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 calendar at the Central Criminal Court Sessions, which opened at the Old Bailey this morning, before Mr Justice Wills, contained charges against Oscar Fingal O’Flahertie Wills Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, 33, of no occupation.

The court was densely crowded in every part when Mr Justice Wills, accompanied by the Lord Mayor and several of the city aldermen, took his seat on the bench punctually at 11 o’clock, the hour specially fixed for the trial. Wilde had some time previously driven to the Old Bailey, accompanied by his sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and the Rev Stewart Headlam, and surrendered to his bail. When placed in the dock by the side of Taylor he looked somewhat haggard and worn, but his health had visibly improved since his release from Holloway. Taylor’s features were very pale, but he stepped into the dock with a jaunty air and seemed indifferent to his position.

The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Lockwood, Q C, M P), Mr H Sutton, Mr C F Gill, and Mr Horace Avory appeared on behalf of the Crown, while the defence of Wilde was conducted by Sir Edward Clarke, Q C, M P, and Mr Travers Humphreys. Taylor was represented by Mr P Grain.

The jury having been sworn and the indictment read, Sir Edward Clarke applied that the two defendants should be tried separately. The indictment, he said, on which the defendants were tried at the last sessions contained twenty-five counts, on many of which a verdict of not guilty was entered. There now remained a certain number of counts charging the committal of offences, but not of conspiracy, by the two defendants now standing at the bar. Of those counts only eight affected Mr Wilde, and in neither of them was any charge made against Taylor. The remaining counts against Taylor were two, but in neither of them was any charge made against Wilde, so that no single count stood in the indictment on which Wilde and Taylor could be convicted.

Mr Grain made a similar application on behalf of Taylor.

The Solicitor-General opposed the application in each case on the ground that there were certain matters in the charges which necessitated the joint indictment of both defendants. The result of trying the defendants separately would be this—It would be necessary to take Taylor’s case first. It would be an inquiry into the conduct of one person on his trial, and necessarily evidence would have to be given against another person not on his trial, and whose responsible for this indictment felt that it might be considered a hardship on the other person that any question or consideration of his conduct might arise in a trial at which he was not represented. Indeed the history of this case was so bound up together that it was impossible to deal with the conduct of the one person without inquiring into that of the other.

Mr Justice Wills said that he had anticipated that this application would be made, and having in view what the evidence was, he thought it would be much fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.

The Solicitor General intimated that he would first take the case of Taylor.

Sir Edward Clarke submitted that the charge against his client Wilde ought first to be taken. There were, he said, obvious reasons why it would be unfair to take Taylor’s case first, and he respectfully asked that inasmuch as Wilde’s name stood first on the indictment and as the first count in that indictment was one directed against him he should be taken first.

Mr Justice Wills said he did not see how he could very well interfere with the rights of the prosecution. It was well within the rights of the prosecution to elect which defendant should first be placed on his trial.

Sir Edward Clarke—Then I shall ask in the event of Taylor being tried first that Wilde’s case shall stand over till the next sessions.

Mr Justice Wills—Don’t you think you had better wait until the end of the trial before making such an application. If there should be an acquittal of Taylor it would be so much the better for Wilde.

Sir Edward Clarke—If your lordship pleases, will your lordship allow Wilde to be out on the same bail as before?

Mr Justice Wills—Are the bails here?

The Solicitor-General—It is a matter entirely within your lordship’s discretion.

Mr Justice Wills—Certainly, I will grant the application.

Sir Edward Clarke—They have been here, but they are gone. They would have been back in the afternoon, but, after your lordship’s instruction, they shall be sent for.

The defendant Wilde then left the dock, and the charges against Taylor were at once proceeded with.

Sir Frank Lockwood opened at length the case against Taylor, and called Charles Parker. Witness repeated the well-known history of the meeting of himself and brother with Taylor, and of their visit to Taylor’s house, Little College street. He also spoke of their visit with Wilde to the Savoy Hotel.

Witness was cross-examined as to his relations with certain gentlemen, but denied that he ever threatened them with exposure if they did not give him money. He however admitted receiving money, and also made other damaging admissions.

William Parker, the elder brother, corroborated the evidence as to the introduction to Wilde.

Alfred Wood was the next witness called to prove the relationship which it was alleged existed between himself, Taylor, and Oscar Wilde. He detailed how he received money from Wilde to go to America, and referred to copies of correspondence which figured prominently during the last trial.

Emile Becker, a fresh witness, a waiter at the Savoy Hotel, said that he remembered Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas coming to live at the hotel. After Lord Alfred Douglas left, Wilde had two more rooms for himself—a bed and a sitting room. He used to take refreshments to the rooms of Oscar Wilde, who was visited at the hotel by young men. The witness remembered a supper being ordered by Mr Wilde on one occasion when a "young gentleman" was with Wilde.

Other witnesses followed, and the case for the Crown closed.

Mr Grain submitted certain counts should be withdrawn.

His Lordship thought the case should go to the jury.