Compare Documents

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.

At the Central Criminal Court, London, on Saturday last, before Mr. Justice Wills, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours. This was the sixth day of the trials of Wilde and Taylor. The Marquis of Queensberry was again in attendance. The Solicitor-General Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted ; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C.. Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr Travers Humphreys defended.

The learned Solicitor-General, resuming his speech in reply on behalf of the Crown, dealt in detail with the arguments laid before the jury by Sir Edward Clarke in defence of Mr Wilde, and he commented in strong terms on observations that were made respecting the lofty situation of Mr. Wilde in connection with his literary accomplishments for the purpose of unduly influencing the judgment of the jury in considering the issue before them, and said that the jury ought to discard absolutely any such appeal, to apply their common sense to the testimony, and to form a conclusion on the evidence, which he submitted fully established the charges. He was commenting on another branch of the case when Sir Edward Clarke interposed on the ground that the learned Solicitor-General was alluding to incidents connected with another trial. The learned Solicitor-General maintained that he was strictly within his rights. The judge held that the learned Solicitor-General was entitled to make the comments he was making. An observation from the Solicitor-General bearing on the interruption of Sir Edward Clarke evoked laughter in court. The judge said that this sort of thing was most offensive to him. It was painful enough to have to try such a case as the present and keep the scales of justice evenly balanced, and when the Court was pestered with applause and other expressions of the feelings of senseless people, who had no business with the case, but came only to satisfy the cravings of a morbid curiosity, it was intolerable. If it were repeated he would have the court cleared. The learned Solicitor-General criticised the answers given by Mr. Wilde to the charges, which explanations, he submitted, were not worthy of belief. The jury could not fail to put the interpretation on the the conduct of the accused that he was a guilty man, and they ought to say so by their verdict.

The Judge, in summing-up, referred to the difficulties of the case in some of its features. He regretted that, if the conspiracy counts were unnecessary, or could not be established, they should have been placed in the indictment. The jury must not surrender their own independent judgment in dealing with the facts, and ought to discard everything which was not relevant to the issue before them, or did not assist their judgment. He did not desire to comment any more than he could help about Lord Alfred Douglas or the Marquis of Queensberry, but the whole of this lamentable inquiry arose through the defendant's association with Lord Alfred Douglas. He did not think that the action of the Marquis of Queensberry, in leaving the card at the defendant's club, whatever motives he had, was that of a gentleman. The jury were entitled to consider that these alleged acts happened some years ago. They ought to be the best judges as to whether the testimony of the witnesses was worthy or not of belief. The letters written by the accused to Lord Alfred Douglas were undoubtedly open to suspicion, and they had an important bearing on Wood's evidence. There was no corroboration of Wood as to the visit to Tito Street, and if his story had been true he thought that some corroboration might have been obtained. Wood belonged to the vilest class of persons that society was pestered with, and the jury ought not to believe his story unless satisfactorily corroborated. Their decision must turn on the character of the first introduction of Wilde to Wood. Did they believe that Wilde was actuated by charitable motives or by improper motives?

The Foreman of the Jury, interposing, asked whether a warrant had been issued for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas, and, if not, whether it was contemplated that a warrant be issued.

The Judge said he could not tell, but he thought not. It was a matter that they could not discuss at that stage. The granting of a warrant depended not upon the inference to be drawn from the letters referred to in the case, but on the production of evidence of specific acts. There was a disadvantage of speculating on this question. They must deal with the evidence before them and with that alone.

The Foreman—But if we are to deduce guilt from the letters it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the defendant.

The Judge—In regard to the question as to the absence of Lord Alfred Douglas, he warned the jury not to be influenced by any consideration of this kind. All that they knew was that Lord Alfred Douglas went to Paris shortly before the last trial, and had remained there since. He felt sure that if the circumstances justified it the necessary proceedings would be taken. His Lordship dealt with each of the charges, and the evidence in support of them, and he then, after thanking the jury for the patient manner in which they had attended to the case, left the matter in their hands.

The jury retired to consider their verdict at half-past three o'clock, and returned a verdict of guilty.

Wilde and Taylor were each sentenced to two years' imprisonment, with hard labour.

The Press Association says—On last Saturday evening, immediately following the passing of the sentence on Wilde and Taylor, the prisoners were removed to the cells in Newgate Prison, adjoining the Central Criminal Court, pending the preparation of the legal warrants authorising their detention for two years. Both were suffering from nervousness, and betrayed their mental anxiety. From the first they were separated, but travelled in the same prison van to Pentonville Prison, where they will serve the preliminary portion of the sentence, a period to be eventually decided by the officials of the jail. When handed over to the governor of Pentonville the prisoners were taken separately to the reception ward, and each had to give details of his identity, religion, and submit to medical examination, after which they passed through the hands of the prison bathroom attendants and barber, and exchanged their own clothes for the prison garb, being afterwards handed over to the care of the chaplain. Yesterday they attended the prison chapel with the other occupants of the jail, and, with the exception of exercise time, they were confined to their cells, where they will in future be kept, unless their health becomes such as to entitle them to infirmary treatment, in which event the prison doctor will decide the nature of the work they must perform. By the terms of their sentence they will be isolated from their friends, except upon four occasions each year, and even this privilege may be forfeited by indifferent conduct.