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.

The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40, author, upon a charge of unlawfully committing acts of gross indecency with Charles Parker and Alfred Wood and with persons whose names were unknown, was resumed.

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

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL continued his address on the part of the prosecution. In the course of his speech there was a laugh in the portion of the Court set apart for the public, whereupon the Solicitor-General expressed his surprise that there should be any stray laughter, and

Mr. JUSTICE WILLS observed that such exhibitions of feeling on the part of people who had no business to be there, and who were only present for the purpose of gratifying their morbid curiosity were most offensive to him, and if there was anything of the sort again he would have the Court cleared.

Tho SOLICITOR-GENERAL referred in detail to the evidence which had been given on the part of the prosecution. With regard to the appeal which Sir Edward Clarke had made as the literary past and the literary future of Wilde, the Solicitor-General observed that with that they had nothing whatever to do. Wilde had a right to be acquitted if they thought he was an innocent man, but if on their consciences they believed that he was guilty of these charges than the jury had only one consideration, and that was to follow closely the obligation of the oath which had been imposed upon them.

Mr, JUSTICE WILLS then summed up, and in the course of his remarks said that the passing of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which made a defendant a competent but not compellable witness, was never intended to alter or to infringe upon the sacred old principle of English law that the prosecution must make out the charge against the accused. His Lordship commented upon the beneficial nature of the provision in that Act of Parliament enabling a defendant to be called as a witness, and went on to say that it would be a bad day for the administration of justice in England when juries ceased to take their direction on points of law from the Judge, or when they surrendered to any Judge in the land--no matter what his learning, experience, or ability was--their own independent judgement on the facts which were before them. It was the province of the jury to decide upon the facts. The learned Judge proceeded to refer in detail to the circumstances of the case.

The Foreman of the Jury said that the jury wanted to know whether a warrant against Lord Alfred Douglas was ever issued.

Mr. Justice Wills replied that he could not say, but he should think not. They had not heard of it.

The Foreman of the Jury.--Or ever contemplated?

Mr. Justice Wills replied that he could not say. He did not think they need discuss that. The issue of a warrant depended always on what evidence there was. The mere production of letters was not sufficient; there must be evidence of some act.

The Foreman of the Jury.--If we are to deduce any guilt from those letters it would apply equally to Lord Alfred Douglas.

Mr. Justice Wills said that they had nothing to do with that. The question which the Jury had to decide was whether Wilde was guilty of the charge made against him. His Lordship reviewed the evidence which had been given in the case, and pointed out to the jury the questions for their consideration. There was only evidence as to one of the counts in reference to St. James's-place.

The jury retired to consider their verdict at half-past 3 o'clock, and at 26 minutes past 5 o'clock they returned and asked a question in reference to the evidence as to St. James's-place.

Mr. JUSTICE WILLS read his note of the evidence of a witness on the subject, and

The jury retired again, but returned into Court about five minutes afterwards and said they found Wilde Guilty on all the counts except that which charged him is respect to Edward Shelley, upon which they found him Not guilty. That count, it will be remembered, was withdrawn from the jury by Mr. Justice Wills on Thursday.

The announcement of the verdict was greeted with a cry of "Shame" in a portion of the Court reserved for the public.

The defendant Taylor was then placed in the dock.

SIB EDWARD CLARKE asked Mr. Justice Wills not to pass sentence until next sessions, as there was a demurrer to be argued in reference to the indictment.

Mr. J. P. GRAIN, who appeared for the defendant Taylor, said that the argument of the demurrer would affect Taylor equally, and he therefore made the same application as Sir Edward Clarke.

The Solicitor-General opposed the application. The passing of sentence now would not interfere with the argument of the demurrer.

MB. JUSTICE WILLS.--There was a verdict of not guilty.

SIK EDWARD CLARKE.--That does not affect it.Mr. JUSTICE WILLS.--What is the objection?SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--That the indictment is bad?

MR. JUSTICE WILLS.--What is the point?SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--The point is the joining of two sets of counts on one set of which the defendant could be called as witnesses and on the other could not.

Mr. JUSTICE WILIS said that, as the passing of sentence now would not affect the argument of the demurrer, be thought it his duty to complete the proceedings here.

MR. JUSTICE WILLS, addressing Wilde and Taylor, said that it had never been his lot to try a case of this kind so bad. One has to put stern constraint upon oneself to prevent oneself from describing in language which he would rather not use the sentiments which must rise in tho breast of every man who had any spark of decent feeling in him and who had heard the details of these two terrible trials. Ho could not do anything except pass the severest sentence which the law allowed, and in his judgment it was totally inadequate to such a case as this. The sentence was that each of them be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years.

On the sentence being pronounced there were cries of "Shame" and hisses in Court.