Compare Documents

London, April 6.—Oscar Wilde’s friend, Taylor, was arrested and taken to the Bow-street Police Station this morning. When Wilde was arraigned in the Bow-street Police Court this morning, Alfred Taylor was placed in the prisoner’s dock, charged with being accessory to Wilde’s crimes. As Taylor stepped into the dock Wilde smilingly recognized him. Taylor is a man of medium size with sharp features and a fair complexion.

Charles Parker, 19 years of age, was the first witness examined. He gave in detail the particulars of his introduction to Wilde by Taylor, and stated that the latter said Wilde was "Good for money." Parker testified that he had frequently dined with Wilde at various restaurants, and detailed the conversations between them on these occasions. He also told of visits to the Savoy Hotel with Wilde, and of meeting Wilde at his chambers at St. James’ Place.

The story told by Parker, if true, proves the case of the Treasury against Wilde. Counsel for Wilde and Taylor reserved the right to cross-examine Parker.

LONDON, April 6. - Most observers of English character would have declared it impossible to arouse the phlegmatic conscience and emotions of the nation to such a pitch of intensity as is to-day manifesting itself in all classes. The horror, the loathing, the anger which revelations in connection with the Wilde-Queensberry case have caused can be compared only with one of those whirlwinds of passion which once in a few decades suddenly sweep over a nation and by their very violence restore confidence in human nature. Not until today, apparently, has the country realized that a moral pestilence in the atmosphere has long been doing deadly work.

Already there are signs that the popular revenge and reform will be indiscriminating and unreasoning in their work. The finger of suspicion is already carrying condemnation wherever it is pointed. Many will suffer fearful social penalties who are absolutely innocent; but the general effect of the great onslaught of public opinion which has now begun will be salutary and for the purifying of the nation.

The best sign of all is that Englishmen are ashamed. It is the first time I have ever seen the manifestation of this emotion among them. They feel that a deep, black, national disgrace has been uncovered, and the feeling is the more poignant because new to them. Their anger against the human reptiles who have brought this shame upon them is indescribable. It not only demands the swiftest and severest punishment, but it has been instantly turned against every art, every fad, every innovation with which those accused or suspected have been identified. To-day's newspapers are unanimous, for instance, in pronouncing the doom of æstheticism and everything connected with that cult. Thus the Telegraph correctly voices public opinion when it says:

"If the general concern were only with the man himself, his spurious brilliancy, inflated egotism, diseased vanity, cultivated affectation, and shameless disavowal of all morality, the best thing would be to dismiss him and his deeds without a word to the penalty of universal condemnation. But there is more than the individual himself to be considered in the matter. The just verdict of yesterday must be held to include with him the tendency of his peculiar career, the meaning and influence of his teaching, and all those shallow and specious arts by which he and his like have attempted to establish a cult and even to set up new schools of literature, the drama, and social thought.

"To the fantastic beginnings of the new school of ethical or literary principle no particular objections could be urged. Nevertheless, these men, linking a certain real sense of beauty with profligate tastes and profane mockery, have exercised a visible influence upon the generation cursed by their presence. You may trace them today, we are ashamed to declare, in the outlying regions of the press, where a certain class of publications strives to exist which has for its inspiration the salacious impulse to go perpetually as close as can be to the limits of public decorum, and to show its smartness by a reverence, veiled indelicacy, and, as far as it dares, by violation of the sacredness of private life. The trail of this fetid fashion has penetrated to our theatres. The shame and disgrace of it have invaded art, and we are asked to admire nowadays specimens from the impressionist and fleshly galleries which are of true and serious art merely a burlesque and mockery. It has passed, with heavy damage to good taste and rightful amusement into the domain of fiction, so that we see novel after novel aspire to a moment's popularity mainly on the grounds of purient sexuality or of ignorant disbelief."

The Chronicle recognizes the wide extent of the evil, and says: "For a long time past London life, or let us say a small and obscure section of it, has been under the shadow of a black cloud. Everybody has suspected and feared; nobody, no decent person, has known that there was some centre whence most deadly infections spread. It was apparent in a certain class of literature. Now a jury has declared that even a man of unattractive character has done a public benefit in branding one of the most prominent figures in our drama, our literature, and by no means an unfashionable section of society. Suffice it to know that, as some return for the undamming of the putrid stream, our life is rid forever of a pestiferous poseur. The way has been cleared for the increased wholesomeness of life. Public opinion has been so sharply screwed up in the past two days that certain things in current art and literature, no less than in conduct, will be intolerable for at least a long time to come."

Regarding the measures which society, now thoroughly aroused and exasperated, will employ for dealing with the evil, it may be said that the Government has wisely decided upon sharp, rapid, and severe action. Evidence has accumulated in the last few days ample for the condemnation of several leaders of the abominable coterie which has its ramifications throughout Europe. They will be arrested, and, in New York police parlance, railroaded as fast as possible to penal servitude.

The Government promptly began to-day by arresting Alfred Taylor, whom the police say has long been known as the leader of this infamous band. Like others of his class, the development of his mania has followed sudden accession of wealth and luxury. His father, who was prominent in the city, and was once close to the Lord Mayor’s chair, left him an immense fortune, which he used to gratify every physical appetite. He spent $60,000 furnishing his house, which has been the headquarters of this class of sensualists. The victims of himself and his crew were dazzled by the Oriental luxuries of the place. One of the features of the drawing room, to which daylight is never admitted, is a marble fountain, distributing perfume instead of water. The police searched the whole place yesterday.

Both Wilde and Taylor were committed for trial without bail at the Bow Street Police Court to-day, after an overwhelming mass of revolting evidence had been given by the victims. Prison life is expected to have an immediate effect on men who are accustomed to every luxury and indulgence, and Wilde is much depressed after a night's confinement. The police have reason to believe that to-day's exposure is already causing a panic-stricken exodus of many persons from England such as followed the Cleveland street scandal a few years ago. There are some who are not unknown in society among them.

The effect of the Wilde case has been intensified in the public mind by the trial of Lord Russell's matrimonial suit at the same time. The same charge is at the basis of this case, and if it were not overshadowed by the Wilde-Queensberry scandal it would have made a great sensation.

By the United Press.

Oscar Wilde's friend, Alfred Taylor, was arrested and taken to the Bow street police station this morning. Oscar Wilde was arraigned before a public magistrate this morning and charged with inciting young men to commit a foul crime, and also with having actually committed the crime himself.

When Wilde was arraigned Taylor was also placed in the prisoners’ dock, charged with being accessory to Wilde’s crimes. As Taylor stepped into the dock Wilde smilingly recognized him. Taylor is a man of medium size, with sharp features and a fair complexion.

Charles Parker, 19 years of age, was the first witness examined. He gave in detail the particulars of his introduction to Wilde by Taylor, and said the letter said Wilde was "good for money." Parker testified that he had frequently dined with Wilde at various restaurants, and detailed the conversation between them on those occasions. He also told of visits to the Savoy Hotel with Wilde and is meeting Wilde at his chambers in St. James's place. He made frequent visits to the latter place. Parker described the conduct of himself and Wilde at these meetings and swore that he had received money and other presents upon almost every occasion. The story told by Parker, if true, proves the case for the Treasury against Wilde.

Counsel for Wilde and Taylor reserved their right to cross-examine Parker.

William Parker, a brother of the first witness called, was placed on the stand and confirmed the story of the first meeting between his brother and Wilde in March, 1893. Charles Parker was bound over in the sum of £85 to give evidence in the Old Bailey proceedings.

The landlady of the house in which Taylor lodged was next examined, and gave testimony regarding the youths who attended the tea parties given by Taylor. She said she had heard Taylor address somebody as Oscar, but did not recognize Wilde as having been one of her lodger’s visitors.

Alfred Wood, the man whose passage to America was paid by Wilde, upon being sworn, testified that he met Wilde at the Café Royal in January, 1893. He went to Wilde’s house, 16 Tite street, Chelsea, S.W., where he remained for some time. Witness described in detail what occured during this time. He said he was drunk at the time of this visit. He also said that Wilde had often given him money and had visited him at his lodgings, but strenuously denied that any wrongdoing had occured during these visits.

In regard to this point the witness was strongly pressed by the magistrate, but reiterated his denials of misconduct, saying that Wilde had simply called upon him.

Continuing, the witness said Wilde had given him altogether £35, upon the receipt of which sum he had handed over to Wilde a number of letters written by him. Subsequently he went to America, remaining abroad fourteen months. He desired to go to America, he said, to get away from Wilde and certain other persons who are now absent from England.

Wilde and Taylor were remanded in custody. A request was made that the prisoners be admitted to bail, but bail was refused.

The Westminster Gazette, commenting on the result of Wilde's prosecution of the Marquis of Queensberry, says:

"The case proves that it is untrue to say art has nothing to do with morality. Wilde’s art rests on a basis of rottenness and corruption."

Archibald Edward Douglas, brother of the Marquis of Queensberry, has written a letter repudiating the statement made today in the course of an interview by Lord Douglas of Haywick, eldest living son of the Marquis, to the effect that no member of the family except his father believes the charges against Wilde. In refutation of this statement the writer of the letter says: "My mother, my sister, and myself believe the allegations made against Oscar Wilde."

The charge against Wilde is meantime being prosecuted under the Criminal Law Amendment act, which classes his offence as a misdemeanor, the maximum penalty for which is two years’ imprisonment for each conviction.