Compare Documents

The trial or JOHN SHOLTO DOUGLAS, MARQUIS of QUEENSBERRY, who surrendered upon an indictment charging him with unlawfully and maliciously writing and publishing a false, malicious, and defamatory libel of and concerning Mr. Oscar Wilde in the form of a card directed to him, was resumed.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys, appeared for the prosecution; Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill defended. Mr. Besley, Q.C., Mr. Monckton, and Mr. Leonard Kershaw watched the case for a person interested.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C., continued his opening statement of the case for the defence. He said that yesterday, when it came to the usual time for the adjournment of the Court, he had dealt as fully as he intended to deal with the question of Mr. Wilde's connexion with the literature and the two letters which had been produced in the case, and he had almost hoped that he had sufficiently demonstrated to the jury upon that matter that, so far as Lord Queensberry was concerned, he was absolutely justified in bringing to a climax in the way he did this question of the connexion between Mr. Oscar Wilde and his son. He himself had, unfortunately, a more painful part of the case now to approach. It would be his painful duty to bring before them young men one after another to tell their tale. It was, of course, even for an advocate a distasteful task. But let those who were inclined to condemn these men for allowing themselves to be dominated, misled, and corrupted by Mr. Oscar Wilde remember the relative position of the parties, and remember that they were men who had been more sinned against than sinning. He was not going in any great detail now to criticize the evidence of Mr. Oscar Wilde in relation to the several transactions as to which he was cross-examined. There were general observations applicable to all the cases; there was, in point of fact, a startling similarity between each of them on his own admission which must lead the jury to draw most painful conclusions. There was the fact that in no one of these cases were these parties on an equality in any way with Mr. Wilde; they were none of them educated parties with whom he would naturally associate, and they were not his equal in years. The jury ould have observed a curious similarity in the ages of each of them. Mr. Wilde had said that there was something beautiful, something charming about youth which led him to adopt the course he did. It was absurd; his excuse in the witness-box was only a travesty of the facts. Who were all these your men? Of Wood he himself had spoken. Who was Parker? Mr. Wilde professed the same ignorance about Parker as be had about Wood--that he knew nothing about his antecedents. He also knew nothing about Searle except that he was out of employment. About Conway be said that he had met him at Worthing. There was a curious similarity between all these cases--they were all of the same age. Take the case of Parker. How did Mr. Wilde come to know Parker? Parker was a gentleman's servant who was out of employment and he and his brother one evening at a restaurant in Piccadilly met Taylor. Taylor came and addressed them. Within a day or two Mr. Wilde gave a dinner to Taylor on the occasion of his birthday, and told Taylor to bring anyone he liked. What an idea Taylor must have had of Mr. Wilde's taste that he should bring to his birthday dinner a groom and a valet. There could be no explanation of the matter but one--that Taylor was the procurer for Mr. Wilde, and the jury would hear from this young man Parker, who would have to tell his unfortunate story to them, that he was poor and out of a place, that he had no money, and unfortunately fell a victim to Mr. Wilde. On the first evening they met Mr. Wilde called Parker "Charlie" and Parker called him "Oscar." He did not want to say anything about Mr. Wilde's theories that there should be no social distinctions. It might be a very noble and a very generous instinct in some people to 'wish to break down social barriers but he did not know that Mr. Wilde's conduct was regulated by any generous instincts towards these young men. If Mr. Wilde wanted to assist Parker, did they think it was in favour of Mr. Wilde that he should take him to a restaurant and give him a luxurious dinner and champagne? Was that the way that assistance would be given? Parker said that after the dinner Mr. Wilde invited him to drive with him to the Savoy Hotel. He himself must say that they had had no explanation from Mr. Wilde as to why he had the suite of rooms at the Savoy Hotel. Parker would tell them what happened on arriving there. That was the scandal at the Savoy Hotel to which Lord Queensberry had referred in his letter as far back as June or July in last sear. The jury would wonder, not at the reports having reached Lord Queensberry's ears, but that Mr. Wilde had been tolerated in London society as long as he had. The man Parker had since enlisted in the Army and bore a good character. Mr. Wilde himself said that Parker was a respectable man. Parker would reluctantly present himself to tell his story to the jury. The learned counsel was next proceeding to deal with the case of a young man named Conway, when

SIR. EDWARD CLARKE, Q.C., who had previously left the Court with Mr. Charles Mathews, returned, and, interposing, asked permission of the learned Judge to have a conversation with Mr. Carson. At the close of a few moments' communication between the learned counsel,

SIR EDWARD CLARKE rose, and, addressing Mr. Justice Collins, said,--Will your Lordship allow me to interpose at this moment to make a statement, which, of course, is made under a feeling of very great responsibility? My learned friend, Mr. Carson, yesterday addressed the jury on the question of the literature involved in this case, and upon the inferences to be drawn from admissions made, with regard to letters, by Mr. Oscar Wilde yesterday, and my friend began address this morning by saying that he hoped yesterday that he had said enough dealing with those topics to induce the jury to relieve him from the necessity of dealing in detail with the other issues in this case. I think it must be present in your Lordship's mind that those who are representing Mr. Oscar Wilde in this case have before them a very terrible anxiety. They cannot conceal from themselves that the judgment that might be formed of that literature and of the conduct which had been admitted might not improbably induce the jury to say that when Lord Queensberry used the words, "Posing as," &c., he was using words for which there was sufficient justification to entitle a father using those words in those circumstances to the utmost consideration, and to be relieved from a criminal charge in respect of that statement. And, my Lord, we had, in our clear view that that might not improbably be the result upon that part of the case, and I and my learned friends who desire to be associated with me in this matter had looked forward to this--that a verdict given in favour of the defendant upon that part of the case might be interpreted outside as a conclusive finding with regard to all parts of the case. The position in which we stood was this--that, without expecting to obtain a verdict in this case, we should be going through day after day, it might be, with long evidence, investigating matters of the most appalling character. In these circumstances I hope your Lordship will think that I am taking a right course, which I am taking after communications with Mr. Oscar Wilde, --that is to say, that, having regard to what has been already referred to by my learned friend in respect of the matters connected with the literature and the letters, I feel that he could not resist a verdict of "Not guilty" in this case, having reference to the words, " Posing as," &c. In these circumstances I hope that your Lordship will think that I am not going beyond the bounds of duty, and that I am doing some thing to save or to prevent what would be a most terrible task, however it might close, if I now interpose and say, on behalf of Mr. Oscar Wilde, that I would ask to withdraw from the prosecution, and, if your Lordship does not think at this time of the case that I ought to be allowed to do this, I am prepared to submit to a verdict of "Not guilty," having regard, if to any part of the particulars at all, to that part of them which is connected with the publication of "Dorian Gray " and the publication of the Chameleon. I trust that that may make an end of the case.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C.--My Lord,--I do not know that I have any right whatever to interfere in any way in the application that my friend has made to your Lordship. I can only say that, as far as Lord Queensberry is concerned, if there is a verdict of "Not guilty," a verdict which involves that he has succeeded in his plea of justification, I am quite satisfied. Of course, my friend must admit that we must succeed upon that plea in the manner which he has stated. Therefore, it rests entirely with your Lordship whether the course suggested by my friend should be taken.

Mr. JUSTICE COLLINS.--Inasmuch as the prosecutor in this case is prepared to acquiesce in a verdict of ``Not guilty," I do not think it is any part of the functions of a Judge or jury to insist on going through prurient details which have no bearing on the matter which has been already concluded by the assent of the prosecutor to a verdict of ``Not guilty." But as to the jury's putting any limitation on the verdict, the justification is one justifying the charge of "Posing as," &c. If that is justified, it is justified. If it is not, it is not; and the verdict of jury must be a verdict of "Guilty" or "Not guilty," and I understand the prosecution to assent to a verdict of "Not guilty." Of course, the jury will return their verdict.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C.--Of course, my Lord, the verdict will be that the plea of justification is proved, and that it is for the public benefit.

JUSTICE COLLINS.--The verdict is "Not guilty," but it is arrived at by that process. I should tell the jury that two things had to be established--that the justification was true in substance and in fact--that the prosecutor had "Posed as," &c.--and I should also have had to tell them that they would have to find that the statement was published in such a manner as to be for the public benefit. If they find these two issues in favour of the defendant, then the verdict will be "Not guilty." That is the verdict, I understand, which is submitted to. Gentlemen of the Jury,--Your ultimate verdict will be "Not guilty," but there are other matters which have to be determined with reference to the specific finding on the plea of justification and which involve two things--that the statement is true in fact, and that it was published for the public benefit. Having found these in favour of the defendant, your verdict will be " Not guilty," and you will have to say whether the plea of justification is proved or not.

The jury having consulted for a few moments, the Clerk of Arraigns, addressing them, said:--Gentlemen of the Jury,--Do you find the plea of justification has been proved or not?

The Foreman.--Yes.

The Clerk of Arraigns.--You say that the defendant is Not guilty, and that is the verdict of you all?

The Foreman.--Yes; and we also find that it was published for the public benefit.

The verdict was received with loud applause.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C.--Of course, the costs of the defence will follow.

Mr. JUSTICE COLLINS.--Yes.

Mr. C. F. GILL.--And Lord Queensberry may be discharged.

Mr. JUSTICE COLLINS.--Certainly.

The Marquis of Queensberry then left the dock amid renewed cheering.

LONDON, April 5.

The hearing of the charge against the Marquis of Queensberry of criminally libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde was resumed this morning at the Central Criminal Court, before Mr. Justice Henn Collins. The defence was a justification of the libel. The counsel for the prosecution were Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys. Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, Q.C., and Mr. A. Gill appeared for Lord Queensberry; while Mr. Besley, Q.C., and Mr. Monckton watched the case for Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis.

The public galleries were again crowded, the greatest interest being shown in the proceedings. His lordship took his seat at half-past ten. Mr. Oscar Wilde was not present when Mr. Carson rose to resume his speech for the defence.

Mr. Carson said that at the adjournment yesterday he had dealt as fully as he intended to deal with the question of Wilde's connection with the literature that had been produced in this case, and also with the two letters that had been read, and he almost hoped that he had sufficiently demonstrated upon these matters, which were not really in dispute, that Lord Queensberry was absolutely justified in bringing to a climax, in the way that he did, the question of the connection between Mr. Oscar Wilde and his son. He had, unfortunately, a more powerful part of the case now to approach. It would be his painful duty to bring before the jury those young men, one after another, to tell their tale. It was, of course, even for an advocate, a distasteful task; but let those who were inclined to condemn these men for allowing themselves to be dominated, misled, and corrupted by Oscar Wilde remember the relative position of the two parties, and that they were men more sinned against than sinning. He was not going in great detail to criticise the evidence of Wilde with regard to the several transactions as to which he crossexamined him. There was a general observation applicable to all the cases. There was a startling similarity between each of them, on Wilde's own admission, which must lead the jury to draw the most painful conclusions. There was the fact that in not one of these cases were the parties upon an equality with Wilde in any way. They were not educated parties such as he would naturally associate with, they were not his equal in years, and there was a curious similarity between the ages of each of them. Mr. Wilde said that there was something beautiful and charming about youth that led him to adopt the course he did, but was he unable to find more suitable companions who were at the same time young among the youths of his own class? The thing was absurd. His excuse in the box was only a travesty of what was the reality of the matter. Who were these young men? They were out of employment, and of their antecedents Wilde professed to know nothing. All of them were from 18 to 20 years of age, or thereabouts, and in the manner of their introduction to Wilde and his subsequent treatment of them all were in the same category, leading to the same conclusion, that there was something unnatural and what might not ordinarily be expected in the relations between them. Parker was a gentleman's servant out of employment. He and his brother were in a restaurant in Piccadilly and were met by Taylor, and when a day or two later Wilde gave Taylor a dinner on his birthday, telling him to bring any friends he liked, what an idea he must have had of Wilde's taste when he brought a groom and a valet! If that one fact was true-and the main features had been admitted by Wilde-why did Taylor speak to those young men at all, and why did he bring them to dine with Wilde? There could be no explanation of these matters but the one that Taylor was the procureur for Wilde. They would hear from Parker, when he came to tell his unfortunate story, that he was poor, out of place, and fell a victim to Wilde. He would tell them that on the first evening they met Wilde addressed him-the valet-as Charlie, and that he addressed this distinguished dramatist, whose name was being spoken everywhere in London as the author of a most successful play, as Oscar. He did not wish to say anything about Wilde's theories of putting an end to social distinctions. It might be a very noble and generous instinct in some people to wish to level down all social barriers; but one thing that was plain in this case was that Wilde's conduct was not regulated by any very generous instincts towards these young men. If he wanted to assist Parker was it of benefit or a man in Wilde's position in society and literature to take him to a magnificent dinner and prime him with the best champagne? All the ridiculous excuses of Wilde would not bear a moment's examination. Wilde pretended that, the whole of these dinners and lunches were mere generous actions on his part. He gave no explanation of why he had that suite of rooms at the Savoy Hotel. It was a large hotel, and Wilde had no difficulty in taking Parker into his rooms, where he treated him with whiskey and sodas, and some of that iced champagne which his doctor forbade Wilde to have, and so worked him up to what followed. There had been no open scandal at the Savoy Hotel; but a man could not live that kind of life without gossip going abroad, and reports being circulated in the circles in which he mixed. After they had heard the evidence from the Savoy Hotel they could wonder, not that the gossip reached Lord Queensberry's ears, but that the man Wilde had been tolerated for years in Society as he had. He referred to the youth Parker, who was coming there with the greatest reluctance, and was now earning for himself a good character in the country, and Wilde's dealings with the boy Conway.

Here came a sensational surprise. Sir Edward Clarke plucked Mr. Carson by the gown, and the indulgence of the court was craved while counsel consulted. Sir Edward and his junior, Mr. Mathews, had both been out of the court for an interval before this surprise came. After a few moments whispering Mr. Carson retained his seat, and Sir Edward Clarke rose and said: Will your lordship allow me to interpose and make a statement, which is, of course, made under a feeling of very grave responsibility? My learned friend Mr. Carson yesterday addressed the jury upon the question of the literature involved in this case, and upon the inferences to be drawn from admissions made with regard to the letters read yesterday my learned friend began his address by saying that he hoped the need of having the jury deal with those details could be avoided. I think it must have been present to your mind that the representatives of Mr. Oscar Wilde have before them in this case a very terrible anxiety. They could not conceal from themselves the inferences which might be drawn might not improperly induce the jury to say that when Lord Queensberry used the words "posing as a --" he was using words for which there was a sufficient justification for a father to use. That in our view might not be an improbable result of that part of the case. I and my learned friends who are with me had to look forward to this-that a verdict given in favour of the defendant upon that point might be regarded as a finding with regard to all parts of the case. The position we stood in was that, in view of the finding of a verdict, we would be going through long evidence dealing with matters of a most appalling character. In these circumstances, I hope your lordship will think I am taking the right course of action. Having regard to what has been already said in respect of the literature and of the letters, I feel that I could not resist a verdict of not guilty in this case-not guilty, that is, having reference to the words "posing as --." In these circumstances I hope your lordship will think that I am not going beyond the bounds of duty, and that I am doing something to save and to prevent what would be a most terrible task, however it might close, if I now interpose to say that, on behalf of Mr. Oscar Wilde, I would ask to withdraw from the prosecution. If your lordship does not think that at this time of the case, and after what has taken place, I ought to be allowed to do this, I am prepared to submit to a verdict of not guilty, having reference-if to any part of the particulars-to that part of the particulars which is connected with the publication of "Dorian Gray" and with the publication of the Chameleon. I trust, my lord, that that may make an end of the case.

Mr. Carson: I do not know that I have any right whatever to interfere in any way with this application my learned friend has made. I can only say, as far as Lord Queensberry is concerned, that if there is a plea of not guilty, a plea which involves that he has succeeded in his plea of justification, I am quite satisfied. Of course my learned friend will admit we must succeed upon the plea in the manner in which he has stated, and that being so, it rests entirely with your lordship as to whether the course suggested by my learned friend is to be taken.

His lordship: Inasmuch as the prosecutor in this case is prepared to acquiesce in a verdict of not guilty against the accused, I do not think it is any part of the function of the judge or jury to insist on going through prurient details which can have no bearing upon a matter already concluded by the assent of the prosecutor to an adverse verdict. But as to the jury putting any limitation upon the verdict of justification, the justification is one which is a justification of the charge, which is "posing as - -." If that is justified, it is justified-if it is not, it is not; and the verdict of the jury upon it must be guilty or not guilty. I understand the prosecutor to assent to a verdict of not guilty. There can be no terms, and no limitations. The verdict must be guilty or not guilty. I understand him to assent to a verdict of not guilty, and of course the jury will return that.

Mr Carson: Of course the verdict will be that the plea of justification is proved, and that the words were published for the public benefit.

Sir E. Clarke: The verdict is not guilty. His lordship: The verdict is "not guilty," but it is arrived at by that process.

The jury then returned a verdict accordingly, that the justification was proved, and that it was published for the public benefit, and that the accused was not guilty.

The verdict was received with applause, and becoming known in the streets, there was a demonstration of approval on the part of a large crowd.

Mr. Carson: The costs will follow. May I ask that Lord Queensberry should be discharged? His lordship: Certainly.

When the formal announcement of his discharge was made the Marquis left the dock amid a salvo of applause, which the officials of the court only half-heartedly attempted to stop.

Mr. Wilde left the Old Bailey a few minutes before sir Edward Clarke made his withdrawal. He drove in his carriage, drawn by a pair of horses, to the Holborn Viaduct Hotel, where he has been lunching daily during the trial. Here Mr. Wilde, Lord Alfred Douglas, Mr. Wilde's solicitor, and one or two other gentlemen remained for some time in consultation.

On leaving the court Lord Queensberry's solicitor addressed the following letter to the Public Prosecutor:-

37, Norfolk-street, Strand. To the Hon. HAMILTON CUFFE, Director of Prosecutions. DEAR SIR,-In order that there may be no miscarriage of justice, I think it my duty at once to send you a copy of all our witness's statements, together with a copy of the shorthand notes of the trial.-Yours faithfully, CHARLES RUSSELL.

The Marquis of Queensberry said to a Press representative this afternoon:--

"I have sent a message to Oscar, saying: 'If the country allows you to leave, all the better for the country; but if you take my son with you, I will follow you wherever you go, and shoot you.' "

Letter from Oscar Wilde.

The Evening News states that it has received the following letter from Oscar Wilde, written on the notepaper of the Holborn Viaduct Hotel:-

"TO THE EDITOR- "It would have been impossible for me to have proved my case without putting Lord Alfred Douglas in the witness-box against his father. "Lord Alfred Douglas was extremely anxious to go into the box, but I would not let him do so. "Rather than put him in so painful a position, I determined to retire from the case, and to bear on my own shoulders whatever ignominy and shame might result from my prosecuting Lord Queensberry. OSCAR WILDE."

"An Ideal Husband," Oscar Wilde's society play, comes to a timely finish at the Haymarket to-morrow evening, and it is understood that the project for reviving it at the Criterion has been abandoned.

The name of Mr. Oscar Wilde has been removed from the playbills and programmes of the Haymarket and St. James's Theatres.