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.

At the Central Criminal Court, London, on Saturday last, before Mr. Justice Wills, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours. This was the sixth day of the trials of Wilde and Taylor. The Marquis of Queensberry was again in attendance. The Solicitor-General Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted ; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C.. Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr Travers Humphreys defended.

The learned Solicitor-General, resuming his speech in reply on behalf of the Crown, dealt in detail with the arguments laid before the jury by Sir Edward Clarke in defence of Mr Wilde, and he commented in strong terms on observations that were made respecting the lofty situation of 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 that 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 Edward Clarke interposed on the ground that the learned Solicitor-General was alluding to incidents connected with another trial. The learned Solicitor-General maintained that he was strictly within his rights. The judge held that the learned 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 that 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 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 learned Solicitor-General criticised the answers given by Mr. Wilde to the charges, which explanations, he submitted, were not worthy of belief. The jury could not fail to put the interpretation on the the conduct of the accused 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 comment any more than he could help about Lord Alfred Douglas or the Marquis of Queensberry, but the whole of this lamentable inquiry arose through the defendant's association with Lord Alfred Douglas. He did not think that the action of the Marquis 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 accused 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 Tito 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 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, if not, whether it was contemplated that a warrant be issued.

The Judge said he could not tell, but he thought not. It was a matter that they could not discuss at that stage. The granting of a warrant depended not upon the inference to be drawn from the letters referred to in the case, but on the production of evidence of specific acts. There was a disadvantage of speculating on this question. They must deal with the evidence before them and with that alone.

The Foreman—But if we are to deduce guilt from the letters it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the defendant.

The Judge—In regard to the question as to the absence of Lord Alfred Douglas, he warned the jury not to be influenced by any consideration of this kind. All that they knew was that Lord Alfred Douglas went to Paris shortly before the last trial, and had remained there since. He felt sure that if the circumstances justified it the necessary proceedings would be taken. His Lordship dealt with each of the charges, and the evidence in support of them, and he then, after thanking the jury for the patient manner in which they had attended to the case, left the matter in their hands.

The jury retired to consider their verdict at half-past three o'clock, and returned a verdict of guilty.

Wilde and Taylor were each sentenced to two years' imprisonment, with hard labour.

The Press Association says—On last Saturday evening, immediately following the passing of the 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 authorising 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, religion, and submit to medical examination, after which they passed through the hands of the prison bathroom attendants and barber, and exchanged their own clothes for the prison garb, being afterwards handed over to the care of the chaplain. Yesterday they attended the prison chapel with the other occupants of the jail, and, with the exception of exercise time, they 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.