Compare Documents

London, April 3.

All the appearances of a sensational trial was presented at the Old Bailey to-day, when the Marquis of Queensberry entered the dock to answer the charge of criminally libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde. Although influential people and the ordinary public clamoured at the doors for admission soon after eight o'clock in the morning, it was only the privileged few who gained entry within the judicial precincts. Necessarily, from the peculiar nature of the case, the proceedings were expected to be of a character such as to preclude the admission to court of any but the sterner sex. The Marquis was the first to appear, and was soon followed by Mr. Oscar Wilde, who took a seat at the solicitors' table. By the time Mr. Justice Collins took his seat on the bench the court was crammed, and the counsel engaged were busy with their blue papers. Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys appeared to prosecute; while Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill (instructed by Mr. Charles Russell) represented the Marquis of Queensberry; Mr. Besley, Q. C., with Mr. Monckton, watching the proceedings on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis.

The Clerk read out the indictment to the effect that the Marquis "did unlawfully and maliciously write and publish a false, malicious, and defamatory libel" concerning Mr. O. Wilde, in the form of a card directed to him.

The Marquis said he pleaded not guilty, and that the libel was true, and that it was for the public benefit that it should be published.

Sir E. Clarke, in opening the case for the prosecution, said the card was a visiting card of the Marquis of Queensberry, and had written upon it, "To Oscar Wilde, posing as --" (an expression which we are unable to print). Of course it was a matter of serious moment that a word as that should in any way be connected with the name of a gentleman who had borne a high reputation in this country. It was an accusation of the gravest of all offences. The accusation of posing no doubt appeared to suggest that there was no guilt of the actual offence, but that in some way or another the person of whom these words were written desired to appear to be a person guilty of that gravest of all offences. He pointed out that there was no allegation in the pleadings that Mr. Oscar Wilde had been guilty of the offence of which he (counsel) had spoken; but there was a series of accusations, and the names of many persons were mentioned. It was said with regard to these that Mr. Wilde had solicited them to commit with him a grave offence, and that he had been guilty with each and all of them of improper practices. He thought it would occur to the jury as somewhat, strange that whereas these pleadings and the statements which were contained in them referred to a very considerable period of time, one would gather from the pleadings that during all that time Mr. Wilde had been unsuccessfully soliciting these persons. If they were called upon to sustain the charges, these persons would necessarily have to admit much in cross-examination; but he supposed they would not be prepared to admit that they were guilty of the grossest of all offences. Of course,it was for those who had undertaken the grave responsibility of putting in the pleadings of these allegations to satisfy the jury if they could, by witnesses whose evidence they would deem worthy of consideration and entitled to belief, that these charges were true. Counsel next proceeded to refer to the circumstances under which Mr. Wilde became acquainted with Lord A. Douglas in 1891, and pointed out that from that time to the present Mr. Wilde had been the friend not only of Lord Alfred Douglas, but of his brother and mother, Lady Queensberry, who was the wife of the defendant, but who some years ago obtained release from the marriage tie in consequence of the defendent's conduct. It was not until 1894 that Mr. Wilde became aware that certain statements had been made affecting his character, and he became aware of it in this way: There was a man named Wood, whom he had seen once or twice, and who had been given some clothes by Lord A. Douglas. This man said he had found in the pocket of the coat that was given to him four letters which had been written by Mr. Wilde to Lord A. Douglas. Whether Wood had found them in the pocket of the coat or whether he had stolen them was a matter upon which he (counsel) at this moment could only speculate. At all events, there were some letters of Mr. Wilde's which were being handed about, and Wood came to Mr. Wilde early in the year 1894, and told, him that he had these letters, and asked Mr. Wilde to give him something for them. Wood represented himself as being in some distress, and as wanting to go to America. Mr. Wilde gave him £15 or £20 in order to pay his passage to America. Wood handed Mr. Wilde the letters which had been written by him to Lord A. Douglas, but he(counsel) did not think any importance attached to these letters, because, as was generally the case where people thought that they had got letters which were of some importance, those which were of no importance were given up, and the letter which was supposed to be of importance was retained. That was the case in this instance. On Feb. 28 Mr. Wilde called at the Albemarle Club, and was then handed the card, the subject of the libel alleged, contained in an envelope, and in the result a warrant was granted, upon which the Marquis of Queensbury was arrested on Mar. 2. Referring to the plea of justification, it contained references to a certain magazine, and Mr. Wilde was said to be responsible for an article appearing in it of a disgraceful and unworthy character. As a matter of fact, however, Mr. Wilde was not responsible for the article at all. He insisted, as soon as he saw that article, his name appearing on the title-page of the magazine that it should be withdrawn from publication. He had no knowledge that the article had been written or that it was going to appear in the magazine until he saw it in print, and he then expressed his opinion that the literature was bad and unworthy to be published.

Evidence having been given to prove the publication Of the alleged libel by Sidney Wright, the porter of the Albemarle Club, to whom the card was given, Mr. Oscar Wilde was next called, and in his evidence he said that he made the acquaintance of Lord Alfred Douglas in 1891. He was also on friendly terms with Lord Alfred Douglas's brother. Since 1891 he had been in the habit of dining with Lord Alfred Douglas at the Albermarle Club, and had stayed with him at various places. In November, 1892, he met the Marquis of Queensberry at the Café Royal, whilst in the company of Lord Alfred Douglas, and they had luncheon together. He did not see the Marquis again for some time. The witness spoke to a man named Wood calling upon him and producing a certain letter, which he had sent to Lord Alfred Douglas. This man said that the letters had been stolen from him. The witness did not regard the letters as of any importance. He gave the man £15 to get to America. He next had a call from a man named Allen, to whom he said: "I suppose you have come about my beautiful letter to Lord Alfred Douglas. If you had not been so foolish as to send a copy of it to Mr. Beerbohm Tree I would gladly have paid you a very large sum of money for the letter, as I consider it to be a work of art." The man said: "It is a very curious construction to put on that letter." He added that a man had offered him £60 for it. The witness said: "If you would take my advice you would go to that man and sell my letter for £60. I have never received so large a sum for any prose work of that length." Other conversation followed, and the man said that he had not a single penny, and was very poor, and witness gave him 10s. He told the man that the letter was a prose poem, which would shortly be published in a dramatic magazine, and he would send him a copy. That letter was the basis of a poem published in French in the "Spirit Lamp" magazine. The Marquis called on him about Lord Alfred Douglas, and witness, referring to a letter, said: "I could have you up at any time for a criminal libel." The Marquis said: "The letter is a privileged one, as it was written to my son." He added: "You were both kicked out of the Savoy Hotel at a moment's notice for your disgusting conduct." He made other statements, and he ordered the Marquis out of his house, saying to his servant: "This is the Marquis of Queensberry, the most infamous brute in London. You are never to allow him to enter my house again, and if he should attempt to come in you must send for the police." There was no truth in the suggestion that he was turned out of the Savoy Hotel. He had nothing whatever to do with the magazine called the Chameleon beyond contributing to it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Carson, Q.C.: He was 40 years of age next birthday; Lord Alfred Douglas was 24 years Of age. Before the interview in Tite-street, between himself and the Marquis, he had hot received a letter from the Marquis protesting against his association with his son, Lord Alfred Douglas. He was aware that the Marquis had made such a protest, but, notwithstanding, he had kept the acquaintance up till the present time, and had stayed with Lord Alfred Douglas at various places, including hotels in London. He had been abroad with him, and recently they were at Monte Carlo. He was of opinion that there was no such thing as an immoral book. Mr. Carson: Do you think the phrase, under the title of "Phrases of Philosophy for the Young," a proper one: "Wickedness is a myth invented by good people to account for the peculiar attractiveness of others"? - I rather think everything I write is true in effect, but not true in the sense of an actual fact in life. So far from the phrases being improper, he thought they were most stimulating. (Laughter.)

Is "Dorian Gray" open to the interpretation of being a disgusting book? - Only to brutes and the illiterate. You cannot ask about the interpretation of my work; it does not concern me. What concerns me is my view and my feeling. I do not care "tuppence" what Philistines think about it.

Mr. Carson read the description of the artist's feelings on first meeting "Dorian Gray" and in reply to a question, Mr. Wilde said: I think this is the most perfect description possible of what an artist would feel on meeting a beautiful personality. You mean a beautiful person? - Yes; a beautiful young man if you like.

Having read another passage, Mr. Carson asked: Do you mean to say that that describes the natural feeling of one man towards another? - It describes the influence produced on an artist by a beautiful personality.

The letter you wrote to Lord Alfred Douglas, was it an ordinary letter? - No. "My own boy"; was that not ordinary? - No. You would say, I suppose, that for a man of your age to address a youth of half your years as "My own boy" would be an improper thing? - No, certainly not; not if he was fond of him. I was fond of Lord Alfred. Mr. Carson quoted--"And it was marvellous that those red, roseleaf lips of yours should be made no less for music and song than for the madness of kissing." Was that proper? - My dear sir, you are cross-examining me upon a poem. You might as well ask me if King Lear or Shakspere's sonnets are improper.

I will read you another letter--

"Savoy Hotel. "Dearest of all Boys, -- Your letter was delightful red and yellow wine to me, and I am sad and out of sorts. Boysey, 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 It breaks my heart. I must see you soon. You are the divine thing I want of grace and genius. But I don't know how to do it. There are many difficulties. My bill here is £49 for the week. My dear, my wonderful boy, I fear I must leave. No money, no credit, and a heart of lead.--From your own OSCAR."

Was that an extraordinary letter? - I think everything I write is extraordinary. I do not pose as being ordinary. Ask me anything you like.

In further cross-examination Mr. Wilde admitted having asked an office boy engaged at his publishers, Messrs. Matthews and Lane, to dine with him at the Albermarle Hotel. The boy had whisky and soda. "He had what he liked," said Mr. Wilde.

Witness was asked as to his acquaintance with two other young men.

The hearing was then adjourned until tomorrow, Lord Queensberry being allowed out on bail.

The charge of criminal libel brought by Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry, which resulted in the acquittal of the accused without a stain on his character, and the subsequent prosecution of Wilde, are fully detailed in the papers brought by the mail delivered to-day.

Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., M.P., with Mr C. Mathews and Mr Travers Humphrey, appeared for the prosecution; Mr Carson, Q.C., Mr C.F. Gill, Q.C., and Mr A. Gill defended; and Mr Besley, Q.C., with Mr Monckton, watched the case on behalf of Lord Douglas Hawick.

After some preliminary evidence had been given Mr Oscar Wilde was called and examined by Sir E. Clarke. He said — I am the prosecutor in this case, and am 39 years of age. My father was Sir William Wilde, surgeon, of Dublin, and chairman of the Census commission. He died when I was at Oxford. I was a student at Trinity College, Dublin, where I took a classical scholarship and the gold medal for Greek. I then went to Magdalen College, Oxford, where I took a classical scholarship, a first in "Mods" and a first in "Greats" of the Newdigate prize for English verse. I took my degree in 1878, and came down at once. From that time I have devoted myself to art and literature. In 1882 I published a volume of poems, and afterwards lectured in England and America. I have written many essays of different kinds, and during the last few years have devoted myself to dramatic literature. In 1884 I married Miss Lloyd, and from that date till now have lived with her in Tite street, Chelsea. I have two sons, the eldest of whom will be ten in June, and the second nine in November.

In 1891 did you make the acquaintance of Lord Alfred Douglas? — Yes, he was brought to my house by a mutual friend. Before then I had not been acquainted with Lady Queensberry, but since then I have, and have been a guest in her house many times. I also knew Lord Douglas, of Hawick, and the late Lord Drumlanrig. Lord Alfred had dined with me from time to time at my house, and at the Albemarle Club, of which my wife is a member, and has stayed with us at Cromer, Goring, Worthing, and Torquay. In November, 1892, I was lunching with him at the Cafe Royal, where we met Lord Queensberry, and on my suggestion Lord Alfred went to him and shook hands. I was aware that there had been some estrangement between the two. Lord Queensberry joined us, and remained chatting with me. From 3rd November, 1892, till March, 1894, I did not see the defendant, but in 1893 I heard that some letters that I had addressed to Lord Alfred Douglas had come into the hands of certain persons.

THE CROSS-EXAMINATION.

Cross-examined by Mr Carson: You stated that your age was 39, I think you are over 40. You were born on 16th October, 1854? — I had no wish to pose as being young.

That makes you more than 40? — Ah!

In reply to further questions the prosecutor said: Lord Alfred Douglas is about 24, and was between 20 and 21 years of age when I first knew him. Down to the interview in Tite street Lord Queensberry had been friendly. I did not receive a letter on April 3 in which Lord Queensberry desired that my acquaintance with his son should cease. After the interview I had no doubt that such was Lord Queensberry's desire. Notwithstanding Lord Queensberry's protest my intimacy with Lord A. Douglas continues to the present moment.

You have stayed with him at many places? - Yes.

At Oxford, Brighton — on several occasions Worthing? — Yes.

You never took rooms for him? — No.

Were you at other places with him? — Cromer, Torquay.

And in various hotels in London? — Yes. One in Albemarle street, and in Dover street and at the Savoy.

Did you ever take rooms yourself in addition to your house in Tite street? — Yes, at 10 and 51, St. James's place. I kept the rooms from the month of October, 1893, to the end of March, 1894. Lord Douglas had stayed in those chambers, which were not far from Piccadilly. I had been abroad with him several times, and even lately to Monte Carlo. With reference to these books, it was not at Brighton in 20 King's road that I wrote my article in the "Chameleon." I observed that there were also contributions from Lord Alfred Douglas, but these were not written at Brighton. I had seen them. I thought them exceedingly beautiful poems. One was in "Praise of Shame," the other "Two Loves." One spoke of his love, and other boy's love as shame. Did you see in that any improper suggestion? — None whatever.

You read "The Priest and the Acolyte?" - Yes.

You have no doubt whatever that was an improper story? — From the literary point of view, it was highly improper.

May I take it that you think "The Priest and the Acolyte" was not immoral? — It was worse, it was badly written. (Laughter.)

Do you think the story blasphemous? — I think it violated every artistic cannon of beauty. I did not consider the story blasphemous.

A copy of "Lippincott's Magazine," in which the story of the "Dorian Gray" first appeared, was handed to its author.

Have you ever "madly adored" anybody many years younger than yourself? — I have reserved adoration for myself only.

Mr Carson then quoted an abstract from the Lippincott version of Dorian Gray, in which the artist tells Dorian of the scandals about him, and finally asks, "Why is your friendship so fatal to young men?"

Asked whether the passage in its ordinary meaning did not suggest a certain charge, witness stated that it described Dorian Gray as a man of very corrupt influence, though there was no statement as to the nature of his influence. "Nor do I think," he added, "that there is any bad influence in the world."

A man never corrupts a youth? — I think not.

Nothing he could do would corrupt him? — If you talk of separate ages.

Mr Carson: No, sir, I'm talking common sense.

Witness: I don't think that one person influences another.

You don't think that flattering a young man, making love to him, in fact, would be likely to corrupt him? — No.

Where was Lord Alfred Douglas staying when you wrote that letter to him? — At the Savoy, and I was at Torquay.

It was a letter in answer to something he had sent you? — Yes, a poem.

Was that an ordinary letter? - Certainly not.

"My own boy." Was that ordinary? — No. I have said it was not an ordinary letter.

Yes, but I wish to know in what it was extraordinary. Why should a man of your age address a boy nearly 20 years younger like that? — I was fond of him. I have always been fond of him.

Do you adore him? — No, but I have always liked him. I think it is a beautiful letter. It is a poem. You might as well cross-examine me as to whether "King Lear" or a sonnet of Shakapeare was proper.

Apart from art, Mr Wilde? — I cannot answer apart from art.

Suppose a man who was not an artist had written this letter, would you say it was a proper letter? — A man who was not an artist could not have written that letter. (Laughter).

Why? — Because nobody but an artist could write it. He certainly could not write the language unless he was a man of letters.

Have you often written letters in the same style as this? — I don't repeat myself in style.

Here is another letter which I believe you also wrote to Lord Alfred Douglas. Will you read it? — No, I decline; I don't see why I should.

Then I will: -

Savoy Hotel, Thames Embankment, W.C. — Dearest of all boys, — Your letter was delightful, red and yellow wine to me, but I am sad and out of sorts. Boysey, 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 with passion. I cannot listen to your young lips saying hideous things to me. I would sooner -

Here a word is indecipherable, but I will ask the witness.

than have you bitter, unjust, hating, I must see you soon. You are the divine thing I want, the thing of grace, but I don't know how to do it. Shall I come to Salisbury? My bill here is L49 for a week. (Laughter.) Why is it you are not here, my dear, my wonderful boy I fear I must have no money, no credit. — Your own OSCAR.

Is that an ordinary letter? — Everything I write is extraordinary. I do not pose as being ordinary. (Laughter.)

Have you got his letter in reply? — I do not recollect what letter it was.

It was not a beautiful letter? — I do not remember the letter.

You describe it as "delightful red and yellow wine to you"? — Oh, of course, a beautiful letter, certainly.

What would you pay for that beautiful letter? — I could not get a copy.

How much would you give if you could get a copy? — Oh, I do not know.

Was this one of yours a beautiful letter? — Yes; it was a tender expression of my great admiration for Lord Alfred Douglas. It was not like the other — a prose poem.

Then Mr Wilde was asked several peculiar questions as to the manner in which Taylor's apartments were furnished. He would not say the appointments were luxurious, but much taste was displayed.

Were the rooms not always darkened? — No.

Did you see any other light to that afforded by candle or lamp? — I generally went there about tea-time, and I suppose it was dark then.

Were the windows covered by double curtains? — It is quite possible, but I can't tell you.

Were the rooms not always strongly perfumed? — Yes, a little perfume, I believe, was used.

Mr Wilde's memory was next taxed in regard to a youth named Mayor. This youth had not been seen of late, and the suggestion was that he had been spirited away, but this Mr Wilde denied.

Coming back again to the acquaintance with Taylor, Mr Carson asked whether that individual figured in female attire, but Mr Wilde was not aware of it.

Was Taylor a literary person, Mr Wilde? — He was a young man of great taste.

Did you discuss literary matters with him? — He used to listen, said Mr Wilde — and the court laughed.

There was another youth named "Fred," said Mr Carson. — There was, replied Mr Wilde. He used to visit at Taylor's place.

Had you ever any trouble over Fred? — None.

Do you know that the police at one time were watching you and Taylor? — No.

Do you know that Taylor and a man named Parker were arrested during a raid made last year at a house in Fitzroy-square? — Yes; I heard so.

Do you know Parker? — Yes.

And now do you that Taylor was notorious for introducing young men to older men? — No.

Has he introduced many to you? — Six or seven: no — about five.

All of whom you know by their Christian names? — Yes.

Have you given money to them? — Yes, all five, I suppose — money or presents.

Did Taylor introduce you to Charles Parker? — Yes.

Was he a gentleman's servant out of employment? — How do I know?

If he had not been a gentleman's servant out of employment you would not have become friendly with him? — I become friendly with anyone I take a liking to.

Was he an artist or a literary man? — Culture was not his strong point, replied Oscar, lightly.

What is he now? — I have not the remotest idea.

How much money have you given Parker? — Four or five pounds.

What for? — Because he was poor, and I liked him. What better reason?

Where did you first see Parker? — At a restaurant — Kettner's.

Was his brother with him? — Yes.

Did you become familiar with him? — They were my guests; they were at my table, so of course I did.

Did you not say that night of Charlie Parker, in the presence of others, "This is the boy for me; will you come with me?" — Most certainly not.

But he went with you afterwards to your rooms at the Savoy Hotel? — He did not.

You gave him money? — Yes. Four pounds or so. He said he was hard-up.

Then Mr Carson asked; Now, Mr Wilde, I ask you what was there in common between you and this young fellow? — I will tell you. I like the society of people who are younger than myself. I recognise no social distinctions of any kind. To me the mere fact of youth is so wonderful that I would sooner talk to a young man for half an hour than even be cross-examined by you in court.

Mr Wilde then went on to admit that he had taken Parker to the Crystal Palace and other places, but denied absolutely the suggestions made.