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.

(Before MR. JUSTICE WILLS.)OSCAR WlLDE, 40, author, surrendered to his bail and was indicted for unlawfully committing acts of gross indecency with Charles Parker, Alfred Wood, Edward Shelley, and with certain persons whose names were unknown.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.O.), Mr.C. F . Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions; Sir. Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.

Tho SOLICITOR-GENERAL, in opening the case, said the charge was under the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The indictment comprised charges ranging from February 20, 1892, up to October 23, 1893, and he thought it more convenient that he should deal with the charges in their chronological order. The defendant was a man of literary attainments, and was the author of various dramatic works of power and intellect. The Solicitor-General proceeded to refer to the charges in their chronological order, and indicated what the evidence would be which would be adduced on the part of the prosecution.

Edward Shelley was then called and examined by Mr. C.F. Gill.

In cross-examination by Sir Edward Clarke, the witness said he was very fond of literature and had a great admiration for Wilde's works. In October, 1892, he wrote to Wilde saying he was suffering from nervousness, the result of insomnia. On April 25, 1894, he wrote a letter to Wilde in which he asked him to help him, as he had lost his health and strength and wanted to go away for rest somewhere--he thought in Cornwall; he asked Wilde to lend him £10 until Christmas, saying that he would be able to repay him by that time. He added that people laughed at him and thought him strange. At the time he wrote that letter he was ill, having overworked himself by studying at night after his work in the day time was over. It was the fact that people laughed at him at the time and thought him strange in his behaviour. Wilde did not lend him £10, but he afterwards gave witness 10s. at a restaurant. On June 15, 1894, witness wrote asking Wilde to use his influence on his behalf to get him employment. In 1894 witness was ill mentally, but there was nothing the matter with him now.

Evidence was given by Alfred Wood.

In cross-examination by SIR EDWARD CLARKE, Wood said a sum of £175 was given to him by a man named Allen. Allen had a sum of £400 or £500 given him by a gentleman, and Allen gave witness £175 of it. Witness had done nothing to deserve that money. Being asked why the sum of £400 or £500 was paid to Allen, the witness replied that he did not know. Being further questioned as to how Alien came to get the £400 or £500, the witness replied that Allen might have blackmailed the man, but witness did not know that Allen did do so. Allen gave Charles Parker £30.

Charles Parker gave evidence, and he was also cross-examined in considerable detail by SIR EDWARD CLARKE.

The hearing of the case was then adjourned until to-morrow, Wilde being admitted on the same bail.

MR. JUSTICE WILLS advised the jury not to allow any one to speak to them about the case.