Compare Documents

London, April 4.— The trial of Oscar Wilde’s libel suit against the Marquis of Queensberry was resumed today. The cross-examination of Wilde was continued. He admitted attending afternoon tea parties at the house of a man named Taylor, where he said he met a youth named Mavorl, who had since disappeared. Wilde was aware that Taylor had been arrested. He did not know Taylor was notorious because of his practices. Taylor had introduced him to five young men. Wilde’s made young men presents they were poor.

Wilde said he knew two brothers named Parker. He had dined with them. He was not aware that one was a valet and the other a groom. He had given one money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter’s private rooms. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested, they wore women’s clothes and were charged with felonious practices. Wilde said Taylor’s arrest did not affect witness friendship for him.

Wilde knew a man named Atkins. They went to Paris and shopped together. Wilde said he paid the fares, but declared it was an infamous lie to say they were guilty of misconduct. Wilde knew a youth named Granger and became angry when asked if he had ever kissed Granger. He declared that counsel was insolent. This ended the cross-examination.

In direct examination letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry were read. In them the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde and reviled Rosebery, Gladstone and the Queen for the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one letter the marquis declared Lord Douglas was not his own son.

At the conclusion of Wilde’s redirect examination, the prosecution closed.

Counsel for the defence in opening declared that Queensberry wanted to save his son from Wilde, when according to his own admission, was a friend of a man known to be a procurer of boys for vicious purposes. Counsel declared the letter from Wilde to Lord Douglas showed Wilde to be guilty.

The St. James Gazette announces that owing to the nature of the testimony in the Wilde libel suit, the paper will not further report the proceedings.

The testimony adduced in the cross-examination of Oscar Wilde, in the Queensberry libel suit, to-day, is of such a nature as to preclude its publication in a reputable newspaper. The Times, therefore, must decline to print it. At one period this morning, while being cross-questioned by Mr. Carson, the marquis of Queensberry's lawyer, Wilde lost his temper and announced the "insolence" of Mr. Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed. Mr. Carson, he said, had deliberately insulted him throughout the cross-examination.

Mr. Carson drew from the witness the acknowledgement that he had made presence of money or trinkets to a considerable number of persons. Wilde blandly explained that he did this "because they were poor."

It may be said that during his cross-examination, Wilde made a pretty good witness for the defense.

LONDON, April 4. - The St. James Gazette makes the announcement that owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit the management of that paper has decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.

The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.

At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Sir Edward Clarke questioned Mr. Wilde in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.

At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.