Compare Documents

(Before MR. JUSTICE WILLS.)The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40 , author, upon a charge of unlawfully committing certain acts with Charles Parker, Alfred Wood, and Edward Shelley, 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 conducted the prosecution; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.

The examination of witnesses on the part of the prosecution was continued.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL put in the shorthand notes of the evidence given by Wilde at the hearing at this Court of the charge of libel preferred by him against the Marquis of Queensberry, and said he proposed to read a portion of it.

Mr. JUSTICE WILLS said it was not necessary that ail that evidence should be read, but the Solicitor- General and Sir Edward Clarke could read the passages to which they wished to refer.

Sir Edward Clarke then read a portion of Wilde's evidence given in examination-in-chief, and the Solicitor-General, Mr. C.F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory read extracts from his cross-examination, passages from his re-examination being read by Sir Edward Clarke.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL intimated that the evidence for the prosecution was concluded.

SIR EDWARD CLAKKE submitted that there was no case to go to the jury. He contended that there was no evidence to support the counts which charged Wilde with committing the acts alleged with persons whose names were unknown.

MR. JUSTICE WILLS said it would not be right for him to say that there was no evidence to go to the jury in reference to those counts, but it was an extremely weak case, and it was the slenderest possible evidence. It seemed to him a case which was just on the line, or so very nearly on the line, that he thought his wiser and safer course would be to leave it to the jury; but he felt it to be so completely on the line, or near the line, that if necessary he would certainly reserve the question for the Court of Criminal Appeal.

SiR EDWARD CLARKE submitted that there was no corroboration of Shelley's evidence.

MR. JUSTICE WILLS said there were traces in Shelley of disturbed intellect and actual delusions. He did not see any corroboration of Shelley.

The Solicitor-General submitted that Shelley was not an accomplice and that his evidence was corroborated.

MR. JUSTICE WILLS said that with regard to Shelley's case he entertained a very clear view. He had thought it well over, and had come to the conclusion, without hesitation, that, in the first place, Shelley must be treated as an accomplice. The rule was that the evidence of an accomplice must be corroborated. Apart from what Shelley said, he could see nothing but what was consistent with perfectly honourable relations between Shelley and Wilde. The letters, so far from corroborating Shelley, were opposed to the notion that there was anything dishonourable. He felt it his duty to withdraw Shelley's case from the jury.

SIR EDWARD CLARK submitted that there was no evidence to go to the jury on the other counts.

His LORDSHIP intimated that he should leave the other counts to the jury.

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

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.