Compare Documents

The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40, author, and ALFRED TAYLOR, 33, upon an indictment charging them under section 11 of tho Criminal Law Amendment Act with committing acts of gross indecency, some of the counts charging Taylor with procuring the commission of those acts, and other counts charging the prisoners with conspiring together to commit and to procure the commission of those acts, was resumed.

Mr. C. F. Gill and Mr. Horace Avory conducted the prosecution on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions; Sir Edward Clarke, Q. C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Wilde; and Mr. J . P. Grain and Mr. Paul Taylor defended Taylor. Mr. Leonard Kershaw and Mr. A. F. S. Pasmore held watching briefs.

Mr. GRAIN said he desired to say that before the magistrate the witness Shelley said that Taylor was a stranger to him, and he should like that to be added to his Lordship's note of Shelley's evidence.

Mr. GILL said that Shelley did not mention Taylor.

Mr. JUSTICE CHARLES said he quite understood that Shelley's evidence did not affect Taylor. He would add to his note of Shelley's evidence, ``Taylor is a stranger to me."

Evidence was then given by shorthand writers, who stated that they took shorthand notes of the evidence given by Wilde at this Court on the hearing of the charge of libel brought by him against the Marquis of Queensberry.

Witnesses were called from the Savoy Hotel, who spoke to Wilde having stayed there.

Sergeant Harris gave evidence as to having watched Taylor's rooms in Little College-street. The witness also deposed to arresting Taylor on April 6 upon the charge.

Inspector Richards deposed that on the evening of April 5 he arrested Wilde upon the charge. Wilde said, "Where shall I be taken to?" Witness replied, "To Scotland-yard and then to Bow-street." Wilde said, "Can I have bail?" Witness replied, ``I do not think you can."

Inspector Brockwell said that on the evening of April 5 he was at Scotland-yard. Wilde was brought there by Inspector Richards, and witness read the warrant for his arrest to him. Wilde said, "Let me read it." Witness replied, "I cannot do that. If there is anything you do not understand I will read it to you again." Wilde said, "What are the dates mentioned?" Witness replied, ``March 11 and divers other dates.''

SIR EDWARD CLARKE asked that a letter found on Wilde should be read.

Mr. JUSTICE CHARLES, having looked at the letter, said, it was only a sympathetic letter from a friend, and he did not see what bearing it had.

SIR EDWARD CLAEKE said that some letters had been put in, and he thought that letter might also be read.

Mr. JUSTICE CHARLES said he would leave it to Mr. Gill.

SIR EDWARD CLARKE said he accepted his Lordship s expression of opinion. The writer of the letter was a distinguished literary man.

Mr. JUSTICE CHARLES said he thought that what he had said sufficiently indicated what the letter was. It was a sympathetic letter from a literary friend expressing the strongest feeling as to the charge made against Wilde.

The shorthand notes of the concluding portion of the evidence given by Wilde

he shorthand notes of the concluding portion of the evidence given by Wilde at the hearing at this Court of the charge of libel brought by him against the Marquis of Queensberry, in which Wilde said that there was no truth in the allegations in the plea of justification which was put in, were read by Mr. GILL. The short-hand notes of Wilde's cross-examination were also read by Mr. Gill and Mr. Avory, who were assisted in the reading of them by Mr. A. Gill. The shorthand notes of Wilde's re-examination were read by Sir Edward Clarke.

Mr. Gill said the evidence for the prosecution was concluded.

Sir Edward Clarke handed in a formal demurrer written on parchment to the indictment.

The hearing of the case was adjourned until to-morrow.

At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Charles, Oscar Wilde, aged 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, aged 33, of no occupation, were severally indicted for certain misdemeanours under the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885.

Mr. C. F. Gill with Mr. Horace Avory conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Public Prosecutor; Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Wilde; Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Paul Taylor defended Taylor; and Mr. Leonard Kershaw watched the case on behalf of certain parties interested.

Before the prisoners were called upon to plead, Sir Edward Clarke moved to quash certain counts of the indictment on the ground that they had been unlawfully joined. In regard to certain of these counts, the Legislature made the accused a competent but not a compellable witness. As to the counts for conspiracy contained in the indictment, and joined unlawfully, as he submitted, to those for alleged offences in regard to which the accused could give evidence, they did not admit of that provision, and consequently, if on the hearing of the first set of charges the accused gave evidence, he would be cross-examined, and the result of that cross-examination might tend to prejudice the case in regard to the subsequent charge, that of conspiracy, in respect of which the accused could not give evidence.

Mr. Gill contended that the counts were in law properly joined, and in support of his contention he referred to the case of "The Queen v. Owen" to show that the joining of the counts for conspiracy with the counts preferred under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act was not inconsistent.

Mr. Justice Charles admitted that the law as it stood presented inconveniences, but he could not concur with the view expressed by the learned counsel (Sir Edward Clarke) that the counts had been improperly joined, as, in his opinion, it was not in accordance with the general law applicable to the indictment.

Sir Edward Clarke asked next that the prosecution should elect upon which of the set of charges they would proceed, whether the conspiracy charge or the charge in regard to which the accused were competent witnesses.

Mr. Justice Charles said that it was impossible to put the prosecution to the election asked for.

Mr. Gill having related the facts of the case to the Jury, evidence was given by witnesses named Charles Parker, William Parker, Alfred Wood, and others. The case for the prosecution had not concluded when the Court adjourned till to-day.