Compare Documents

SEPARATE TRIAL.

Monday was appointed for the second trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor for offences under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and the proceedings commenced at the Old Bailev before Mr. Justice Wills.

The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood), Mr. Sutton, Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. H. Avory appeared to prosecute; and Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. T. Humphreys again defended Wilde, the counsel for Taylor being Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Sydney Knox.

The defendant Wilde, who was present with his sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and the Rev. Stewart Headlam, at once went into the dock on the arrival of the judge, Taylor, who had not been admitted to bail, being already there. Wilde, who was much bronzed, looked considerably better in health than at the end of the last trial, but Taylor's pale face showed the effects of incarceration.

Before the swearing of the jury, Sir E. Clarke made an application that the two defendants should be tried separately.

His lordship asked whether the Solicitor-General had any objection to this course.

Sir F. Lockwood : I have.

Sir E. Clarke pointed out that on the occasion of the trial last sessions, the indictment upon which the defendants were charged contained 25 counts. Upon many of these counts a verdict of not guilty was entered, and there remained now a certain number charging them with certain offences. There were only eight of these counts which affected Oscar Wilde, but in none of these was any charge made against Taylor. The other counts were against Taylor, and in none of them was any charge made against Wilde. Therefore, there was no single count now standing upon the indictment upon which Wilde and Taylor could be both convicted. He, therefore, submitted that they should be tried separately.

Mr. Grain, on behalf of Taylor, agreed with everything which Sir E. Clarke had said.

Sir F. Lockwood objected to the cases being tried separately.

Sir E. Clarke said that he and his learned friend who represented Taylor were distinctly of opinion that the trying of these two cases together would result in injustice being done to both defendants.

His Lordship : I need hardly say that this is a matter which had been present to my mind before I came here. I anticipated that this application would be made, and I have considered it carefully with regard to the evidence put before me. Having in view what that evidence is, I think it would be much fairer that they should be tried separately.

The Solicitor-General said he proposed, then, to take the case of Taylor.

Sir E. Clarke urged that the trial of Wilde should proceed first. His name stood first on the indictment, and he believed it would prejudice his case if he were tried after Taylor.

The judge said it ought not to make the least difference. He and the jury would do their best to see that their interests were not prejudiced.

Sir E. Clarke thought there never was a time nor a case in which that duty was more difficult to discharge.

The Judge: I think it would be convenient to take the course suggested.Sir E. Clarke: Then I apply that Mr. Wilde's case should stand over until next sessions.The Judge: Don't you think that application had better be made when we see what the result of this trial is? If it should be an acquittal, then all the better for the defendant Wilde.Sir E. Clarke : There is no prospect of him taking his trial to-day; and, of course, there will be no objection to allow him to be on the same bail as formerly.The Solicitor-General: I should leave that in your lordship's discretion.The Judge: There is no reason for refusing it if the bail are here, but if not they must be sent for.Sir E. Clarke: They shall be sent for at once. They had been told thev were free until the afternoon.

The Solicitor-General then proceeded to open the case against Taylor, and recapitulated the facts already known. Charles Parker repeated the evidence that he gave at the former trial. The witness was subjected to a close cross-examination by Mr.Grain, who sought to show that his testimony was not worthy of belief. The witness admitted that he had received money obtained by men named Wood and Allan from a gentleman, but he denied that it was "hush" money. Wm. Parker, brother of the last witness, gave evidence in corroboration. Alfred Wood deposed to his relationship with Taylor and Oscar Wilde, from whom he received money to go, as he said, to America. Mr. Grain took objection to certain portions of the evidence on the ground that it did not affect his client, but the Court, on certain points, ruled that the evidence was admissible. Evidence was given as to the conditions under which Taylor lived in Little College-street, W., and as to the arrest of the prisoner. Mr. Grain argued that the corroboration adduced was not sufficient in law to justify the case going to the jury. The Solicitor-General submitted that there was ample corroboration of the evidence. The judge was of opinion that there did exist certain corroboration, and he allowed the case to go to the jury. Mr. Grain next addressed the jury on behalf of Taylor, submitting that the evidence of the accomplices was utterly unreliable, and that, as the Crown had failed completely to prove their case, his client ought not to be convicted. The case was adjourned.

TAYLOR FOUND GUILTY.

The trial was resumed at the Old Bailey on Tuesday of Alfred Taylor, 33, of no occupation, on an indictment charging him with certain misdemeanours. The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood) Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. H. Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Mr. J. P. Grain defended. The defendant, called by Mr. Grain, gave an emphatic denial to the whole of the allegations with regard to persons whose names had been mentioned. In reply to questions put in cross-examination, the witness admitted that he had attired himself in a female Eastern costume. Witness pressed as to persons that he had been with said that he did not remember their names. He was introduced to Mr. Wilde by a friend named Schwabe. He went to a restaurant with a man named Harrington, but the latter did not pass the night in Little College-street The cross-examination of the defendant was a lengthy one, it being sought by the learned Solicitor-General to get admissions of an incriminating character from the witness, relative to his association with the Parkers and others. The names of a number of persons were put to the witness as those with whom he had misbehaved himself; but he denied the allegations made. In reply to Mr. Grain, in re-examination, the witness said that many of these persons whose names had been mentioned were old acquaintances. He had never misconducted himself with any of these persons. Mr. Grain, continuing his speech for the defence, asked the jury to place no reliance upon the testimony of blackmailers and accomplices, and having regard to the positive denial of his client, and the unsatisfactory character of the evidence called by the prosecution, to acquit the prisoner. He maintained that the prisoner was an innocent man, and that the Crown had failed absolutely to bring guilt home to him. The Solicitor-General replied on behalf of the Crown, and he dwelt at some length with the salient features of the case presented by the evidence, which, he submitted, left no doubt as to the guilt of the accused. Mr. Justice Wills, in summing up, said that it had been a rule of long-established practice that a prisoner ought not to be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of accomplices, and it would be a source of great danger to an accused person if such a rule was not adhered to. It was a question for the jury to say what weight ought to be placed on the evidence put forward in corroboration of the statement of the accomplices. They ought to be satisfied before an adverse verdict was given that the evidence was sufficiently corroborated and warranted a conviction. His lordship dealt with the specific charges against the prisoner, and pointed out features in the evidence for the guidance of the jury, which features, he observed, abundantly justified him in not withdrawing the case from the jury. In conclusion, his lordship told the jury that if the evidence left a reasonable doubt in their minds as to the innocence or the guilt of the prisoner he was entitled to an acquittal. The jury retired to consider their verdict at 25 minutes past three. After an absence of 40 minutes, a communication was sent to the judge from the jury, who put certain questions on paper bearing on certain counts of the indictment. His lordship having dealt with the questions, the foreman of the jury said that they found the Prisoner guilty of acts of impropriety with William and Charles Parker in the autumn of 1893. As to the count for "procuring," they were not prepared to give a verdict. The Solicitor General, at the suggestion of the Judge, said that he would be content with the verdict of guilty on the two counts. Sentence on Taylor was deferred until after Wilde's trial.

Taylor, who appeared to feel his position acutely, was then removed. The Marquis of Queensberry was in attendance during the day, and remained in court until the finish of the case.

London, May 20.

To-day was appointed for the second trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor for offences under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and proceedings commenced at the Old Bailey before Mr. Justice Wills. The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood), Mr. Sutton, Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. H. Avory appeared to prosecute, and Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. T. Humphreys again defended Wilde, the counsel for Taylor being Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Sydney Knox. The defendant Wilde, who was present with his sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and the Rev. Stewart Headlam, at once went into the dock on the arrival of the judge, Taylor, who had not been admitted to bail, being already there. Wilde, who was much bronzed, looked considerably better in health than at the end of the last trial, but Taylor's pale face showed the effects of incarceration.

Before the swearing of the jury, Sir E. Clarke made an application that the two defendants should be tried separately. His lordship asked whether the Solicitor- General had any objection to this course.

Sir F. Lockwood: I have.

Sir E. Clarke pointed out that on the occasion of the trial last sessions the indictment upon which the defendants were charged contained 23 counts. Upon many of these counts a verdict of not guilty was entered, and there remained now a certain number charging them with certain offences. There were only eight of these counts which affected Oscar Wilde, but in none of these was any charge made against Taylor. The other counts were against Taylor, and in none of them was any charge made against Wilde. Therefore, there was no single count now standing upon the indictment upon which Wilde and Taylor could be both convicted. He therefore submitted that they should be tried separately.

Mr. Grain, on behalf of Taylor, agreed with everything which Sir E. Clarke had said.

Sir F. Lockwood objected to the cases being tried separately.

Sir E. Clarke said that he and his learned friend who represented Taylor were distinctly of opinion that the trying of these two cases together would result in injustice being done to both defendants.

His lordship: I need hardly say that this is a matter which had been present to my mind before I came here. I anticipated that this application would be made, and I have considered it carefully with regard to the evidence put before me. Having in view what that evidence is, I think it would be much fairer that they should be tried separately.

The Solicitor-General said he proposed, then, to take the case of Taylor.

Sir E. Clarke urged that the trial of Wilde should proceed first. His name stood first on the indictment, and he believed it would prejudice his case if he were tried after Taylor.

The judge said it ought not to make the least difference. He and the jury would do their best to see the interests were not prejudiced.

Sir E Clarke thought there never was a time nor a case in which that duty was more difficult to discharge.

The judges: I think it would be convenient to take the course suggested. Sir E. Clarke: Then I apply that Mr. Wilde's case should stand over until the next sessions. The judge: Don't you think that application had better be made when we see what the result of this trial is? If it should be an acquittal, then all the better for the defendant Wilde.

The case of Taylor was then proceeded with.

Sir Frank Lockwood, in opening the case for the prosecution, referred briefly to Taylor's career, and to his connection with "a person called Oscar Wilde." He went through the charges in which Taylor alone was concerned; and said that in some sense, for the purpose of establishing the case of this man, it was necessary that other persons should come under the notice of the jury. He said, however, that he would join with Mr. Grain to obtain the fairest and most impartial trial for the prisoner who now sat in the dock. Dealing with the history of the charges, he went back to the meeting between Taylor and the two Parkers, at the St. James's Restaurant in March, 1893. He described the two Parkers as men in humble life and of no education, who could have had no legitimate attraction for a man of intellect. Taylor, he said, had offered to introduce the Parkers to Wilde, and had asked them to call on him at 13, Little College-street. They did this; and they found at that address an establishment which he went on to describe. When they called on Taylor, he told them that he had arranged to introduce them to Wilde at a restaurant--either Kettner's or the Solferino--that evening The ex-groom and the ex-valet went, neither of them having previously seen Oscar Wilde, and dined with him in a private room. He repeated the conversation which took place at the conclusion of that dinner, the subsequent visit which it was alleged was made to the Savoy Hotel, where Wilde was staying, by Wilde and Charles Parker; and mentioned the acts which, it was charged, took place there. Parker stayed there, he said, a couple of hours, and Wilde gave him £2. Parker visited Wilde there again a week later, and similar acts took place, after which Wilde gave him £3. Wilde had on other occasions given Parker a silver cigarette case and a gold chain-ring. He regretted the necessity under which he found himself of going in detail into the conduct of a man who was not now on trial--Oscar Wilde. Wilde was a man of some literary distinction, who had attained some eminence as a dramatist. Wilde lived at that time in Tite-street Chelsea; but he had also occupied rooms at the Savoy Hotel and at 10, St. James's-place, where he was visited by Parker. He had taken Parker to the Crystal Palace and to other places of amusement, he had dined alone with him at restaurants, and he had visited Parker at his lodging in Park-walk, Chelsea. If all this were proved it would be established beyond all doubt that the object of Taylor in introducing the Parkers to Oscar Wilde was an improper one. He next referred to the visit of the Parkers to Taylor at Little College-street, where they stayed for some time. Taylor afterwards moved to an address in Chapel-street, and there Charles Parker stayed with him for a fortnight. Taylor was also charged with introducing Alfred Wood to Wilde in the same way, and with similar motives. Wood was a clerk, in a humble position in life, who was out of occupation, as the Parkers had been when Taylor met them. Wood had no ostensible means of getting his living; in January, 1893, he found that Wood was staying with Taylor in Little College-street. He referred to Wood's meeting with Wilde by an appointment made by telegram by the person who had introduce I Wood to Taylor, and to the supper at the Florence Café which followed. Wilde gave Wood money and presents, and took him to his house in Tite-street.

The first witness called was Charles Parker. Examined by Mr. Gill, he repeated in substance the evidence given by him at the previous trial. He again described his meeting with Taylor and his visit to Taylor, and described Taylor's rooms. He said that Taylor had taken them to dine with Oscar Wilde, at a restaurant somewhere near the Palace Theatre, and he mentioned in detail what occurred at the Savoy Hotel, where he went with Wilde the same night after dinner. He gave similar evidence as to his second visit to the Savoy Hotel, a week later; and also repeated the evidence given at the previous trial tending to incriminate Taylor.

Mr. Grain cross-examined with a view to discrediting the witness, who, however, denied that he had been concerned with Wood and Allen in blackmailing. He knew how they had got that money, but they gave him £30 as a present--not as his share of hush-money. He admitted having got £10 from a man named Clark, one of whose letters he had in his possession, but he denied having obtained that letter improperly. Clark had never, he said, threatened to charge him with stealing a gold watch and chain; and he did not know that Clark had sent for a policeman. Clark had, he admitted, threatened to send for a policeman if witness did not leave his rooms. He had told Taylor that his father was a horse-dealer of Datchet; and that was true.

William Parker was next called, and examined by Mr. Horace Avory. He corroborated his brother's evidence, so far as it concerned him. When his examination-in-chief was concluded, the court adjourned for luncheon.

Upon resuming, the first witness was Alfred Wood, with regard to whom the indictment alleges an introduction of the witness by Taylor to Wilde for an illegal purpose. Wood, who is a smooth-tongued fellow with a deliberate, non-committal manner of speech which does not make him seem any the more ingenuous, described his acquaintance with Taylor, and visits to the snuggery at Little College-street. It was not at all clear, however, that Taylor was responsible, at least directly, for the introduction to Wilde. This was effected by a third person, whose name was not now given. At the last trial it was stated that the third person was Lord Douglas who, while at Salisbury, arranged the meeting at the Café Royal by correspondence with Wilde, and telegraphed to Wood the time of the rendezvous.

As to the blackmailing episode, it would be remembered that simultaneously with the attempt of the man Allen to extort money from Wilde by the instrumentality of the "red rose-leaf lips" and the "red and yellow wine" letters, this witness, who had given the letters away, applied to Wilde for assistance in getting away to America.

"Why did you go to Mr. Wilde?" asked Sir Frank, and the witness replied, "I was not quite fit to mix with people in that position of life, with plenty of money, and I wanted to get away abroad and into a situation." "I suppose," his lordship presently interrupted, "the purport of this evidence is that Wilde was anxious to get Wood out of the way?" "Yes," said Sir Frank Lockwood, "and that he paid money to do it."

Wood proceeded that to enable him to go to America Wilde gave him £20. At the same interview he returned some letters to Wilde. He would not admit that it was a case of barter. On the following day he lunched with Wilde, who gave him another £5. Then came the letter from New York to Taylor with the reference to "telling Oscar he might send" the witness "a draft for an Easter egg if he liked." His lordship again displayed symptoms of wanting to know you know; and Sir F. Lockwood put the question plainly: "From whom came the telegram in consequence of which you went to the Café Royal to meet Wilde?" The witness: From Lord Alfred Douglas. His lordship: Had you any acquaintance with Lord Alfred Douglas at the time when you first met Wilde? Yes. Sir F. Lockwood: Where had you met Lord Alfred Douglas first? At Taylor's rooms at Little College-street. Who introduced you to him? No one. He was in the room, and he shook hands with me.

Upon this his lordship said the evidence of procuration against Taylor seemed no stronger than it might be against three or four other persons, and Mr. Grain attached so little importance to the witness's evidence that he did not trouble to cross-examine.

This completed the evidence of principals in the alleged misconduct. It was not till a quarter to three that Wilde's bail was renewed and he was released from custody. The Rev. Stewart Headlam had been in attendance for some time, but there was difficulty about finding Lord Douglas of Hawick, the second surety.

Sir Edward Clarke has, of course, no locus standi before the court in respect to the case against Taylor. He remained in his place all day, however, closely watching the proceedings.

Mrs. Grant, the landlady at 18, Little College-street, described the Oriental stuffiness of Taylor's rooms, with their draperies, perfumes, and midday oil. At half-past three the prosecution, in spite of the protests of Mr. Grain, called a new witness, Emile Becca, waiter at the Savoy Hotel, to prove that in March, 1893, Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas stayed there, and that Wilde was visited by young men. He further deposed to serving such meals as young Parker swears he shared with Wilde there; but he was unable to identify any particular young man as having been there. Similar evidence with regard to Wilde's rooms at 10, St. James's place, was given by Thomas Price, who was able to identify Taylor as one of the callers.

Mrs. Gray, landlady of 3, Chapel-street, Chelsea, deposed that Taylor stayed in her house from August, 1893, to the end of that year. Charles Parker used to come there to see him, and for three weeks shared his room. Oscar Wilde came there once.

Frederick Kearley, a pensioned police inspector, deposed to receiving from the last witness a hat box full of papers left by Taylor in her house. Among the papers was a slip of paper hearing Parker's address, and two telegrams from Wilde to Taylor putting off appointments with young men.

Mrs. Rumsby deposed that Charles Parker lodged in her house at 50, Park-walk, Chelsea, for a fortnight, and Mrs. Bancroft, who lives in the same house, swore that she had seen Wilde come there in a cab.

The evidence of Mr. Robinson, bookkeeper at the Savoy Hotel, Sergeant Harris, the detective officer who kept observation on 13, Little College-street, and arrested Taylor; and Inspector Richards, who charged him, concluded the case for the prosecution, which had occupied so much time that the intention of completing the whole case to-night was abandoned.

Mr. Grain proceeded to open his defence with the understanding that thereafter the hearing should be adjourned. He urged that so far as the case against Taylor went there was an almost entire absence of corroboration. He claimed that the counts charging Taylor with procuring should be struck out altogether, while, in regard to the charges of committing acts of indecency with the Parkers, there was again absolutely no corroboration of the stories of the lads, who must themselves have been consenting parties if the acts took place.

The Solicitor-General, on the other hand, contended that there was ample corroboration to go to the jury.

His lordship held that there was sufficient corroborative evidence to get rid of technical difficulty, and he thought it better there should be a verdict, for reasons which would appear in his summing up.

Mr. Grain therefore addressed the jury, opening the case for the prisoner, whom he intimated he would call to give evidence in his own behalf. He promised that Taylor would deny upon his oath that he had committed any act of indecency with either of the Parkers, or had procured either of them to commit acts of indecency with Mr. Oscar Wilde.

The hearing was then adjourned till tomorrow.

Before leaving, his lordship asked the jury to keep an open mind on the case, and not to form any conclusion until they had heard everything that had to be said on the case.