Compare Documents

Oscar Wilde, 40, author, who surrendered to his bail, and Alfred Taylor, 38, were placed at the bar to take their trial again upon those counts of the indictment as to which the jury at he last Sessions were unable to agree upon a verdict. It will be remembered that the jury at the last Sessions found the defendants "Not guilty" upon the other counts in the indictment.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr, C.F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory conducted the prosecution on behalf 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 defended Taylor.

Sir Edward Clarke said that before the jury were sworn he thought he ought to make an application that the defendants should be separately tried. The ground for the application was that it was an application practically as of right in this case. On the occasion of the trial, which took place at the last Sessions the indictment contained 25 counts. Upon many of those counts a verdict of not guilty was entered, and there remained a certain number of counts not charging conspiracy, but charging the committal of offences by the defendants. There were only eight of those counts which affected Wilde, and in none of those counts was any charge made against Taylor. The other counts were counts against Taylor, and in nine of them was there any charge made against Wilde. He submitted, therefore, that inasmuch as the counts were separate with regard to the defendants, the defendants should be tried separately.

Mr. J. P. GRAIN, for Taylor, said that he concurred in everything which Sir Edward Clarke had said, and he made the same application.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed the application. He said that he had pointed out to his learned friend that the result of trying the defendants separately would be that it would be necessary to take the case of Taylor first.

SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--I should object to that.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL repeated that it would be necessary to take Taylor's case first -- the sequence 'of events would necessitate that being done. Then what would be the nature of the inquiry? It would be an inquiry into the conduct of one person who was on his trial, and evidence would have to be given of the conduct of another person who was not on his trial. In these circumstances it appeared to him that those who were responsible for the drawing of the indictment

rightly considered the position and thought it would be an injustice to the person not on his trial that evidence should be given as to his conduct when he was not represented. He trusted that Mr. Justice Wills would not allow his learned friend to dictate to the prosecution as to the order in which the cases should be taken. Those who framed the indictment rightly included the defendants in the some indictment. The history of the cases were so bound up together that it would be impossible to inquire into the case of one without inquiring into the case of the other. He submitted that it would be the fairest course towards the defendants that there should be one trial, and he asked that they should be tried together.

SIR EDWARD CLARKE said that the ground upon which the Solicitor-General supported the course of trying the defendants together was that it would be unfair to the defendants to try them separately. The best defence, and Mr. Grain and he (Sir Edward Clarke) were distinctly of opinion that it would be an injustice to the defendants if they were tried together. He therefore urged that they should be tried separately.

Mr. Justice Wills said that he need hardly say that this matter had been present to his mind for consideration before he came there, because he did not affect to be entirely ignorant of what had taken place, and he anticipated that this application would be made. He had considered it carefully with regard to the evidence, and in view of what the evidence was he thought that it was much fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.

THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he proposed to take the case of Taylor first.

SIR EDWARD CLARKE asked that Wilde's case might be taken first. Wilde's name stood first in the indictment, and the first count was a count directed against him. It would be unjust to Wilde that his case should be tried immediately after the trial of the other defendant.

Mr. Justice Wills.- It should not make any difference.

Sir Edward Clarke.- It should not, my Lord.

Mr. Justice Wills.- I and the jury will do our very best to take care that one trial has no effect on the other.

Sir Edward Clarke.-I am sure you will do that, but there never was a case in which that duty was more difficult to discharge. I ask, inasmuch as Mr. Wilde's name is first in the indictment and the first count is one directed against him, that his case should be taken first.

Mr. Justice Wills.- I do not see how I can interfere with the discretion of the prosecution.

Sir Edward Clarke.- Then it would be convenient for me to at once make the application, which I shall repeat at the end of Taylor's case, and that is that the trial of Mr. Wilde shall stand over until the next Sessions.

Mr. Justice Wills suggested that the application had better be made when they saw the result of Taylor's case.

Sir Edward Clarke said that as there was no prospect of Wilde being called up to take his trial at present he asked that Mr. Justice Wills should allow him out on the same bail.

The Solicitor-General said he would leave the matter entirely in his Lordship's discretion.

Mr. Justice Wills granted the application.

Oscar Wilde was accordingly allowed out on the same bail.

The trial of Alfred Taylor upon the counts charging him with committing and procuring the commission of acts of gross indecency was then proceeded with.

The Solicitor-General, in opening the case, said that the defendant Taylor, who was 33 years of age, was educated at one of our large public schools and began life with a considerable amount of money which he had inherited. For a short time he held a commission in a Militia regiment, but apparently for some time before the time with which he (the Solicitor-General) should have to trouble the jury he had followed no occupation of any sort or kind. The Solicitor-General then proceeded to refer to the facts of the case as alleged by the prosecution, and said that, of course, the jury would give the fairest and most impartial trial to the case.

Evidence was then given by Charles Parker and William Parker. Other witnesses were also called for the purpose of giving corroborative evidence.

At the conclusion of the evidence for the prosecution,

Mr. Grain submitted that there was no corroboration, or at any rate no such corroboration as was requisite, and he contended that there was no case to go to the jury against Taylor.

The Solicitor-General contended that although there was no corroboration by an eye-witness there was, nevertheless, corroborative evidence.

Mr. Justice Wills said he thought that there was sufficient corroborative evidence.

Mr. Grain then addressed the jury for the defence of Taylor, contending that there was no corroborative evidence, and that the charge against him had not been proved. He should call Taylor as a witness, and he would give him a denial of the charge.

At the conclusion of Mr. Grain's speech,

The hearing of the case was adjourned until to-morrow. Mr. Justice Wills advising the jury to keep their minds open and not to allow any one to speak in reference to the case.

It is an almost unprecedented thing for a trial of any importance to begin on the first day of a sessions of the Central Criminal Court. Monday and Tuesday are usually devoted to the finding of true bills and the consideration of cases of minor importance by the Recorder and the Commons Sergeant. Judges' cases are seldom touched before Wednesday, when the judge of assize whose name stands first on the rota leaves the decorous precincts of the High Court for the dingy and ill-ventilated court in the Old Bailey. It was by special arrangement, therefore, that Mr. Justice Wills attended at the Central Criminal Court this morning to begin the second trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor on charges of gross indecency and offences against the Criminal Law Amendment Act with regard to which the jury at the last sessions disagreed. No fresh indictment having been preferred, it was not necessary to send the case a second time to the grand jury.

The preliminary task of swearing and charging the grand jury was performed, as usual by the Recorder, who was supported by the Lord Mayor and sheriffs, and an unusually large muster of aldermen, all in their robes of office. In honor of the month, the bouquets were larger and gayer than usual. And the little heaps of sweet herbs, first provided as a defence against gaol fever in the days of unreformed prisons, seemed bigger than common.

While the case against the prisoners has been reduced by the

ELIMINATION OF SEVERAL COUNTS

of the indictment and the disqualification of one of the witnesses, it has been strengthened by the action of the Solicitor-General himself taking up the case for the Crown. Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory make a destructive trio in the Treasury prosecution,. On the side of the defence there is no change. In Sir Edward Clarke, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys, Wilde possesses as powerful a defensive combination as could be desired. Taylor is again represented by Mr. Grain.

Wilde, during the past fortnight, has been on bail. Taylor, however, has remained in Holloway Prison, and was brought to the Old Bailey with other prisoners in the van this morning. He was placed at once in the dock, but, sitting at the back, was scarcely observed. He looked much paler than when last before the Court, and seemed to have lost something in his air of jaunty self-confidence. Wilde reached the court shortly before eleven o'clock, and, sitting at the solicitor's table, held a whispered consultation with Mr. Charles Mathews. All the counsel in the case were early in attendance. When Mr. Justice Wills arrived, he and the Lord Mayor tried to sit down simultaneously on the same seat. It was the Lord Mayor's seat -- and the Lord Mayor had it. Mr. Justice Wills is not used to playing second fiddle to lord mayors, but he took the second best seat with a good grace.

When the Clerk of Arraigns called upon Wilde to surrender to his bail, he stepped ponderously into the dock, with a slight, almost imperceptible, bow towards the Bench, but no discoverable recognition of his fellow prisoner. There is little improvement in Wilde's appearance. Mental trouble has cut very deeply into his face.

Before the jury were sworn,

Sir Edward Clarke said he desired to make

A PRELIMINARY APPLICATION

that the defendants might be tried separately.

His Lordship: Unless the Solicitor-General has anything to say --

Sir F. Lockwood: I have, my lord.

Sir Edward Clarke said the ground of his application practically was that it was the prisoners' right to be tried separately. A the last trial there was an indictment of conspiracy. That had now been withdrawn, and there was no single count now standing on the indictment on which both prisoners could be convicted.

Sir F. Lockwood strenuously opposed the application. He pointed out that one of the counts charged Taylor with procuring certain persons to commit illegal acts with Wilde. The history of these cases cases was so bound up together that it was impossible to inquire into one without inquiring into the other. It was, therefore, the fairest course towards the accused that there should be but one inquiry.

His Lordship said he had anticipated this application, and had already considered it carefully with regard to the evidence. His own opinion was-- his lordship did not put it higher than an opinion -- that it was much fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.

Sir F. Lockwood: As your lordship pleases. In that case I propose, my lord, to take the case of

TAYLOR FIRST

Sir Edward Clarke at once objected on behalf of Wilde on the ground that he would be prejudiced in the eyes of the jury by having the case against Taylor heard first.

His Lordship assured the learned counsel that, whatever the result of the first trial might be, he and the jury would endeavor to insure that it should have no influence on the second. Moreover, he thought it was within the right of the prosecution to elect in what order the cases should be taken.

Sir Edward Clarke: Then I make a further application, which I shall repeat at the end of Taylor's trial, and that is that Wilde's case may stand over till the next sessions.

His Lordship said the application had better be postponed till the end of the first trial, significantly adding, "if there should be an acquittal, so much the better for the other prisoner."

The jury was thereupon sworn to try Taylor, whose plea of "Not guilty" was of course taken at the last sessions. In the meantime his lordship

AGREED TO RELEASE WILDE

on the same bail as before till to-morrow. His sureties had left the court, however, Sir Edward Clarke said they would be sent for at once. Pending their return Wilde was taken downstairs to renew his acquaintance with the Old Bailey cells.

The beginning of the Solicitor-General's opening was distinctly moderate in tone and he echoed Sir Edward Clarke's appeal against prejudice, expressing a hope that Taylor too might have a most impartial trial." "But I believe," he added, "that such an appeal is absolutely and entirely unnecessary." He described Taylor as a young man of good family who had been educated at one of the large public schools, and at his majority inherited a large sum of money. For a short time he held a commission in a militia regiment. But apparently, his fortune being exhausted, for some time before the events with which the jury would have to deal he had followed no occupation of any sort or kind. Wilde (and the distinguished counsel's voice took a deeper and stronger inflection in mentioning him) was a man of high literary attainments, a man who had

ACHIEVED SOME DISTINCTION

by his dramatic works, and apparently, at the time of which counsel was speaking, had a house in Tite-st., Chelsea, suited to his condition and life, in which he lived with his wife and children, and had also a sitting room and a bedroom at the Savoy Hotel. Taylor lived at 13, Little College-st., Westminster, and the first charge with which counsel would deal was that Taylor attempted to procure the commission of certain acts by Oscar Wilde with Charles Parker.

Sir Frank then went over the well-known details of the intimacy of the Parkers and Wood with Taylor and Wilde, and called Charles Parker.

The witness (Charles Parker) is a fresh-colored lad with a face that would rather attract than repel a stranger. Neatly dressed in blue serge, he rather gruffly followed Mr. C. F. Gill's questions, which were, as his lordship presently pointed out, rather leading in character. the old story was gone through again to the last detail.

The prisoner Taylor is not of a literary turn. At the former trial he made no notes, but sat with folded arms and a complacent mien, leaving the literary department to his more distinguished companions. Being now left blooming alone, he obtained a few sheets of foolscap and scribbled notes to his counsel.

Parker concluded his evidence by stating that after his arrest with Taykor in 1894 he made up his mind to leave London, and enlisted.

"His arrest?" his lordship interposed. "On what charge?"

Mr. Gill hummed and hawed till the judge added, "I only want to know, you know. You leave the impression that there is something mysterious. What were you arrested for?"

Witness: For being in a house in Fitzroy-st.

Mr. Gill: Really for being there for a felonious purpose. There were men there dressed as women.

His Lordship: Then I suppose they were charged with consorting together to commit acts of indecency. Much better to have the whole thing out.

In that case, said Mr. Grain, better at the same time have it out that both Taylor and Parker were

DISCHARGED BY THE MAGISTRATE.

He proceeded to cross-examine Parker with a view to showing that he was introduced to Taylor by a man named Harrington. This he denied. Then, as to blackmailing, Mr. Grain asked, "Have you ever taken hush money from anyone?"

Witness: No

Be careful, you know. You have been in that box before. Have you threatened to charge people with offences unless they paid you money? - No.

You know Wood and Allen? - Yes.

Have you not admitted you received £30 for your share of hush money obtained by them? - They never told me it was hush money. They gave it to me.

That was just before you enlisted? - Yes.

Did either of them tell you how they obtained that money? - Yes, they got it out of some gentleman.

Had you committed the acts mentioned with the man they got the money out of? - Yes.

Do you know a person of the name of Macklin? - I have heard the name. I have heard Taylor speak of him.

Do you know a person named Clarke, who lived at 3, Northumberland mansions? - Yes.

Macklin came to your rooms when you were living at Camera-sq. about May, 1894? - I know the man you mean. I did not know his name was Macklin.

Did you take a number of letters from Clarke out of his pocket? - No. I think he gave me one of Clarke's letters.

Did you, about Whitsuntide, 1894, go to Clarke's rooms and ask him for £10? - Yes.

Did you take his letter with you? - No, nothing.

What did you go to Clarke for? -

I WANTED THE MONEY

to go away to America.

Where is Clarke now? - I don't know.

His Lordship: What is he?

Witness: A silver-broker, I think, or something in the silver trade. He was then in the business with his brother-in-law at Bond-st.

Mr. Grain: Did you at that interview take his watch from his pocket? - No

Did he not threaten to charge you with stealing his gold watch and chain? - No. He said if I did not go away he would send for the police.

The witness denied point-blank that Clarke introduced to him another man named Durnbach, or that he had ever threatened Clarke about letters he had written to Durnbach. His story was that Taylor introduced him to Durnbach, whom he afterwards introduced to Clarke.

Mr. Grain left it at that, He had obtained enough for his purpose.

William Parker, the elder brother, and a coarser copy of the last witness, generally corroborated his evidence about the introduction to Wilde, and his selection of Charlie as "the boy for me." he also gave positive evidence of misconduct of a grave nature with Taylor.

Before adjourning for lunch Mr. Lockwood put out a feeler as to the length of time his lordship was prepared to sit. Mr. Justice Wills had a heart for any fate, and suggested that the case should be

FINISHED TO-DAY,

early or late. To facilitate this desirable end the adjournment for lunch was curtailed.

In the afternoon the first witness was Alfred Wood, with regard to whom the indictment alleges an introduction of the witness by Taylor to Wilde for an illegal purpose. Wood, who is a smooth-tongued fellow with a deliberate, non-committal manner of speech, which does not make him seem any the more ingenuous, described his acquaintance with Taylor, and visits to the snuggery at Little College-st. It was not at all clear, however, that Taylor was responsible, at least directly, for the introduction to Wilde. This was effected by a third person, whose name was not now given. At the last trial it was openly stated that the third person was Lord Alfred Douglas who, while at Salisbury, arranged the meeting at the Café Royal by correspondence with Wilde, and telegraphed to Wood the time of the rendezvous.

The case is proceeding.