Compare Documents

The suit of Oscar Wilde and the Marquess of Queensberry was down in to-day's list for trial at the Central Criminal Court, London, before Mr. Justice Collins and a common jury. The words of the indictment charge John Sholto Douglas with maliciously publishng a defamatory libel of and concerning Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wilde. The general public and the members of the Junior Bar were very early in attendance, and not only was all sitting room taken up but the passages of the court were so blocked by the crush that ingress and egress was a matter of great difficulty.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Mathewe, and Mr. Travers Humphreys had been retained for the prosecution. Mr. Carson, Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill were counsel for the defence; a watching brief for Lord Alfred Douglas (son of the defendant) being held by Mr. Besley, Q.C., and Mr. Monckton.

Plaintiff arrived at half-past ten, accompanied by his solicitor, and took a seat in the well of the court immediately in front of Sir Edward Clarke. Immediately afterwards the jury answered to their names, but it was not until twenty minutes to eleven that silence was called for the entrance of the learned judge.

Lord Queensberry at once surrended to his bail, and was conducted to the dock. His lordship seated himself, but obediently to the attendant's request advanced to the front and stood with his arms resting upon the ledger.

The Clerk of the Court having read the indictment charging the defendant with having published a defamatory libel of the plaintiff upon a card addressed to him, Lord Queensberry replied, "Not guilty," and added the further plea. "The libel is true and was published for the public benefit.'

For the prosecution Sir Edward Clarke then opened. The libel, he said, was upon a visiting card containing the name of Lord Queensberry, and it was a matter of very serious moment; because it imputed to Mr. Oscar Wilde the gravest offence with which a man could be charged; but a far graver issue was raised by the plea that the libel was justified, and that Mr. Oscar Wilde had for a considerable period solicited certain persons (whose names were mentioned in the pleadings) to commit certain practices. The learned counsel traced the plaintiff's career at Trinity College, Dublin, and subsequently at Magdalen College, Oxford, his marriage with a daughter of the late Mr. Lloyd, Q.C., and his later literary and artistic career. He detailed plaintiff's social connection with the sons of the defendant and with Lady Queensberry, who some years ago obtained relief from her marriage owing to misconduct on the part of the Marquess. Touching next on the introduction of Mr. Wilde to Lord Queensberry by Lord Alfred Douglas at the Café Royal, Sir Edward called the attention of the jury to a personage not hitherto mentioned. This was a man who had been given the same clothes worn by Lord Alfred Douglas, and who alleged that in the pockets he discovered four letters addressed to Lord Alfred by Mr. Oscar Wilde. Whether the man had found or stolen them was a matter of speculation. This person came to Mr. Oscar Wilde, represented himself as in distress and as wanting to go to America, and plaintiff gave him £15 or £20 in order to pay his passage. He then handed to plaintiff the letters. To those letters he (Sir E. Clarke) did not attach the slightest importance. As was generally the case the important letter was retained. While Mr. Oscar Wilde's play A Woman of No Importance was in preparation what appeared to be to some extent the copy of a letter was handed to Mr. Tree, the actor, with a request to give it to Mr. Wilde. After this another individual called on the plaintiff and offered him the original, but he said, "No." He had a copy which he looked upon as a work of art, and did not want the original. Plaintiff looked upon the letter as a sort of "prose sonnet," and told the man that it would probably appear as a "sonnet poem." It did so appear in a critical magazine edited by Lord A. Douglas, and called The Spirit Lamp. The learned counsel read the letter.

The following is a copy of the letter which was published in sonnet form in the Spirit Lamp—an aesthetical and satirical magazine edited by Lord Alfred Douglas:—

My own boy,—Your sonnet is quite lovely, and it is a marvel that those red roseleaf lips of yours should be made no less for the madness of music and song than for the madness of kissing. Your slim-built soul walks between passion and poetry. No Hyacinthus followed love so madly as you in Greek days. Why are you alone in London, and when do you go to Salisbury? Do go there and cool your hands in the grey twilight of Gothic things. Come here whenever you like. It is a lovely place, and only lacks you. But go to Salisbury first. Always with undying love yours, Oscar.

Continuing the learned counsel said the words of the the letter did appear extraordinary to those in the habit of reading commercial correspondence—(laughter)—but it was merely an expression of poetic feeling, and had no relation whatever to the suggestion now made. On the production of the plaintiff's play, The Importance of Being Earnest, Lord Queensberry was refused admission and his money returned because he brought to the theatre a bouquet of vegetables—(laughter)—and the jury might have their doubts whether his lordship was responsible for his actions. The learned advocate dealt at some length with the suggestion made against the plaintiff because of his connection with certain literary productions, and as showing his real feeling as to improper publications he instanced the fact that plaintiff the instant he saw a production called The Priest and the Acolyte, wrote to the editor of the magazine protesting against its continued appearance. As to Mr. Wilde's Picture of Dorian Gray, it was simply idealising reality in the sense of harmony and beauty.

Sydney Wright, the porter of the Albemarle, having deposed to handing Lord Queensberry's card to Mr. Oscar Wilde,

The Plaintiff himself entered the witness-box, and assuming an easy pose with his arms resting on the rail, he answered the questions of his leader in a firm, deliberate voice. He met the man Wood, who had the letters referred to at the rooms of a tailor, and Wood said a man named Allen had stolen the letters from him, but they had been recovered by a detective. Plaintiff told him he did not consider the letters of any importance. Wood said he had been offered £60 for what witness described as "his beautiful letter to Lord Alfred Douglas." His reply was "I never received so large a sum for a prose work so short in length." That letter formed the basis of a French poem afterwards published and signed by a young French poet, a friend of his own. Passing from various interviews with Wood and another person named Tyler, plaintiff described a scene with Lord Queensberry in his library. He told defendant he supposed he had come there to apologise for the letter he had written about plaintiff and his son. Defendant replied that the letter was privileged, adding that plaintiff and Lord Alfred had been kicked out of the Savoy Hotel at a moment's notice, and that they had been blackmailed, and that plaintiff had taken rooms for defendant's son in Piccadilly. These statements were perfectly untrue. He asked defendant, "Do you seriously accuse your son and me?" Lord Queensberry answered, "I do not say that you are it, but you look it." (Slight applause in court.)

The Learned Judge: I will have the court cleared if there is the smallest repetition of disturbance.

Witness completed Lord Queensberry's answer, "I do not say that your are it, but you look it and you pose at it, which is just as bad. If I catch you in a public cafe again with my son I will thrash you." Plaintiff replied, "I don't know what the Queensberry Rules are, but the Oscar Wilde's rule is to shoot at sight." He then ordered defendant out of his house, saying to the servant, "This is the Marquess of Queensberry, the most infamous brute in London. Never allow him to enter my house again. If he attempts it send for the police." He was not responsible for the publication of "The Priest and the Acolyte" in the Cameleon magazine. He disapproved of it, and expressed his disapproval to the editor. There was no truth in the statements of defendant contained in the pleadings.

(Continued on Page 4.)

Mr. Carson began his cross-examination by asking plaintiff whether he was not something over 39, the age which he had given in his examination in chief. He now said he was born on the 16th October, 1854. In addition to his house in Chelsea he had rooms in St. James's Place, and Lord A. Douglas had visited them. He regarded the "Priest and the Acolyte" as violating all the artistic canons, and as being disgusting twaddle; but he had never publicly dissociated himself from the Chameleon, in which it appeared.

Was the "Priest and the Acolyte" immoral?—lt was worse—it was badly written. (Laughter.)

The learned counsel took plaintiff through a series of questions on his "Phrases and Philosophies," contributed to the Chameleon.

"Wickedness is a myth invented by good people to account for the attractiveness of others." Do you hold that to be a safe axiom?—Witness: Most stimulating. (Laughter.)

You think anything that stimulates thought is good whether moral or immoral?—Thought is neither one nor the other, thought is intellectual.

Counsel called attention to a criticism of "Dorian Gray" in the Scots Observer, in which it was described as set in "an atmosphere of moral corruption," and asked plaintiff whether he regarded that as a suggestion that his work pointed to a certain grave offence?—Witness: Some might think so, whether reasonably or not.

Mr. Carson: Have you ever felt the feeling of "adoring madly" a man some years younger than yourself?

Plaintiff: I never gave adoration to anybody except myself. (Laughter.)

Mr. Carson: In your introduction to "Dorian Gray" you say there is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are either well or badly written?

Plaintiff: That expresses my view.

Has "Dorian Gray" a certain tendency?—Only to brutes, and only illiterates would so regard it.

Do the majority of people take up the "pose" you are giving us ?—I am afraid not. I am afraid they are not cultivated enough.

Mr. Carson: Not cultivated enough to draw a distinction between a good book and a bad book?

Witness (loftily): Oh. certainly not. (Laughter.)

Mr. Carson, quoting from a copy of "Lippincot" (a second copy having been handed to the learned judges), read the author's description of his first meeting with Dorian Gray, and asked, "Do you consider that description of the feelings of a man towards a youth just growing up as proper or improper?"

Plaintiff: I think it is the most proper description possible of what an artist would feel on meeting a beautiful personality.

May I take it that you have never felt the sensations which you there describe?—No; I borrowed from Shakespeare's Sonnets.

Mr. Carson: You have written an article pointing out that Shakespeare's Sonnets have a certain tendency?

Plaintiff: On the contrary, I wrote objecting to the shameful perversion by Hallam, the historian, aud a great many French critics.

Certain questions as to a French novel referred to in plaintiff's "Dorian Gray," were ruled out as irrelevant.

Mr. Carson returned to "Dorian Gray," and in a long passage hit upon the phrase, "Why is your friendship so fatal to young men ?"

Plaintiff: I do not think any grown person influences another grown person.

Further questioned, he said his letter to Lord A. Douglas was written from Torquay, where he was staying, and Lord Alfred was at the Savoy.

Mr. Carson: You say "your slim built soul walks between passion and poetry."

Plaintiff: It is a beautiful phrase. (Laughter.) The letter is unique. (Renewed laughter.)

Mr. Carson: Listen to this second letter of your own to Lord A. Douglas:—

"Dearest of all boys,—Your letter was delightful, and it was red and yellow wine to me, for I am sadly out of sorts. You must not make scenes with me. They kill me, they wreck the loveliness of life. I cannot see you, so Greek and gracious. Distorted by passion, I cannot listen to your curved lips saying hideous things to me. Don't do it. You break my heart. I must see you soon. You are the divine thing I want, a thing of grace and genius, but I do not know how to do it. Shall I come to Salisbury? There are many difficulties. My bill here is £49 for the week. I have also a new sitting-room over the Thames for you. Why are you not here my dear, my wonderful boy? I fear I must leave. No money, no credit, aud a heart of lead.—Ever your own, Oscar.

Is not that an extraordinary letter?—Everything I write is extraordinary. (Laughter).

Mr. Carson: You do not pose as being ordinary?

Plaintiff (with a gesture of contempt): No.

Is that a love letter?—lt is a letter expressive of love.

Cross-examined: Wood was a young man who had held a clerkship and was in a different social position. He had been asked by Lord A. Douglas to help Wood, and supped with Wood at the Café on the night of his introduction. On one occasion he gave Wood £2, but not for an object suggested by the learned counsel. He never misconducted himself with Wood at his house in Chelsea while his (the plaintiff's) wife and children were away. When Wood brought those letters to him he thought he came to levy blackmail.

My suggestion to you is that instead of giving him £16 you gave him £30. Did you not give him £5 the following day?—Yes. (Sensation.)

Did you have a champagne farewell lunch with the man who levied blackmail?—Yes. He convinced me he had no intention, and that the letters had been stolen by other persons.

Was it then you gave him the £5?—Yes.

Why?—Because he said £15 would land him penniless at New York.

Did you not think it strange that a man with whom you had lunched in a private room should seek to levy blackmail?—Perfectly infamous.

Cross-examination resumed: He knew Wood as "Alfred," and two other men named Allen and Taylor were also known to him. Allen was known to him by reputation as a blackmailer and nothing else. He gave Allen 10s. "to show his contempt." (Laughter). After Allen came Clyburne, who also consulted him about the letters. He was also kind to Clyburne, and gave him 10s. (Laughter.) He told Clyburne he was afraid he was leading a dreadfully wicked life. Clyburne said, "There was good and bad in all of us," to which he replied, "You are a philosopher." (Laughter.)

Is the discovered letter the only one that a sonnet was written about?-I should have to go through a great deal of modern poetry before I could answer that? (Laughter.)

The case was adjourned till to-morrow.

LONDON, April 30.

As usual, there was again a big crowd at the Old Bailey this morning to witness the closing scenes in the terrible drama known as the Wilde trial.

Before the arrival of the Judge, Taylor was brought into the dock, and, hanging in an uncomfortable attitude over the ledge, conferred earnestly with Mr. J. P. Grain, his leading counsel, while Mr. Charles Mathews, as usual, passed down into the cells to see Wilde. A most serious conference with Sir Edward Clarke followed, and the counsel for the prosecution were equally closely engaged at their side of the court. As soon as his lordship had taken his seat Mr. Gill sprang upon the court the first surprise of what was to be a day of surprises. Having considered the indictment, he said, he had come to the determination not to ask for a verdict on the two counts of the indictment charging the defendants with conspiracy.

Sir Edward Clarke instantly and with emphasis exclaimed: "If that had been done in the first instance I should have applied that the defendants should be tried separately. Of course, I know my learned friend has the legal right to withdraw the counts at any stage of the case."

His lordship said the evidence had suggested to his mind that the counts of conspiracy were really unnecessary, and

Sir Edward Clarke said he must ask that a verdict of not guilty on the conspiracy counts might at once be taken of the jury.

His Lordship: I cannot say that. All I can say at the present stage of the trial is that I feel it my duty to accede to Mr. Gill's application.

Sir Edward Clarke: At some part of the case I shall claim that a verdict of not guilty be entered on these counts.

Before the sensation of this first surprise had died away Sir Edward Clarke was on his feet again. "Have you something more to say?" asked his lordship; and the sensation was redoubled when Sir Edward Clarke replied: "No, my lord, I was about to address the jury." After the announcement that had just been made, he said, an announcement of the importance and significance of which he would have much to say later in the day, he was going to call Mr. Oscar Wilde before the jury as a witness! This decision had not been arrived at in consequence of the decision of Mr. Gill in regard to charges which, if they were not to be proceeded with, should never have been put into the indictment. And Sir Edward was fully alive to all the consequences of the course he had elected to take. To put Mr. Wilde in the witness-box would entitle Mr. Gill to the right of reply in the case, and expose him (Sir Edward) to the consequence of having that evidence and his own observations commented on and replied to. But he had never attached as much importance to "the last word" as the great advocates who taught him his profession used to do.

The court was very hushed and still when the full significance of Sir Edward Clarke's decision was realised. Sir Edward first protested against the action of Mr. Gill yesterday in insisting on reading, for the purpose of prejudicing Wilde, the cross-examination in the Queensberry case. It was a cross-examination upon his books and writings, and Coleridge had long ago said: "Judge no man by his books. The man is more and greater than his books." But Mr. Wilde had been judged, not by his own books alone, but by articles written by other people which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. Sir Edward would not himself have the smallest hesitation about defending "Dorian Grey," a very simple story which appeared first in Lippincott's, a publication in the highest class of American periodical literature, and which, in book form, had since been in constant circulation and on sale in every English bookshop. As to Mr. Carson's cross-examination of Wilde on the French work, "Á Rebours," Sir Edward described it as grossly unfair, and a violation of every cannon of justice. He denied Wilde's responsibility for any of the views expressed in that book or in the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte," about which Wilde was one of the first to protest. Then, passing from the literary part of the case, Sir Edward pointed out that the latest date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was September, 1893, 18 months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry which had brought this matter before the public and placed him at his present peril. Wilde had long been, and was now, a friend of Lady Queensberry and her son. Lord Queensberry had been divorced from his wife.

Mr. C. F. Gill interrupted that this was irrelevant, and in no way material to the present case, and he should protest against any attack on Lord Queensberry, who was not represented here.

There was a laugh when Sir Edward replied that Mr. Gill rebuking irrelevance was rather amusing. He did not further describe Lord Queensberry's position, but proceeded that he, Sir Edward, was responsible for the advice given to Mr. Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly because of that fact that he was here again on Wilde's behalf to meet an accusation which could not be properly tried. Men charged with offences like those alleged against Mr. Wilde, he said, when they know themselves to be guilty, shrink from investigation. Men guilty of such offences suffer from a species of insanity. What then would they think of the mental condition of a man who, knowing himself to be guilty, and that evidence of his guilt would be forthcoming from half-a-dozen different places, insisted on bringing his case before the world? On March 30, before the previous trial, Mr. Wilde knew this catalogue of accusations against him. He nevertheless went into the witness-box again, to deny absolutely that there was the least truth in any of them.

Mr. Grain said he would also call Taylor to give evidence on his own behalf.

Wilde was then called and sworn, He stepped alertly from the dock to the witness-box, and then, standing erect, or leaning in an easy attitude on the front of the box, he quietly answered Sir Edward Clarke's questions. He repeated once more the story of his classical distinctions at Dublin and Oxford, where he took his degree in 1878. Since that year, he said, he had devoted himself to literary work. Recently he had devoted himself specially to dramatic literature, and his first play, "Lady Windermere's Fan," was produced in the early part of 1892. He had since produced "A Woman of No Importance," "An Ideal Husband," and "The Importance of Being Earnest," and had also written "Salomé," a tragedy in French, and contributions for various magazines. In 1884 he married miss Lloyd, and has two sons. His wife and sons have always lived with him at 16, Tite-street. He also had between October, 1893, and April, 1894, rooms at 10, St. James's-place. They were taken for literary work, and he very rarely slept there. His house at Tite-street was very small, and he always found it most convenient to work elsewhere, that he might not be disturbed. It was entirely and solely for that purpose he took the rooms at St. James's-place. At his previous examination in the Queensberry case he denied every one of the charges made against him.

Was the evidence you gave on that occasion absolutely and in all respects true? Entirely true evidence. Is there any truth in any of the allegations made against you in the evidence in this case? There is no truth whatsoever.

With this emphatic declaration the examination in chief was concluded.

Cross-examined by Mr. Gill, first with regard to Lord Alfred Douglas's poems in the Chameleon, he said that the one "In Praise of Shame'' had reference to modesty; the word shame was to be taken in that sense. As to the words in the sonnet "Two Loves," they referred to a deeply spiritual affection that was as pure as it was perfect. There were those who would not understand it and mocked at it, and sometimes put one in peril.

At the conclusion of this explanation there was handclapping in the public gallery.

The judge: I shall have this court cleared if there is the slightest manifestation of feeling.

Witness went on to say that there was nothing in the letter written to Lord A. Douglas of the Savoy Hotel of which the was ashamed. It was one full of deep affection, but the other letter was more of a literary answer to one addressed to him. The Savoy letter was direct and simple, and was not literature, he repudiated the evidence of the chambermaid at the Savoy as entirely untrue, the same remark applying to the evidence of the "masseur." He heard that the jury found the libel justified in the last case, but he was not in court nor did he read any account of it. The evidence of Edward Shelley was untrue in respect to the allegations.

Mr. Gill: With regard to the evidence of Charles Parker, what part is untrue? I say he never came to the Savoy Hotel at all, but it is quite true he came to lunch once or twice at St. James's-place. The allegations were untrue. Witness also denied the allegations of Atkins and of Alfred Wood.

Re-examined: Taylor was an accomplished pianist, and there used to be music at his rooms. Atkins wanted to go on the music-hall stage, and witness brought him his first song.

Sir E. Clarke: You produced the letter known as the "prose poem" in your examination in chief during the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry? Yes.

Alfred Taylor was next placed in the box, and examined by Mr. Grain. He said he was 33 years of age. His father was in a large way of business up to the time of his death, and that business was now carried on as a company. He was educated at Marlborough up to the age of 17, and then went to a private tutor, and afterwards entered the militia, with the idea of getting through to the army. In 1883 witness came into a sum of £45, 000, and lived a life of pleasure in town, having no occupation. Witness denied the accusations of Charles Parker. Witness in cross-examination said he had no knowledge that the Parkers were servants our of a place. He discovered a good deal afterwards.

After lunch Sir Edward Clarke began in measure terms a careful analysis of the case for the prosecution. Appealing to the jury to set aside prejudice, and regard only the evidence which had been laid before them, he asked if they could possibly find Wilde guilty of the terrible offences with which he was charged. He complained of the embarrassment caused by the action of the Crown in allowing the conspiracy counts of the indictments to stand till late in the case, and pointed our what he said was the cruel hardship of trying the prisoners conjointly on charges, many of which affected them individually only. Taylor, for example, could not possibly be concerned in the charges made by Edward Shelley against Wilde, nor Wilde in the misconduct alleged to have taken place in Taylor's rooms. Dealing then with the evidence, Sir Edward pointed out that in cross-examining Mr. Gill had dealt, not with Wilde's own writing, but with two poems written by Lord Alfred Douglas, with which Wilde had no more to do than Sir Edward--or the jury. As to the affection which Mr. Oscar Wilde had expressed in the letters which had been put in, he had himself described it as a pure and true affection, absolutely unconnected with, alien to, irreconciliable with, the filthy practices which this band of "blackmailers" had been narrating. He had gone into the witness-box fearless of what might be produced against him. He himself produced the first of the two letters which had been used against him, with regard to which Sir Edward said, "Mr. Wilde is not an ordinary man. He is a man who has written poetry, brilliant dramas, charming essays; a man who from his youth has been trained in the study of the literatures of the world--not of this England of ours alone, but of those empires whose glories are to us now only a name. He writes letters in a tone which to others may seem high-flown, exaggerated--absurd, if you like, but, said Sir Edward, he was not afraid or ashamed to produce those letters. I spoke to you before of the cowardice of guilt. I reminded you that these men--the Woods, the Parkers, the Atkinses, the whole tribe of them--flourished in so frightful a trade because a man who has been tempted into any sort of guilt would rather give his whole fortune, rather exile himself from his country, than allow the thing to be suggested against him. Contrast this instinctive shrinkage of the guilty man with the courage that brought Mr. Wilde into the witness-box in this court to face, once and for all, and as he hoped, and I hope, to dispose of the accusations which were being made against him. Dealing with detail with the evidence, Sir Edward insisted strongly on the facts that Wilde's movements had always been open, and the hotels at which he stayed were not small houses of ill-repute in back streets, but important and well-known hotels.

Under the strain of these last hours of his trial, Wilde's remarkable phlegm is rapidly breaking down. During the afternoon he restlessly changed his position, scribbled repeatedly with a quill pen on a piece of blotting-paper, but always haggardly regarding the counsel who was so brilliantly pleading his cause, or the jury who were absorbed in Sir Edward Clarke's advocacy. "Fix your minds," Sir Edward Clarke concluded, "firmly on the tests which ought to be applied to evidence before you can condemn a fellow-man on a charge like this. Then I trust the result of your deliberations will be to gratify those thousand hopes which are waiting upon your verdict; I trust that that verdict will clear from this fearful imputation one of our most renowned and accomplished men of letters."

The conclusion of a remarkably earnest and effective address was followed by irrepressible applause.

Wilde was visibly affected by the peroration of Sir E. Clarke, and on becoming more composed wrote a note which was passed to the learned counsel.

Mr. Grain followed on behalf of Taylor. In regard to the charge of procuring, Mr. Grain showed that the two lads named Parker were the only witnesses who claimed to have been introduced by Taylor to Wilde, and that all the resources of the Crown and of the eminent solicitors employed by Lord Queensberry had been unable to produce any corroboration of their story of misconduct. He explained that Taylor, having got through his own large fortune, was living at Little College-street on an allowance from his father's firm.

Mr. C. F. Gill replied on behalf of the Crown, going laboriously through every point at some length, and at the conclusion of his speech the court adjourned until to-morrow.