Compare Documents

LONDON, April 4.

The Central Criminal Court was again filled to its utmost capacity this morning, when the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde was resumed. All the windows in the court were wide open, but even this did not suffice to clear away the stuffy atmosphere which always seems to pervade the building. The public galleries were filled with persons having privilege passes, and these, it was understood, consisted almost entirely of friends of the parties in the case.

Mr. Wilde entered the court at a quarter-past 10, and taking his seat at the end of the solicitors' table, engaged in an animated conversation with Mr. Charles Mathews, one of his counsel. Some few minutes later Mr. Carson and Mr. Gill, who appeared for the defendant, made their way to the counsel's seat. They were soon afterwards followed by the Marquis of Queensberry, who walked into the dock and took his stand with the same air of self-composure as marked his conduct yesterday. He was again attired in a dark blue overcoat, and carried in his hand his small felt hat. Mr. Justice Henn Collins, the judge, took his seat at 10.30. He was accompanied by Mr. Sheriff Samuel and several Aldermen.

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 Queensbury; Mr. Besley, Q.C., with Mr. Monckton, watching the proceedings on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis.

Mr. Oscar Wilde again went, into the witness-box, and his cross-examination by Mr. Carson was continued. Replying to questions, witness said he had continued on intimate terms with Taylor down to the present time, and it was he who arranged the interview with Wood relating to the letters at Great College-street. He used to visit witness at his house, his chambers, and at the Savoy. Witness used to go to afternoon tea-parties at Taylor's lodgings. He did not know whether he did his own cooking, but there would be nothing wrong in that.

Mr. Carson: Have I suggested anything wrong? No, but cooking is an art. Another art? Yes. Were the rooms luxurious? The place was furnished with more than usual taste. Was it not luxurious? No, I said in good taste. I thought them most pretty rooms.

Witness denied that day and night the rooms were lighted with candles and gas, and that heavy double curtains were always drawn over the windows.

Were the rooms strongly perfumed? Yes; I have known him to burn perfumes in his rooms. I burn perfumes in my rooms.

Did you see Wood there at tea? No; except on the occasion referred to. I have seen Sydney Mavor there. He was a friend of mine, but I have not the remotest idea where he is now. Have you had any communication with him? Yes; last Sunday I got Taylor to go to his mother's house to say I wanted to see him. He was not there, and I don't know where he is. Were you told he has disappeared within the last week? No; I heard he was away. Have you found him since ? What do you mean by finding him? I object to the phrase. I have not seen him since. Answering further questions, witness said he had never seen Taylor wearing a lady's fancy costume. He had sent telegrams to Taylor. He had no business with him. Was he a literary man? He was a young man of great taste and intelligence, educated at a very good public school.

Did you discuss literary matters with him? He used to listen on the subject.

And get an intellectual treat also? Certainly. Witness said he never got him to arrange dinners for him. He had never seen Fred Atkins at Taylor's, and did not know that Taylor was being watched by the police at his rooms. He knew that Taylor and Parker, whom he also knew, were last year arrested at a house in Fitzroy-square. He had seen Parker in Taylor's rooms subsequently occupied in Chapel-street. Taylor had introduced to witness about five young men, with whom he had become friendly. He liked the society of young men.

Had any of them any occupation? That I can hardly say. Did you give money to each? Yes; I should think to all five-money or presents. Did they give you anything? Me? No. Among the five was Charles Parker? Oh, yes. Was he a gentleman's servant out of employment? I never heard that, nor should I have minded. How old was Parker? I don't keep a count. He was young, and that was one of his attractions. I have never asked him his age. I think it is rather vulgar to do so, (Laughter.) Was he an educated man? Culture was not his strong point. (Laughter.) Did you ask what his previous occupation was? I never inquire about people's pasts. (Laughter.) Nor their future? Oh, that is a public matter. (Laughter.) Did you become friendly with Parker's brothers? They were my guests at table. Did you know that one was a gentleman's valet and the other a gentleman's groom? I did not know it, nor should I have cared. I do not care "tuppence" for social position. What inducement was there for you to entertain them? The pleasure of being with those who are young, bright, happy, careless, and original. I do not like the sensible, and I do not like the old.

In the course of further cross-examination, the witness said: "Charley", Parker did not accompany me to the Savoy Hotel, and I strongly deny that there has been any misconduct between us. From October, 1893, to April, 1894, I had rooms in St. James's-place. Taylor wrote to me while I was staying there, telling me that Parker was in town, and I asked him to come and have " afternoon tea " with me. He came to see me five or six times. I liked his society. I gave him a silver cigarette case and about £3 or £4 in money.

Mr. Carson: What was there in common between you and these young men? Well, I will tell you. I like the society of people much younger than myself. I recognise no social distinctions at all. The mere effect of youth is so wonderful that I would sooner talk with a young man for half an hour than even be cross-examined in court. (Laughter.)

Cross-examination continued: A common boy I met in the street might be a pleasing companion. I took Parker to lunch with me at various places.

Witness went on to say that Parker had written a letter to him asking whether he might have the pleasure of dining with him that evening; and he (Mr. Wilde) was to send an answer by the messenger. The writer hoped it would be convenient "that we should spend the evening together."

Questioned with regard to "Freddy" Atkins, Mr. Wilde said he first met him at the rooms of a gentleman in a house off Regent-street. He had the charm of idleness about him, with the ambition to go on the music-hall stage.

Did he discuss literature with you? Oh, I wouldn't allow him. (Laughter.) The art of the music-hall was as far as he had got. Answering further, witness said he took Atkins over to Paris a fortnight after they met. They stayed at 29, Boulevard des Capucines, and Atkins was over there practically as his guest.

Mr. Carson: I think you told me that you heard that Parker and Taylor were arrested together? I read it in a newspaper.

Did you read that at the time they were arrested they were in company with several men in women's clothes? My recollection is that two young men in women's clothes drove up to a house of music-hall singers, and that they were arrested outside the house. I was very distressed when I saw the account of the raid in Fitzroy-square, but it made no difference in the friendship between myself and Taylor. I was not aware that one of the men was well known for his indecent practices.

Mr. Carson: If anyone says you slept in the same bed as Parker it is a mistake? Yes, an infamous lie. There was never any impropriety between himself and Atkins. He knew a young man named Scrape, who also had no occupation; he was introduced by Taylor. Witness had asked him to dine with him, and had given him a silver cigarette case. It was his usual present. The witness was then similarly cross-examined about a young man named Sydney Mayborn, to whom he also gave a silver cigarette case of the value of £4 11s. 6d. He dined with him (Mayborn) at the Albemarle Hotel, and they stayed there the night, because he liked to have people staying with him. Mayborn lived at Notting Hill. He had never taken boys into his bedroom at the Savoy. He was under the massage treatment then.

This concluded the cross-examination, and in reply to Sir E. Clarke, witness said letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry were communicated to him by the persons to whom they were addressed. These were read by counsel. The first, addressed to Lord Alfred Douglas, ran:-

"Alfred,-It is extremely painful to me to have to write to you in the strain I must, but please understand I decline to receive any answers from you in writing in return. After your previous hysterical impertinent ones, I refuse to be annoyed with such, and must ask you, if you have anything to say, to come here and say it in person. First, am I to understand that having left Oxford, as you did, with discredit to yourself, the reasons of which were fully explained to me by your tutor, you now intend to loaf and loll about and do nothing ? All the time you were wasting at Oxford I was put off with the assurance that you were eventually to go into the Civil Service or to the Foreign Office, and then I was put off by an assurance of your going to the Bar. It appears to me you intend to do nothing. . . I utterly decline, however, just to supply you with sufficient funds to loaf about. You are preparing a wretched future for yourself. . . Secondly, I come to a more painful part of this letter, your infamous intimacy with the man Wilde. It must either cease or I will disown you, and stop all money supply. I am not going to try and analyse this intimacy, and make no accusations. . . . No wonder people are talking as they are if you are seen as I saw you. Also, I now hear on good authority-but this may be false-that his wife is petitioning to divorce him. . . . Is this true, or do you not know of it ? The horror has come to my mind that it was possible you may perhaps be brought into this. If I thought the actual thing was true, and it becomes public property, I should be quite justified in shooting him at sight. . .- Your disgusted, so-called father, QUEENSBERRY."

Replying to a question, Mr. Wilde said there was not the slightest foundation for the remark as to divorce proceedings.

To the letter a telegram was sent in reply, "What a funny little man you are.-ALFRED DOUGLAS." The next letter began: "You impertinent young Jackanapes," and went on: "If you come to me with any of your impertinence, I shall give you the thrashing you richly deserve. The only excuse for you is that you must be crazy. All I can say is that if I catch you with that man again, I will make a public scandal in a way you little dream of. It is already a suppressed one. I prefer an open one."

A letter from the Marquis to Mr. Alfred Montgomery, his father-in-law, was next read:

"Sir,- ... Your daughter is the person who is supporting my son to defy me.... Last night I received a very quibbling sort of message from her, saying the boy denied having been at the Savoy for the last year.... As a matter of fact, he did so, and there has been a scandal ever since.... I saw Drumlanrig here (Maidenhead) on the river last night, which rather upset me…."

Another letter was read, and then

Sir E. Clarke asked: Having regard to the contents of those letters did you or did you not think it right to disregard the wishes referred to in them? I thought it right to entirely disregard them.

The court then adjourned for lunch.

On resuming, the court was kept waiting some 10 minutes owing to the absence of Mr. Wilde, who apologised to the judge for his lateness.

In answer to a question by Sir E. Clarke, regarding "Dorian Gray," witness said he had not "purged" or "toned down" that book for the purpose of publishing it in book form, but he had altered a certain passage which was liable to be misconstrued.

Sir Edward Clarke then read in full Mr. Wilde's letter in reply to the criticism of "Dorian Gray" which appeared in the Scots Observer. And then read again the passage from "Dorian Gray" on which Mr. Carson cross-examined Mr. Wilde yesterday afternoon, and the following passage, which, he claimed, threw an entirely different light on the whole.

Continuing, Mr. Wilde said that he first knew Alfred Taylor in October, 1892. He was introduced to him by the gentleman whose name had been written down and referred to. That gentleman was one of high position and of good repute. He had not seen him since March, 1894. He had not been in England for two years, and had not been available as a witness in this case. When he was introduced to Taylor, Taylor was living at 13, College-street. He knew nothing about Taylor having any occupation or about his means. He knew that he had been educated at Marlborough, and was a well educated and accomplished man. Neither at the time of this first meeting, nor at any time since, had he had any reason to believe that Alfred Taylor was an immoral and disreputable person. As to the arrest of Taylor and Parker the explanation which Taylor gave him was that it was a benefit concert he was attending. He was asked to play the piano, and two music-hall singers were expected to come in costume. They were not in the house; and suddenly the police entered and arrested everybody. He thought it was monstrous to blame Taylor in the matter.

Witness had been introduced to Edward Shelley by Mr. John Lane, the publisher. He found Shelley to be a young man with a great desire for culture. He had carried on conversation on literary subjects with Shelley. In February, 1892, his play "Lady Windermere's Fan" was produced. He gave Shelley a ticket for the dress-circle on the first night. On the following night he supped with some gentlemen, and he thought Mr. Edward Shelley was one of the party. Mr. Shelley was a great admirer of his (Mr. Wilde's) own works, and he gratified that appreciation by giving Shelley copies of them. He had never written an inscription in any book that he gave to Shelley which he had the smallest objection to the whole world reading. Soon after the first appearance of "Lady Windermere's Fan" he went to Paris, and after his return Shelley dined with him at Tite-street.

Mr. Wilde then left the box, and Sir E. Clarke said the evidence for the prosecution was "closed for the present"-a qualification which Mr. Carson objected to. His lordship said that, broadly put, the case for the prosecution must close now, but at his discretion he might admit some other evidence.

Mr. Carson then opened the case for the defence. The Marquis, he said, was undoubtedly, they would find, justified in the public interest, and in the interest certainly of his son, in taking the steps he had to withdraw his son from the company of Wilde. Evidence would be brought to show that these young men with whom Oscar Wilde had been associated were all men of notorious immorality. Mr. Wilde was a man with a notorious reputation, a reputation which, it would be proved, led to trouble at the Savoy Hotel. Taylor was the pivot of the case. Taylor was notoriously a disreputable man. Taylor introduced these young men, these men of art, and grooms and valets, to Wilde. Yet Taylor was not to be produced. Witnesses would be brought to describe the extraordinary den-the perfumed, ever-curtained rooms-he kept in Little College-street. This was the place where Mr. Wilde made visits to meet these young men. Witnesses would be brought to prove the fearful practices of this man, Oscar Wilde. Why was a gentleman spoken of in the case as nameless? Because the man was out of the country. (Sensation.) But Taylor was not out of the country. Taylor, who, if any man could, could speak for Mr. Wilde. And Taylor was still a friend of Wilde's. But he was not called.

As to the literature written by Oscar Wilde, Mr. Carson took up first the Chameleon. He would not say Mr. Wilde was responsible for all that appeared in that publication. But if he was willing to contribute to a journal which had for its purpose the praise of a gross practice, and wrote for such a journal aphorisms and philosophies for the use of the young, what could they believe but that he approved of its teachings? He disapproved of the article in the journal called "The Priest and the Acolyte," not because it was immoral, but merely because it was not artistic. The language used by the priest in the article with reference to the acolyte was the same in effect as that addressed to Lord Alfred Douglas by Mr. Wilde. The same strain, the same immorality ran through "Dorian Gray." If they found Mr. Wilde himself in his conduct with Lord Alfred Douglas adopting the same idea as ran through those articles and books, could they have any doubt that the same kind of mind was dominating the conduct of Lord Alfred Douglas? The poem, "Two Loves," by Lord Alfred Douglas, published in the Chameleon, and spoken of by Mr. Wilde as beautiful, was not beautiful, but filthy.

Mr. Carson then took up "Dorian Gray," and described the teaching in it, reading long extracts from the work. The book alone supplied enough to justify the complaint made by Lord Queensberry.

The case was adjourned.

Speaks of Perfumed Rooms and Cosy Tea Parties, of Trips to Paris, of Costly Presents and Dinners where the Wine was not Stinted.

If the Wilde-Queensberry case does no other good it will at least have encouraged a very large number of people in the healthy habit of early rising. Before the work of the day actually commenced this morning there were those who envied the Marquess his comfortable quarters in the dock. The crowd was mainly composed of people of no importance, and was exclusively male. A doubtless distinguished, but unrecognisable Mongolian visitor was permitted to sit on the bench at the judge's right hand, and on his left was an unusually large detachment of aldermen. Oscar slipped in quietly by a side door, and pending the arrival of his legal representatives sat admiring his fleshy hands. Presently Mr. Charles Mathews, his junior counsel, arrived, and the two put their heads together for an earnest whispered consultation. The jury meanwhile arrived themselves with the morning papers. There was a moment's sensation, and much craning of necks and goggling of inquisitive eyes when a whisper went round that

LORD ALFRED DOUGLAS WAS IN COURT.

Simultaneously the noble defendant, clad in a dark blue overcoat with velvet collar, in place of the rusty black garment of yesterday, was admitted to the dock, and sat there quietly till Mr. Justice Collins arrived, when he returned his old pose, with arms folded on the dock front.

Punctually at half-past ten Oscar was recalled to the witness-box. Bland and attentive, his hands limply crossed and drooping, or clasped round his brown suède gloves, he awaited the resumption of Mr. Carson's cross-examination. First the Irish Q. C. reverted to the prosecutor's acquaintance with Taylor of the missing letters. Taylor lived at 13, Little College-st., and Oscar had visited him there and at chambers in the Adelphi, besides having him at his own house at Tite-st. The Little-College-st. establishment did not strike him as too elaborate or luxurious. They were " pretty room, " displaying more taste then is common.

Mr. Carson: He never admitted any daylight into the rooms, did he?

Witness: Oh yes.

Were they not always lighted either with candles or gas? - No, I think not.

Then it would not be true to suggest that there were double curtains to the rooms and the daylight was never admitted? - Most untrue. I should think.

Were the rooms strongly perfumed? - I don't know how you mean, now. Perfume? Yes;

WE USED TO BURN PERFUME.

He was in the habit of burning perfume as I am in my rooms.

Did you see Wood there at tea? - Only on the one occasion.

Did you see Sidney Mavor, a friend of yours, there? - Yes.

How old is he? - I should think 25 or 26.

Is he still a friend of yours? - I have not seen him for, I should think, a year. I have not the remotest idea where he is now.

Do you know where he has gone? - I don't know at all.

Do you know he has disappeared within the last week? - No. Taylor wrote him a letter asking him to call at his rooms, but I have not seen him.

Oscar rather resented the suggestion that he had been trying to find Mavor. No one waited on them when they were at tea at Taylor's. He was quite sure he had never seen Taylor in a lady's costume, and it was not true that in 1892 and 1893 he was constantly communicating with Taylor by telegram.

Was he a literary man? - I have never seen any creative work of his. He had great taste and intelligence, and was brought up at a good English public school.

It was another case, Oscar added, of the young men enjoying a literary treat in his conversation.

THEY HAD DINED TOGETHER,

at the Florence, in Rupert-st. and at the Solferino, always in private rooms. On 7 March, 1893 he telegraphed to Taylor to meet him at the Savoy. That was for the purpose of discussing Wood's intention of blackmailing Oscar in regard to the letters stolen from Lord Alfred Douglas. There was another telegram inviting Taylor to join Oscar and "Fred" at a little dinner. "Fred was a young man to whom I was introduced by a gentleman whose name I do not wish to have introduced into the case."

What was his other name? - Atkins.

You were very familiar with him? - I don't know what you mean. I liked him.

Oscar denied that he had ever known that Taylor was being watched by the police, but he knew Taylor and a man named Parker were arrested in a raid made last year on a house in Fitzroy-sq. He knew Parker. He had met him at Chapel-st.

Was not Taylor notorious for introducing young men to older men? - I never heard that in my life.

How many young men did he introduce to you - young men with whom you afterwards became intimate? - You mean friendly. I should think about five.

Were they all about 20 years of age? - Twenty to 22. I liked the society of young men.

Lord Queensberry

BROKE INTO A BROAD GRIN

at this, and for a moment relaxed his fixed stare at the witness to gaze round the court as though inviting attention to this answer.

Oscar continued that he had given money or presents to all five of these young men, none of whom appeared to have any employment or means. He said he had no knowledge that Charles Parker was a gentleman's servant out of employ.

If he had been such, would you have been friendly with him? - I would be friendly with any human being that I liked.

How old is he? - I do not know. (Oscar became petulant.) I do not keep the census. He may have been 15, 20, 25. I never asked him.

Was he a literary man? - Oh, no !

Was he an educated man? - Culture was not his strong point. (Laughter.)

There was a little dinner at Kettner's in Soho, to which Oscar invited Taylor on his birthday, to bring any friends he liked. He brought Charlie Parker and his brother.

Did you know one was a gentleman's valet and the other a gentleman's groom? - I did not know nor should I have cared, sir.

What pleasure had you in the company of men like them? - The pleasure of being with those who are

YOUNG, BRIGHT, HAPPY, FAIR.

I don't like the sensible, and I don't like the old. I do-not-like-either. (Oscar became almost emphatic.)

It was a good dinner, they had whatever they wanted, Kettner's best fare and Kettner's best wine.

Did you give them an intellectual treat? - They seemed deeply interested.

You did not stint them? - What gentleman would stint his guests.

What gentleman would stint a valet? - I strongly object to the description.

Oscar denied that after dinner he said of Charlie Parker, "This is the boy for me," or that they went together to the Savoy Hotel, or that any kind of impropriety occurred. He denied that he gave the lad £2, or that he forced champagne or whisky and soda upon him. "At no time," he said, "did Parker come to the Savoy." They called one another "Charlie" and "Oscar." "I like those I like to call me 'Oscar,'" the prosecutor said. A week later there was another little dinner at Kettner's. It did not appear that it was anybody's birthday this time and "Charlie" came alone.

Did you ask Taylor what those young men were? - It was sufficient for me that they were friends of Taylor's Parker himself told me he was anxious

TO GO ON THE STAGE.

No, Taylor did not tell me he had met them in the St. James's Restaurant. Parker came to Tite-st. to tea five or six times, and also visited Oscar in his rooms at St. James's-place.

What was he doing there? - Visiting me. I liked his society.

Parker, like the others, received presents, and asked for money when he was hard up. Oscar gave him £3.

All at once? - Yes! - all-at-once.

What was he doing? - You ask me what a young man does when he comes to tea! He has his tea, he smokes cigarettes, and I hope he enjoys himself.

What was there in common between you and this young man? - Well, I will tell you. I delight in the society of those much younger than myself. I like those who may be called idle and careless. I recognise no social distinctions at all of any kind. The mere fact is that youth is so wonderful I would sooner talk to a young man for half an hour than even be cross-examined in court. (Laughter.) Yes, I would talk to street arab with pleasure.

Sir Edward Clarke so little liked the tone of the cross-examination that he handed up to the judge a letter of Parker's, to show that he was not so illiterate as Mr. Carson dryly reported that the jury would presently have an opportunity of seeing Parker himself.

Oscar denied that he had visited Parker at 60. Park-walk, Chelsea, st. half-past twelve at night. He knew where Park-walk was, but it was not near Tite-st. - It was "quite far away."

How far to walk? -

AH! I NEVER WALK.

How long to drive? - I have no idea.

Oscar did not know what had become of Parker. He had heard that he had enlisted as a private in the Army. He read of the arrest of Taylor and Parker in the newspapers in August of last year.

Did you read that they were in the company of several men in women's clothes? - Oscar "only knew what he had read in papers," but his impression was that the men in women's clothes - music hall singers--were arrested outside. He was very much distressed at the intelligence - "but the magistrate seems to have taken a different view, for he dismissed the case."

Mr. Carson read out a list of the accused in the Fitzroy-sq. raid, and asked, "Did you never hear of Preston in connection with the Cleveland-st. scandals?"

No, said Oscar, he had never heard of him, and he did not know that another man arrested at this time was a man of notoriously evil life. The crowd made no difference in his living for Taylor and Parker, and Taylor was at his house as recently as Tuesday last.

When did you first know Freddy Atkins? - In November, 1892.

What is he? - He was in the employ of a firm of bookmakers.

You did not come in contact with him through

MAKING BETS?

- Oh, no !

How old was he? - I should think about 19 or 20 - a young man.

Where were you introduced? - In the rooms of the gentleman whose name you handed up to me yesterday.

Tell me the address? - They were in rooms off Regent-st. - I think in Margaret-st. - I can't remember the number.

Was anyone else present? - Yes, I think there were several people there.

Two days afterwards there was a dinner at Kettner's, quite a small party, and they became friendly enough to call one another "Oscar" and "Freddie."

You say he was in the employ of a bookmaker? - Yes, and he apologised for neglecting his business.

Did he seem an idle kind of fellow? - Yes! Oh, yes! He seemed idle. With ambition to go to the music-hall stage.

Did you discuss literature with him? - No! oh, no! I would not allow that! The art of the music hall was as far a he had got.

Did you ask him to go to Paris with you? - No. Oscar had to enter into a long explanation to show that although he did take " Freddie " to Paris, the suggestion came from

THE MYSTERIOUS GENTLEMAN

whose name was handed up in writing yesterday. It was not an Oscar's secretary that he went--the suggestion was childish! They shared the same rooms at 23, Boulevard des Capucines - three rooms on suite, two of which were bedrooms. They lunched at the Café Julian.

After lunch did you suggest to him to have his hair curled? - No, I told him I thought it would be very unbecoming. He suggested it. Did he get his hair curled? - I don't think so. I should have been very angry if he had. (Laughter.)

Annoyed at your guest-getting his hair curled? - I should have thought it very silly.

They afterwards dined together, and Mr. Carson suggested that it was a good dinner with plenty of wine. Oscar was vexed and hurt. He hoped he should never stint a guest of wine, "but if you ask me whether I plied him with wine such a suggestion is monstrous. I won't have it!"

Mr. Carson said he had not made the "monstrous" suggestion. "Ah, but you have before, you have before! Yes"! Oscar reproached him. After dinner he gave the lad a guinea to go to the Moulin Rouge - "Moolong Rooje," as Mr. Carson called it. A laugh went round, and he apologised to the Court." I believe

I PRONOUNCED IT WRONG,"

he said: 'tis the "Moolang Ruge."

Mr. Wilde continued that any suggestion that impropriety occurred during the Paris trip would be an infamous lie. He denied that he asked Atkins to say nothing about the trip to Paris. At the time Freddy was living in Pimlico. He now lives at 25, Osnaburgh-st. He gave Freedy £3 15s. to pay for his first song. "He told me," said Oscar, "that the poets who write for the music-hall stage never take less."

Mr. Carson passed on to the case of another young man, Ernest Scarth, who was also about 20 years of age.

Did you know he, too, had been a valet?

- No.

Was he well educated? - Education depends on what you understand by it. He was a pleasant, nice, good fellow.

It was again Taylor who effected the introduction. He prefaced it by describing Scarth as having met Lord Douglas of Hawick on board ship coming from Australia. Oscar straightway invited both to dine with him. He denied indignantly that he had kissed Scarth or been guilty of improper conduct.

Why did you ask him to dinner? - Because I am very good-natured.

Did you give him any presents? - Oh, yes; I gave him a cigarette case. It is my custom to

PRESENT CIGARETTE CASES.

Returning to the case of Sindey Maher, Mr. Carson found that he was introduced to Oscar by the Nameless Gentleman at Margaret-st. Oscar gave him a cigarette case which cost £4 11s. 5d., and invited him to stay with him at the hotel in Albemarle-st. It was simply for companionship.

He did not stay all night for companionship, did he? - It was for the pleasure of his company during the evening, and we breakfasted together next morning. I like to have people staying with me. It amused and pleased him that I should ask him to be my guest - a very nice charming fellow.

Walter Granger, a lad of 18, servant in the rooms of Lord Alfred Douglas at High-st., Oxford, was the next subject of inquiry, and for the first time Oscar lost his head and made a tactical blunder. "Have you ever kissed this boy?" asked Mr. Carson, and the witness replied, "Oh no! certainly not. A peculiarly plain boy!"

Mr. Carson pounced on this expression instantly, and asked if it was only because the boy was ugly he was not kissed.

For the first time Oscar seemed at a loss and shuffled. He replied, "No, because it seems to me such an intense insult on your part. It seems ridiculous to imagine that any such thing could have occurred."

Mr. Carson repeated. "Then why did you mention his ugliness?"

"I should not like to kiss a boy, " Oscar replied. " Am I to be cross-examined as to the reason I should not like to kiss a boy?"

Mr. Carson, with irritating (**)ration, repeated, "Why mention his ugliness?"

Oscar became positively angry. " Because you sting me by insolent questions!" he said. Then added, "Calmly, I say you sting me, and try to unnerve me in every way, and I say things flippantly that I would not say seriously."

Then that was a flippant answer? - Oh, that, anything ! Yes. I should my certainly

A FLIPPANT ANSWER.

Mr. Carson was satisfied, and passed on to occurrences at the Savoy Hotel. Oscar had been under the treatment of a masseur named Midgen at the hotel, but he denied that he had taken boys there.

At half-past twelve the cross-examination came to a somewhat sudden termination, and Sir Edward Clarke rose to re-examine.

First sir Edward read three letters from Lord Queensberry to Lord Alfred Douglas and other members of his family which preceded the alleged libel. The first was a letter dated Sunday, 1 April, from Carter's Hotel, Albemarle-st. It began, " Alfred,--it is extremely painful to me to have to write to you in the terms I must." and said Lord Alfred must understand that no answers in writing would be received, or if received would be burnt unread. "After your previous hysterically impertinent one, I refuse to be annoyed with such, and must ask you, if you have anything to say to me to come here and say it in person." His lordship asked if he was to understand that his son, having

LEFT OXFORD IN DISGRACE,

and fallen away from his intention to enter the Civil Service or the Foreign Office, intended to take up any other serious line of life, as "I decline to supply you with funds to loaf and loll. You are preparing a wretched future for yourself, and it would be (***) and wrong of me to encourage you in this. Secondly, I come to the more painful part of this letter--your infamous intimacy with this man Wilde must cease, or I will disown you and stop all supplies.... I am not going to analyze this intimacy and I make no accusations; but, to my mind, to pose as a thing is as bad as to be the real thing. With my own eyes I saw you both in the most loathsome and disgusting relationship as expressed by your manner and expression. Never in my experience have I ever seen such a sight as that in your horrible features. . . . I hear, on good authority, that his wife is going to divorce him on grounds of unnatural crimes. Is this right, and if so do you know of it, going about as you do with him? If I thought the actual thing was true, and it becomes public property, I should be quite justified in

SHOOTING HIM AT SIGHT

- Your disgusted and so-called father, QUEENSBERRY."

In reply to this, Lord Alfred telegraphed:- "To Lord Queensberry, Carter's Hotel, Albemarle-street, - What a funny little man you are."

Lord Queensberry's retort was another letter beginning:- "To Lord Alfred Douglas, - You impertinent young jackanapes! I request you will not send me such messages through the telegraph. If you come to me with any of your impertinence, I shall give you the thrashing you richly deserve. The only excuse for you is that you must be crazy. I heard from a man who was at Oxford with you that this was your reputation there. It accounts a good deal for what has happened. If I catch you with that man again, I will make a public scandal in a way you little dream of. Unless it ceases, I shall carry out my threat and stop all supplies. So you know what to expect. - Queensberry."

The next letter was written by Lord Queensberry from Skindles to Mr. Alfred Montgomery, the

FATHER OF LORD QUEENSBERRY

divorced. Among much that was incoherent, Lord Queensberry said: "Your daughter is the person who is supporting my son to defy me. I have had a very quibbling, prevaricating message from her saying the boy denied having been to the Savoy for the last year. Why send it at all unless he denies ever having stayed at the Savoy at all with Oscar Wilde? As a fact he did do so, and there has been a hideous scandal. I was told they were warned off. This hideous scandal has been going on for years. I don't want to make out a case against my son, nothing of the kind, but I have made out a case against Oscar Wilde. If I were quite certain of the actual thing I would shoot the fellow at sight. But I am only accusing him of posing, and for that I will chastise him and mark him. I don't believe Wilde will now dare to defy me. He plainly showed the white feather the other day, the damned cur and coward! He is no son of mine. His mother may support him, but she shall not do it in London and with this going on. The Rosebery-Gladstone-Royal insult which came to me through my other son came to me through her. I thought it was you, but it appears it was not. . . . I saw Drumlanrig here on the river last night, which much upset me.

ROSEBERY NOT ONLY INSULTED

me by lying to the Queen, which she knows, and makes her as bad as him, but Gladstone also has made a lifelong quarrel between my son and me."

The last letter was written from Scotland to Lord Alfred Douglas. If Lord Alfred really were his son, Lord Queensberry wrote, how right he had been to face any outcry or ignominy rather than run the risk of bringing any more such creatures into the world! When Lord Alfred was quite a baby Lord Queensberry had looked upon him in his cradle and wept the bitterest tears a man could shed at thinking he had brought such a creature into the world. In this Christian country it was a wise father who knew his own son. there was madness on the mother's side, and few families in this Christian country were without it if they could be looked into. "I make allowances; I think you are demented; and I am very sorry for you. No wonder you have

FALLEN A PREY

to that horrible brute. You must gang your ain gait."

Mr. Wilde first denied in emphatic terms that there was any truth in the story that his wife was seeking a divorce. He added that the letters which had just been read were brought to his knowledge before the libel proceedings were commenced, but, having regard to their character, Mr. Wilde thought it right to entirely disregard the wishes contained in them.

Sir Edward Clarke next spent a lot of time in reading, and then several long extracts from "Dorian Grey," as a set-off to what had been read yesterday.

In continued re-examination by Sir E. Clarke, Mr. Wilde said a lot of the young men whose names had been mentioned had been introduced to him by Alfred Taylor in October, 1892, who was introduced to him by a gentleman of position and repute--the one whose name had been written down and referred to. Taylor was then living at 13, College-st.

Did you know anything as to his means or occupation? I knew that he had

LOST A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY

by some shares. He was a well-educated young man who played the piano, and Wilde from time to time called upon him. Neither at the time when he was introduced to Taylor nor since had he had any reason to believe Taylor was an immoral person. He remembered some few months ago seeing in a newspaper--the Daily Chronicle--a report that a raid had been made on a house in Fitzroy-st. Alfred Parker and Charles Taylor were among the persons arrested there.

Did you gather what they were charged with?

Oh, yes, yes.

What was the charge? - So far as I could gather they were charged with being there for an unlawful purpose.

You were much distressed? - Yes.

He wrote you a letter? Yes, he said it was

A BENEFIT CONCERT

for which he had been given a ticket. Two men came in women's dress to take part in the concert, and the police immediately broke in and arrested everybody in the place.

Was any impression left on your mind that Taylor was at all to blame?

certainly not. I thought it was monstrous.

Sir Edward now turned to the case of Shelley, who, the prosecutor said, had been introduced to him by Mr. John Lane. afterwards he often went to Mathews and Lane's when Shelley was the only person in charge there. They had many literary conversations together. When "Lady Windermere's Fan" was produced Shelley had a ticket from Mr. Wilde.

He was a great admirer of your work? - Yes.

And you gratified his taste by giving him copies of your books. - Yes.

Did you ever write any inscription on the fly-leaf of any of those books (one fly-leaf had been torn out) that you would object to the whole world seeing?

"NEVER IN MY LIFE"

was the emphatic reply.

Oscar said he went to Paris to attend to the production there of "Lady Windermere's Fan," and when he came back Shelley called on him at Tite-st.

The case is proceeding.