Compare Documents

PROTEST BY THE JUDGE

The final stage in the trial of Oscar Wilde was entered upon on Saturday at the Old Bailey. The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lock- wood), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. H. Avorv appeared on behalf of the Public Prosecutor,and Sir E. Clarke, Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended. The court was again crowded, and great interest was taken in the proceedings.

The Solicitor-General resumed his reply on the whole case, and at the outset referred to the circumstances under which Lord Queensberry wrote the letter which was the cause of the charges being investigated in the first instance. He proceeded to urge that Sir E. Clarke had appealed to the jury to save his client on account of his high literary position. Under the glamour of art-

Sir E. Clarke most strongly protested against this sort of appeal to the jury, which suggested that it was his desire that one man should go down and the other be saved under the false glamour of art. This was far removed from the evidence laid before the court. His Lordship said that up to the present time there had been little or no allusion to the other trial.

Sir F. Lockwood declared that his learned friend in his final appeal to the jury laid great stress upon the literary position of his client. This man must be judged equally "i h the other according to the law. The Judge remarked that he would have worthing to say on the points raised after-

The Solicitor-General next referred to Taylor as a man upon whom Wilde would have relied, had his story been true. Sir E. Clarke had made much of the fact that it was Wilde himself who produced the first of the letters to Lord A. Douglas; but that was only done to take the sting out of the cross-examination.

Sir W. Clarke stated that the Solicitor-General had no right to make such an observation.

Sir F. Lockwood retorted, and there was some laughter in the court at the repeated conflicts between the two eminent counsel, whereupon Sir F. Lockwood protested against laughter in such a case.

His Lordship said it was hard enough to have to try a case of that sort, and hold the scales fairly between the parties, without being pestered with applause, which merely expressed the feelings of senseless people who had no business in the court except the gratification of morbid curiosity. If there was any more of this kind of thing he would have the court cleared.

Sir F. Lockwood proceeded to closely analyse the charges against Wilde, and commented on the strong point made by Sir E. Clarke in his appeal to the jury, that the Crown had provided one of the principal witnesses with a suit of clothes, and that some of these men had been in the custody of the detectives. These clothes had been provided in order that the witnesses should not appear in the uniform if the Queen, and most of the others had been in the custody of the detectives and removed from place to place with great secrecy to prevent their being tampered with, and to ensure their attendance in court. He made no sort of apology for the course taken by the prosecution on this matter. He dealt at length with the evidence called on behalf of the prosecution, and asked what object could the independent witnesses have in giving their independent stories but to speak the truth in the interests of the public. In conclusion Sir F. Lockwood asked the jury to do their duty fairly. If they believed Wilde to be an innocent man they must acquit him; but if, on their consciences, they believed him to be guilty of the offences charged against him there was only one consideration - to follow closely the obligations which the oath had imposed upon them.

SUMMING UP.

The Judge, in summing up, referred to the difficulties and responsibilities imposed upon everyone connected with a case such as that before the court. It dealt with matters in which, thank God, one's ordinary experience of human life served one but little; but they were surrounded with an atmosphere of natural and inevitable prejudice, which made the cool administration of justice difficult. He regretted that the charges of conspiracy were ever introduced m the indictment; they ought either never to have been introduced, or never to have been abandoned when introduced. He did not believe that Wilde had suffered one hairs breadth by the order in which the defendants had been tried in the present the Solicitor-General that Taylor had not did not think that, under the circumstances, be could have made his appearance in the witness-box; and it was also inevitable that the defendant should give evidence if he hoped to have any chance of procuring a verdict of acquittal. He could not bring himself to give simply a colourless summing up, which was of no good to anybody; but expressed the hope that in respect of any opinions which might be hinted at or conveyed, the jury would regard them not as opinions to guide them, but rather as matters to criticize, to cavil with, to find fault with, and to see whether they were justified. It was the province of the jury themselves to decide; and it had been the aim of his judicial life, so far as he could, to preserve that province sacred. It was very unfortunate that in dealing with the case he should have to refer to Lord A. Douglas. He was not present, and was no party to the proceedings.

A Juror: My Lord, he could be here.

His Lordship assented that Lord Alfred could be present, but pointed out that he could not volunteer himself into the case. Continuing, the Judge remarked that he would say nothing that he could help to blast Lord A. Douglas's career in life; but it did not relieve him from the necessity of investigating, as far as he could, his relations with Wood . He referred to the defendant's letter to Lord A. Douglas, which Wilde said was a prose poem, and declared that it was poison for a young man. It was a lamentable one, necessitating the intervention of his friends. Whatever construction might be put upon the letter, it was one which an elder friend ought not to address to a young man. He proceeded to comment on the relations between the defendant, Lord A. Douglas, and the young men called on behalf of the prosecution; and in reference to Wilde's dealings with Wood, said it was for the jury to say whether they could accept the account given by the defendant, that he believed Wood to be a blackmailer coming to levy toll upon him because he possessed certain letters, and that he was so disarmed of suspicion by his candour in reference to the letter that he felt he had done great injustice in his own mind ; and, therefore, paid him £16, not for the letters, but as a pure act of benevolence to enable him to go to America. To destroy these appeared a most grievous mistake - a mad mistake. To believe anything simply because Wood said it would be absurd,as Wood belonged to perhaps the vilest class that our great cities produce; he was at least connected with a gang of black- mailers ; and the stress of the case with regard to him seemed to depend upon the character of the original introduction. Was it stamped with charity, kindness, and good- will simply, or was it by one wicked person to another?

The Foreman of the Jury, interrupting, said that in view of the intimacy with Lord Alfred Douglas the jury would be glad to know whether a warrant for Lord Alfred Douglas's apprehension was ever issued.

The Judge: I should think not.

The Foreman: Or ever contemplated?

The Judge: I 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 the 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 an adjournment of half-an-hour for luncheon, the Judge, on resuming at 2.25, implored the jury to give no heed to the fact that no charge had yet been brought against Lord Alfred Douglas, and to discard that consideration from their minds, lest it might prejudice the administration of justice. His Lordship then proceeded to deal with the case of Parker, speaking of him as mixed up with a gang of blackmailers, and pointing out that to accept his unsupported testimony would be monstrous ; but for some reason or other he appeared to have been a very acceptable companion, and the intimacy was an extraordinary one. It was the association with men of that class that created the suspicion in the case; but whether it ought to go beyond suspicion or not it was for the jury to say. He next dealt with the two occurrences at the Savoy Hotel, stating that one of them was most suspicious. In concluding he assured the jury that he had done his best to point out such things as he thought ought fairly to be said on behalf of the defendant, as well as what might fairly be relied upon the other side; and he thanked the jury for their patient and impartial attention to the detail of a disagreeable and anxious case. The jury retired at 3.30.

VERDICT.

The jury returned a verdict of "Guilty." Prisoner was sentenced to two years' hard labour. Taylor received the same.

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.