Compare Documents

The Marquis of Queensberry has applied to the treasury to recoup him the £2,000 expended in the Wilde case. The treasury offered him £100. The Marquis, in reply, says that unless he is reimbursed he will raise the question in Parliament.

LONDON, May 25. - An Old Bailey jury, cautiously impaneled, and, as it seemed, carefully coached by the Judge of the High Court, has declared Oscar Wilde guilty of the abominable offences against him. Public opinion, which is often on the side of the accused, and almost invariably sympathetic in regard to any prisoner standing a second trial for the same crime, had from the first pronounced, with nearly absolute unanimity, that he was guilty of everything set forth in the indictment and of much more. The country judged him out of his own mouth and so did the jury to a large extent.

Any other result would have been a disgrace to the intelligence of English jurymen and a crying shame upon British justice. It is impossible, however, to conceal the fact that from the first the common people believed that Wilde would never be convicted. Instinctively, they felt that the influence behind this shameless friend of princes and nobles would prove too powerful for ordinary judicial procedure. The police had placed the government in possession of the names of men of rank, wealth, and fashion who undeniably shared in some of Wilde’s orgies, and had collected evidence amply sufficient to place them in the criminal dock with the hearty approval of all clean men. But the Secretary of State took no step against them to vindicate outraged morals or avenge flouted justice.

The passionate shout which went up from the nation when Wilde’s impudent action, designed to stop the mouths of his accusers, ignobly collapsed, compelled the government to take action against him and his foul accomplice, Taylor. But Lord Alfred Douglas and other men whose evidence would have made the case against Wilde and others even more complete and irrefutable were allowed to leave the country. They are still abroad, but doubtless they will return to this country in a short time, secure against punishment. Possibly it is as well, for Wilde’s conviction can scarcely fail to prove an effectual deterrent for years to come, and it will be to the public interest to let this awful scandal become forgotten.

Honest men have from the first displayed unusual, perhaps unchristian eagerness for conviction in this case. During the last two or three days fierce and universal resentment has been spoken and shown at what appeared to superficial observers almost collusion on the part of the Judge and the lawyers in ordering to save Wilde. But Justice Willis’s is summing up, which unexpectedly proved to be a strictly judicial piece of work, together with the Solicitor-General's masterly speech and the common sense of a jury of plain citizens, finally prevailed.

Wilde was full of confidence to the last, so that the result was a staggering blow to him. He strove to utter something, but his tongue clove to the roof of his mouth, and he sank back in his chair a mental and physical wreck. The final scene was truly, perhaps fittingly, dramatic.

By the United Press.

The trial of Oscar Wilde was resumed in the Old Bailey Court this morning, Sir Frank Lockwood continuing his address to the jury for the prosecution. He dilated upon the intimacy of Wilde with Taylor, and said that leniency ought not to be shown to one and not to the other because of the position and intellect of the one.

Sir Edward Clarke protested against the counsel's confusing Taylor’s case with Wilde’s.

Sir F. Lockwood expressed hope that the jury would not regard Wilde’s letters as "prose poems," but would appreciate them at their proper level, which was rather lower than that of beasts.

Sir Edward Clarke angrily objected to the language used by the prosecuting counsel, and a heated argument between the two ensued. After a protracted wrangle the Judge interfered and advised Lockwood to confine himself to discussion of the evidence and not start out on any rhetorical denunciation of the prisoner.

Mr. Lockwood finished his address by saying that Wilde’s own admissions pointed conclusively to his guilt.

The Judge in summing up dealt with each of the charges contained in the indictment, his opinion being plainly and strongly against the prisoner. In regard to Wilde’s letters to Lord Alfred Douglas, he said they might be "prose poems," but that they were nonetheless poison to a young man's mind and the writer was clearly not a desirable companion for the young.

The Judge finished his charge at 3 o'clock and the jury retired. Before the jury retired the foreman asked the Court if a warrant had been issued for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas.

The Judge said that no warrant had been issued, whereupon the foreman said: "But if we must consider these letters as evidence of guilt they surely show that Lord Douglas’s guilt is equal to that of Wilde."

The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the Judge sentenced Wilde and Taylor, the latter sentence having been suspended pending the result of the trial of Wilde, to two years at hard labor each.

The jury occupied two hours in the consideration of the case. After their verdict had been rendered Sir Edward Clarke, on behalf of Wilde, and counsel for Alfred Taylor, made application for a postponement of sentence. The Judge peremptorily refused to grant the application, and in his remarks described the offences of which the prisoners were guilty as the most heinous that had ever come to his notice. This view was apparently shared by the spectators, as when the judge sentenced Wilde and Taylor to two years’ imprisonment at hard labor many persons present cried "Shame."

When the sentence was pronounced Wilde appeared to be stunned. As the last word of the sentence was uttered the apostle of æsceticism was hurried to his cell.

The Marquis of Queensberry has applied to the Treasury to recoup him for the £2,000 expended in the Wilde case. The Treasury offered him £100. The Marquis, in reply to this offer, says that unless he is reimbursed he will raise the question in Parliament.