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, Friday. The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for an alleged criminal libel upon Mr. Oscar Wilde entered upon its third day of hearing at the Old Bailey this morning before Mr. Justice Collins and a jury. As on the two previous occasions, the small, dingy court was crowded. The interest taken in the unsavoury proceedings seemed unabated. No sooner were the doors of the court opened than the public gallery was again besieged. In the body of the court there was not that eager rush for seats on the part of the Junior Bar that was apparent on the two previous days. At ten o'clock the gangways were not blocked, as hitherto had been the case, and it seemed evident that more stringent efforts were being taken by the officials of the court to prevent the inconvenient crushing and crowding so characteristic a feature since the opening of the action.

The prosecutor was represented by Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C, M.P.; Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys. Mr. Carson, Q.C, M.P.; Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill were for the defence; and watching briefs were held by Mr. Besley, Q.C, and Mr. Monckton.

As soon as the Marquis of Queensberry arrived he went to the dock, and took a seat, where he read a newspaper, pending the arrival of the judge. Mr. Wilde had not yet appeared, but his solicitor was chatting with Sir Edward Clarke.

MR. CARSON'S PAINFUL DUTY.

When the Court rose yesterday Mr. Carson had not finished his opening address to the jury. Resuming this morning, he said it would be his painful duty to bring before the jury the young men mentioned in the case who had unfortunately allowed themselves to be dominated by Mr. Oscar Wilde, and had been more sinned against than sinning. They were none of them educated persons or Mr. Wilde's equals in years, and the excuse put forward by the prosecutor to account for those friendships was onlv a travesty of facts. There was an extraordinary similarity in the history of all these sad cases, all leading up to the inevitable conclusion that there was something criminal in the relations between these young men and the prosecutor. How could one believe that Taylor was the kind of man that Mr. Wilde pretended him to be? There could be no possible doubt, viewing all the circumstances and admissions, that Taylor was employed by Wilde.

THE LAST SCENE AND VERDICT.

Amid impressive silence Sir E. Clarke, pale and trembling, and evidently feeling his position very acutely, rose, and asked leave to withdraw from the case. Addressing his Lordship with some emotion, he said perhaps he would allow him to interrupt at that moment, and make a statement. His learned friend had addressed the Jury upon the question of the literature involved in this case and upon the inferences to be drawn from the admissions made with regard to letters by Mr. Oscar Wilde on the previous day. His learned friend began his address that morning by saying he hoped that he said enough in dealing with those topics in detail to have prevented the necessity of referring in detail to the other issues in the case. Be thought it must have been present to the mind of his Lordship that those who represented Mr. Wilde on this case had before them a very terrible anxiety. They could not conceal from themselves that the judgment which might be formed with regard to the literature and to the conduct, which had been admitted was such as might induce the jury to say that there was ground for justification on the part of Lord Queensberry in using the words that he was posing as a man of immoral character, it being the clear view of himself and his learned frineds, who desired to be associated with him in this matter, that might not improbably be the result upon that part of the case. They had to look forward to this, that a verdict given in favour of the defendant in reference to that might be regarded as a conclusive finding as to all parts of the case. The position, therefore, in which they stood was this, that without expecting to gain a verdict in this case, they would be going through day after day a large amount of evidence in the investigation of matters of the most appalling character. In these circumstances he hoped his Lordship would think that he (counsel) was taking the right course which he was about to take after consulting with Mr. Wilde—that was to say, that, having regard to what had already been referred to him by his learned friend Mr. Carson in respect to the literature and the letters, he felt it would not be right to resist a verdict of "not guilty" in reference to the words "posing as" an immoral person. Under these circumstances he (the learned counsel) thought he was not going beyond the bounds of duty and doing something to save and prevent what would be a most terrible case, however it might close, if he now interposed on behalf of Mr. Wilde, and stated that he would withdraw from the prosecution, and he was prepared on Mr. Wilde's behalf to submit to a verdict of not guilty.

Mr. Carson, Q.C, said he did not think that he had any right whatever to interfere in any way with such an application his learned friend had made. He could only say that, as far as Lord Queensberry was concerned, if there was to be a verdict of "not guilty," the verdict must involve that his Lordship had succeeded in his plea of justification. With that understanding he (the learned counsel) would be quite satisfied to adopt the course proposed. Of course, his learned friend would admit they must succeed on that plea, and that being so it rested entirely with his Lordship as to whether the course suggested by his learned friend was to be adopted.

THE JUDGE'S RULING.

Mr. Justice Collins was understood to say that it rested with the jury to say whether they were prepared to acquiesce in that verdict of "not guilty" against the accused. It was not part of the duty of the judge or jury to go into the details bearing upon the matter, but the jury could not place any limitation to their verdict. A plea of justification was made, and the charge was that of "posing" as a person of immoral character. If it was justified it was justified ; if it was not it was not ; and the verdict of the jury must be "guilty" or "not guilty." He understood that the learned counsel (Sir E. Clarke) had said that the prosecutor was willing to agree to a verdict of "not guilty.' There could be no terms, no limitation. The verdict must be "guilty" or "not guilty." He understood the learned counsel for Wilde to assent to a verdict of "not guilty," and the jury would, therefore, return that verdict.

Mr. Justice Collins said he should have to tell the jury that two things must be established. First, that the plea of justification was true in substance, and, in fact, that the prosecutor had "posed" as a person of immoral character, and he should also have 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 found on these two points in favour of the defendant, then the verdict would be "not guilty." In that way they would say whether they found the plea of justification proved or not.

NOT GUILTY

After a few moments' consultation together on the part of the jury, the foreman intimated that they had arrived at their verdict.

The Clerk of Arraigns—Do you find the plea, of justifcation proved? Yes.And do you find the defendant not guilty? YesAnd that is the verdict of you all? Yes.And also that it was published for the public benefit? Yes.

The result was received with loud cheers by the crowded court.

The Marquis of Queensberry was then formally discharged, and left the dock.

The learned judge made an order allowing the costs of the defence.

THE PROSECUTOR'S MOVEMENTS.

An "Echo" reporter, who called this morning at the residence of Mr. Oscar Wilde, in Tite Street, Chelsea, learnt that he left home between 9-30 and 10 o'clock this morning, and drove to an hotel in Sloane Street. There he had some refreshment, asked if there were any letters for him, and then drove away in a cab. Here the Exchange Telegraph Company takes up his movements. In a message sent across the wires shortly after twelve, the company says:—"Oscar Wilde went to the Old Bailey this morning, but did not enter the precincts of the court. He had a consultation with Sir Edward Clarke in a room off the court, and while the learned gentleman was making his statement to the judge Wilde hurriedly left the building."

Another report says:—It was at first stated that Mr. Wilde had left London by the boat train for Dover, but this rumour probably arose from the fact of his having written a letter to a contemporary from the Holborn Viaduct Hotel explaining his reason for the withdrawal of the charge, which was that he could only prove his case by putting Lord Alfred Douglas into the witness-box against his father. The "Globe's" representative on calling at the hotel was told by the manager that Mr. Oscar Wilde had not been staying there, nor was he there then. "Mr. Wilde was here this morning," added the manager, "but he has left." Asked for how long a period Mr Wilde remained, and at what time he left, the manager expressed himself unable to answer either questions. Our representative was informed later that several friends of Mr. Wilde were with him at the hotel, and that they all left together early in the afternoon.

Another representative called at the Cadogan Hotel, Sloane Street, where Mr. Wilde was said by another authority to have gone. Asking to see Mr. Wilde, he was told that he declined to be interviewed ; but the reporter saw Lord Alfred Douglas, who, in reply, said that Mr. Wilde had not the least intention of leaving the country, but would remain "to face whatever there was to face."

The Exchange Telegraph Company confirms this statement, and adds that the name of Mr. Oscar Wilde has been removed from the playbills and programmes of the Haymarket Theatre.

LETTER TO THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

On leaving the court this forenoon, Mr. Charles Russell, Lord Queensberry's solicitor, addressed the following letter to the Public Prosecutor:—"37, Norfolk Street, Strand."The Honourable Hamilton Cuffe, Esq., 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 witnesses' statements, together with a copy of the shorthand notes of the trial.Yours faithfully, Charles Russell."The Treasury, Whitehall."

A WARRANT ISSUED.

A report from Bow Street states—"It is understood that a warrant in connection with the Wilde case was applied for at five o'clock thia afternoon, and it is believed that it was granted. The application was made to Sir John Bridge in his private room, and the officials were naturally reticent on the subject. Mr. Charles Russell (son of the Lord Chief Justice) and Mr. Angus Lewis of the Treasury, with two witnesses, were in attendance, and it is understood that the application for the warrant was made by them.