which had been imposed upon them.

His Lordship, in summing up, that this was a very painful and shocking case, which necessitated a cold and calm administration of justice, in order that due protection should be afforded to the defendant. For himself he would rather try a most shocking murder case than be engaged in trying one of these cases. He could not, however, say that his sense of difficulty was increased in this case by any consideration of the education or culture of the person accused, because having regard to the result of the Queensberry libel case they need not distress themselves by ordinary considerations which would add to their distress, in the case of persons of education or of culture. With regard to the course which this case had taken, he thought it fortunate that the jury had disagreed in the first case and that Wilde and Taylor were now tried separately. Though he thought the trials should have been taken in a different order, he did not think that the defendant in the present case had suffered one hairsbreadth by the fact that Taylor was tried first. Something had been said as to the hardships upon the defendant in having to appear three times in the witness box, but in cases where there were circumstances of grave suspicion and conduct which had to be explained, and which could be explained by the defendant, the practice of allowing defendants to give evidence in their own defence was to his mind, a circumstance of the utmost vains in the administration of justice. They were substantially four charges involved in this case. There was alleged misconduct with Wood, alleged misconduct with Parker, and two matters alleged at the Savoy Hotel. Before he entered upon this case he wished to say that he thought it would be a bad day for the administration of justice in England when juries ceased either to take their direction upon points which lay within his own proper province from the judge or surrendered to another their own inherent judgement of the facts that were before them. In this case he could not give a simple colorless summing up which was no good to anybody, but he hoped that in respect of any opinions which might be hinted at in anything he might say that they would regard them, not as opinions which were to guide them, but as matters they were to criticize and see whether they were justified. He would not address himself in the case of Wood. It was unfortunate that in dealing with Wood’s case he must deal with a good deal that affected Lord Alfred Douglas, who was not a party to these proceedings, and could not give evidence.

A juror — He would be here.

His Lordship said he could not volunteer himself. He was anxious, in the case of a young man like this, to say nothing that might help to blast his career in life, but that did not in the least relieve him from the necessity of investigating the facts of this case. With regard to these charges the defendant was entitled to the full benefit of the observation that these matters were alleged to have taken place two or three years ago. But they must not forget that these charges had grown out of the writing of these letters to this young man. It was a matter for the grave consideration of the jury as to whether the letter referring the madness of kissing pointed as unclean relations and appetites on both sides. He would not invite their attention to any particular expression in that letter. It was Lord Alfred Douglas who sent Wood to the defendant. They were not to believe anything simply because Wood said it. That would be absurd. Wood belonged to a vile class, and was at least acting with a gang of blackmailers and a gang of people addicted to certain practices, and it was probable that that sort of person would do the same thing himself. The case as to Wood seemed to him to depend upon what they thought was the character of the original introduction — whether it was stamped with charity, kindness, and goodwill, or whether it was for a wicked purpose.

The Foreman of the Jury — The jury are very anxious to know whether, in view of the intimacy between Lord Alfred Douglas and Wood, a warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas was ever issued.

His Lordship — I should think not.

The Foreman — Or was ever contemplated?

His Lordship — That I cannot say.

The Foreman — The jury wish to know whether, if they deduce guilt from these letters, it will affect Lord Alfred Douglas as well as the defendant.

His Lordship said he thought the receipt of these letters, and the continued intimacy was as damaging to the reputation of the recipient as of the sender, but that had nothing to do with the present inquiry. The question was whether guilt was brought home to the man in the dock.

At this point the Court adjourned for luncheon.

On resuming after luncheon.

His Lordship again referred to the inquiries by the jury regarding Lord Alfred Douglas. The suspicion was that Lord Alfred Douglas would be spared if he was guilty simply because he was Lord Alfred Douglas. That was a matter that they could not discuss, and he asked them to disregard ant such considerations as that. The present inquiry was whether the man in the dock had been guilty of these immoral practices with certain persons, of whom Lord A Douglas was not one. He next came to deal with the case of Parker, and they had to account for the defendant’s association with him. That was one of the crucial points in this inquiry. They must remember in this connection that it was stated that Parker got as introduction to Wilde because he wished to go on the stage. That statement was borne out by Parker himself. With regard to the two remaining charges he did not think that, in view of the lapse of time that had occurred, it would be safe to rely on the evidence of the masseur. The chambermaid’s case was, however, very different. It was a very remarkable story. The question was whether they were satisfied Alfred Douglas’s. As to letters obtained from Wood, if neither Wood nor Parker attempted to blackmail defendant when there was an opportunity they might be sure there was no ground for it. In conclusion, his lordship said he had done his best to hold the balance fairly, and he thought with the help of counsel all prejudice had been kept out of the case.

The jury retired precisely at 3 30 pm. After the jury had retired the prisoner left the dock by the staircase leading into the cells below, and at the same time Lord Douglas of Hawick left the court. The Marquis of Queensberry did not put in appearance after luncheon.

At 5 25 the jury, who had previously sent a communication to the judge, returned into court. The foreman said they wished to hear the evidence of the waiter at 10 St James’s street read over. The judge complied, and said there was not evidence that Parker slept at that house. The jury then again retired, and after an absence of a few minutes returned with a verdict of guilty upon all the counts of the indictment.

Taylor was then placed in the dock alongside Wilde.

Sir E Clarke appealed for the postponement of sentence till the next sessions on the ground that a demurrer of that indictment was bad had not been argued.

His Lordship said the passing of sentence would not interfere with the argument, and he thought it right to complete the case at once. Addressing the defendants, he said that the jury had arrived at a correct verdict. He could not entertain a shadow of a doubt. He hoped those who sometimes imagined that a judge was half hearted in the cause of decency and morality, because he took care that prejudice was not allowed to enter into the case, would see that that was consistent with a stern sense of indignation at the horrible crime which had been brought home to both of them. There could be no doubt that Taylor had kept a kind of male brother, and that Wilde had been guilty of acts of a hideous kind it was equally impossible to doubt. In such circumstances he should pass the severest sentence which the law allowed him, and which was totally inadequate to such a case of this. Wilde and Taylor would each be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years.

Taylor, on hearing the sentence, hurried from the dock, but Wilde, who seemed quite dazed, stood with fixed gaze and trembling hands, and look as if about to faint. Two warders were quickly at his side, but Wilde help up his hands as if to keep them off, and addressed the court in a few unintelligible words. He was then hurried below.

London, Sunday. Immediately after the passing of sentence on Wilde and Taylor the prisoners were removed to the cells in Newgate Prison, adjoining the Central Criminal Court, pending the preparation of the legal warrants authorizing their detention for two years. Both were suffering from nervousness, and betrayed their mental anxiety. From the first they were separated, but travelled in the same prison van to Pentonville Prison, where they will serve the preliminary portion of the sentence, a period to be eventually decided by the officials of the jail. When handed over to the Governor of Pentonville the prisoners were taken separately to the reception ward and each had to give details of his identity and religion and submit to a medical examination, after which they passed through the hands of the prison bathroom attendants and barber, and exchanged their own clothes for prison garb, being afterwards handed over to the care of the chaplain.

Today they attended the prison chapel with the other occupants of the jail, and with the exception of exercise time that were confined to their cells, where they will in future be kept unless their health becomes such as to entitle them to infirmary treatment, in which event the prison doctor will decide the nature of the work they must perform. By the terms of their sentence they will be isolated from their friends except upon four occasions each year, and even this privilege may be forfeited by indifferent conduct.