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 trial or JOHN SHOLTO DOUGLAS, MARQUIS of QUEENSBERRY, who surrendered upon an indictment charging him with unlawfully and maliciously writing and publishing a false, malicious, and defamatory libel of and concerning Mr. Oscar Wilde in the form of a card directed to him, was resumed.

Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys, appeared for the prosecution; Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill defended. Mr. Besley, Q.C., Mr. Monckton, and Mr. Leonard Kershaw watched the case for a person interested.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C., continued his opening statement of the case for the defence. He said that yesterday, when it came to the usual time for the adjournment of the Court, he had dealt as fully as he intended to deal with the question of Mr. Wilde's connexion with the literature and the two letters which had been produced in the case, and he had almost hoped that he had sufficiently demonstrated to the jury upon that matter that, so far as Lord Queensberry was concerned, he was absolutely justified in bringing to a climax in the way he did this question of the connexion between Mr. Oscar Wilde and his son. He himself had, unfortunately, a more painful part of the case now to approach. It would be his painful duty to bring before them young men one after another to tell their tale. It was, of course, even for an advocate a distasteful task. But let those who were inclined to condemn these men for allowing themselves to be dominated, misled, and corrupted by Mr. Oscar Wilde remember the relative position of the parties, and remember that they were men who had been more sinned against than sinning. He was not going in any great detail now to criticize the evidence of Mr. Oscar Wilde in relation to the several transactions as to which he was cross-examined. There were general observations applicable to all the cases; there was, in point of fact, a startling similarity between each of them on his own admission which must lead the jury to draw most painful conclusions. There was the fact that in no one of these cases were these parties on an equality in any way with Mr. Wilde; they were none of them educated parties with whom he would naturally associate, and they were not his equal in years. The jury ould have observed a curious similarity in the ages of each of them. Mr. Wilde had said that there was something beautiful, something charming about youth which led him to adopt the course he did. It was absurd; his excuse in the witness-box was only a travesty of the facts. Who were all these your men? Of Wood he himself had spoken. Who was Parker? Mr. Wilde professed the same ignorance about Parker as be had about Wood--that he knew nothing about his antecedents. He also knew nothing about Searle except that he was out of employment. About Conway be said that he had met him at Worthing. There was a curious similarity between all these cases--they were all of the same age. Take the case of Parker. How did Mr. Wilde come to know Parker? Parker was a gentleman's servant who was out of employment and he and his brother one evening at a restaurant in Piccadilly met Taylor. Taylor came and addressed them. Within a day or two Mr. Wilde gave a dinner to Taylor on the occasion of his birthday, and told Taylor to bring anyone he liked. What an idea Taylor must have had of Mr. Wilde's taste that he should bring to his birthday dinner a groom and a valet. There could be no explanation of the matter but one--that Taylor was the procurer for Mr. Wilde, and the jury would hear from this young man Parker, who would have to tell his unfortunate story to them, that he was poor and out of a place, that he had no money, and unfortunately fell a victim to Mr. Wilde. On the first evening they met Mr. Wilde called Parker "Charlie" and Parker called him "Oscar." He did not want to say anything about Mr. Wilde's theories that there should be no social distinctions. It might be a very noble and a very generous instinct in some people to 'wish to break down social barriers but he did not know that Mr. Wilde's conduct was regulated by any generous instincts towards these young men. If Mr. Wilde wanted to assist Parker, did they think it was in favour of Mr. Wilde that he should take him to a restaurant and give him a luxurious dinner and champagne? Was that the way that assistance would be given? Parker said that after the dinner Mr. Wilde invited him to drive with him to the Savoy Hotel. He himself must say that they had had no explanation from Mr. Wilde as to why he had the suite of rooms at the Savoy Hotel. Parker would tell them what happened on arriving there. That was the scandal at the Savoy Hotel to which Lord Queensberry had referred in his letter as far back as June or July in last sear. The jury would wonder, not at the reports having reached Lord Queensberry's ears, but that Mr. Wilde had been tolerated in London society as long as he had. The man Parker had since enlisted in the Army and bore a good character. Mr. Wilde himself said that Parker was a respectable man. Parker would reluctantly present himself to tell his story to the jury. The learned counsel was next proceeding to deal with the case of a young man named Conway, when

SIR. EDWARD CLARKE, Q.C., who had previously left the Court with Mr. Charles Mathews, returned, and, interposing, asked permission of the learned Judge to have a conversation with Mr. Carson. At the close of a few moments' communication between the learned counsel,

SIR EDWARD CLARKE rose, and, addressing Mr. Justice Collins, said,--Will your Lordship allow me to interpose at this moment to make a statement, which, of course, is made under a feeling of very great responsibility? My learned friend, Mr. Carson, yesterday addressed the jury on the question of the literature involved in this case, and upon the inferences to be drawn from admissions made, with regard to letters, by Mr. Oscar Wilde yesterday, and my friend began address this morning by saying that he hoped yesterday that he had said enough dealing with those topics to induce the jury to relieve him from the necessity of dealing in detail with the other issues in this case. I think it must be present in your Lordship's mind that those who are representing Mr. Oscar Wilde in this case have before them a very terrible anxiety. They cannot conceal from themselves that the judgment that might be formed of that literature and of the conduct which had been admitted might not improbably induce the jury to say that when Lord Queensberry used the words, "Posing as," &c., he was using words for which there was sufficient justification to entitle a father using those words in those circumstances to the utmost consideration, and to be relieved from a criminal charge in respect of that statement. And, my Lord, we had, in our clear view that that might not improbably be the result upon that part of the case, and I and my learned friends who desire to be associated with me in this matter had looked forward to this--that a verdict given in favour of the defendant upon that part of the case might be interpreted outside as a conclusive finding with regard to all parts of the case. The position in which we stood was this--that, without expecting to obtain a verdict in this case, we should be going through day after day, it might be, with long evidence, investigating matters of the most appalling character. In these circumstances I hope your Lordship will think that I am taking a right course, which I am taking after communications with Mr. Oscar Wilde, --that is to say, that, having regard to what has been already referred to by my learned friend in respect of the matters connected with the literature and the letters, I feel that he could not resist a verdict of "Not guilty" in this case, having reference to the words, " Posing as," &c. In these circumstances I hope that your Lordship will think that I am not going beyond the bounds of duty, and that I am doing some thing to save or to prevent what would be a most terrible task, however it might close, if I now interpose and say, on behalf of Mr. Oscar Wilde, that I would ask to withdraw from the prosecution, and, if your Lordship does not think at this time of the case that I ought to be allowed to do this, I am prepared to submit to a verdict of "Not guilty," having regard, if to any part of the particulars at all, to that part of them which is connected with the publication of "Dorian Gray " and the publication of the Chameleon. I trust that that may make an end of the case.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C.--My Lord,--I do not know that I have any right whatever to interfere in any way in the application that my friend has made to your Lordship. I can only say that, as far as Lord Queensberry is concerned, if there is a verdict of "Not guilty," a verdict which involves that he has succeeded in his plea of justification, I am quite satisfied. Of course, my friend must admit that we must succeed upon that plea in the manner which he has stated. Therefore, it rests entirely with your Lordship whether the course suggested by my friend should be taken.

Mr. JUSTICE COLLINS.--Inasmuch as the prosecutor in this case is prepared to acquiesce in a verdict of ``Not guilty," I do not think it is any part of the functions of a Judge or jury to insist on going through prurient details which have no bearing on the matter which has been already concluded by the assent of the prosecutor to a verdict of ``Not guilty." But as to the jury's putting any limitation on the verdict, the justification is one justifying the charge of "Posing as," &c. If that is justified, it is justified. If it is not, it is not; and the verdict of jury must be a verdict of "Guilty" or "Not guilty," and I understand the prosecution to assent to a verdict of "Not guilty." Of course, the jury will return their verdict.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C.--Of course, my Lord, the verdict will be that the plea of justification is proved, and that it is for the public benefit.

JUSTICE COLLINS.--The verdict is "Not guilty," but it is arrived at by that process. I should tell the jury that two things had to be established--that the justification was true in substance and in fact--that the prosecutor had "Posed as," &c.--and I should also have had to tell them that they would have to find that the statement was published in such a manner as to be for the public benefit. If they find these two issues in favour of the defendant, then the verdict will be "Not guilty." That is the verdict, I understand, which is submitted to. Gentlemen of the Jury,--Your ultimate verdict will be "Not guilty," but there are other matters which have to be determined with reference to the specific finding on the plea of justification and which involve two things--that the statement is true in fact, and that it was published for the public benefit. Having found these in favour of the defendant, your verdict will be " Not guilty," and you will have to say whether the plea of justification is proved or not.

The jury having consulted for a few moments, the Clerk of Arraigns, addressing them, said:--Gentlemen of the Jury,--Do you find the plea of justification has been proved or not?

The Foreman.--Yes.

The Clerk of Arraigns.--You say that the defendant is Not guilty, and that is the verdict of you all?

The Foreman.--Yes; and we also find that it was published for the public benefit.

The verdict was received with loud applause.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C.--Of course, the costs of the defence will follow.

Mr. JUSTICE COLLINS.--Yes.

Mr. C. F. GILL.--And Lord Queensberry may be discharged.

Mr. JUSTICE COLLINS.--Certainly.

The Marquis of Queensberry then left the dock amid renewed cheering.