Compare Documents

London, Wednesday.The Marquis of Queensberry surrendered to his bail to-day at the Central Criminal Court and was indicted for publishing a defamatory libel of Oscar Wilde by addressing to him a card at the Albemarle Club. There was a crowded attendance of the public. On taking his place in the dock Lord Queensberry answered the indictment by pleading—first, not guilty, and secondly, that the libel was true and was published for the public benefit. Another letter came to the plaintiff through Mr Tree, the actor. It was handed to that gentleman who in turn gave it to plaintiff. It was couched in extravagant terms, but it did not bear the suggestion made in this case. Coming to Lord Queensberry’s action, the learned counsel said the jury might have doubts whether the defendant was responsible for his actions.

Sir E Clarke, in opening for the prosecution, said a very grave issue had been raised because the defendant in the pleadings alleged that the plaintiff had for some time solicited persons named to commit indecent offences. Certain letters addressed by the plaintiff to Lord A Douglas were brought to him by a man who said he was in distress: and Mr Wilde gave him £15 or £20 to pay his passage to America.

Mr Wilde was examined by Sir Edward Clarke at length on the subject of the letters which he said he did not regard as important. He described a stormy interview in his own house with Lord Queensberry, who accused him of a nameless offence. He told the defendant he did not know what the Queensberry rules were, but the Oscar Wilde rule was to shoot at sight. In ordering the defendant out of the house he described him as the most infamous brute in London. There was no foundation for suggestions in the pleadings.

Mr Carson cross-examined him as to the teaching in Dorian Gray and Phrases and Philosophies, and the plaintiff replied that he looked at these matters from a point of view of art; the Priest and Acolyte was twaddle, but he had not dissociated himself from Camelion, in which it appeared The man Wood was an unemployed clerk, plaintiff said in further cross-examination, and he not only gave him £15 for his passage to America, but £5 more on the occasion of a champagne lunch before his departure. He denied any misconduct as regards Wood. Lord A Douglas had asked him to befriend the man when introducing him. Wood and plaintiff knew each other by their Christian names. A man named Allen also called on him with reference to the Douglas letters. He knew Allen as a blackmailer, and gave him 10s to show his contempt (laughter). After Allen came another person, named Clyburne, and he was kind to Clyburne by giving him the same amount. To a bookseller’s assistant he had given money on three occasions, but he denied misconduct.

The court adjourned.

London, April 3 — Every available inch of the Old Bailey was occupied this morning, when the Marquis of Queensberry surrendered to bail and the libel suit brought against him by Oscar Wilde was opened before Justice Collins. Oscar Wilde charges the Marquis of Queensberry with libel by leaving on February 28 last na uncovered card at the Albemarle Club, on which card were written certain foul epithets. As a result Mr. Wilde on March 2 caused the arrest of the Marquis of Queensberry, and the latter at the Marlborough Street Police Court was placed under £1500 bail. The aisles of the old court-room were crowded with lawyers. Admission was obtained by ticket only. There was a pile of applications a foot high from many well-known persons.

The Marquis of Queensberry, who wore a shabby overcoat, was placed in the dock and answered to the indictment by pleading first, not guilty, and secondly, that the libel was true, and that it was published for the public good. The Marquis seemed quite unconcerned, and replying to the questions put to him, he spoke quietly and clearly.

Sir Edward Clarke, formerly Solicitor General, in opening the case said that the gravest issues had been raised, as the defendant, in his pleadings, alleged that the plaintiff had for some time solicited persons named to commit indecent offences. Certain letters addressed by the plaintiff to Lord Alfred Douglas, second son of the Marquis of Queensberry, were brought to plaintiff by a man who said he was in distress, and Mr. Wilde gave him £20 with which to pay his passage to America. Another letter was handed to Beerbohm Tree, the actor, who gave it to the plaintiff.

Oscar Wilde was then called, and he languidly arose from the Solicitor’s table, at which he had been seated, and entered the witness box. The plaintiff was faultlessly, dressed in a long black frock coat, and carried his gloves in his hands, showing his fingers to be covered with rings. He was very pale, but was seemingly composed, Wilde spoke with his customary drawl, leaning his arms on the rail of the ‘witness box, and replying distinctly to the questions addressed to him. The jury, which was composed of very intelligent men of elderly appearance, mainly prosperous tradesmen, eyed him with curiosity.

The witness said that upon arriving at his house a few months ago he found two gentlemen waiting in the library, one of them was the Marquis of Queensberry, and the other one was unknown to the plaintiff. "The former said: ‘Sit down.' I replied: ‘Lord Queensberry, I will not allow any one to talk that way in my house. I suppose you have come to apologize. Is it possible that you accuse your son and me of an unnatural crime?' He replied: ‘I do not say it; but you look like it and appear like it.' "

Counsel for the plaintiff then asked the witness about the man to whom he had given £20 with which to pay his passage to America. Witness said: "The man told me he had been offered £60 for the letter, and I advised him to immediately accept it. But finally I gave him the money in order to relieve his distress, and he gave me the letter." The document referred to was here produced, and was handed to Justice Collins. The letter ferreted to the "rose-red lips" of Lord Alfred Douglas, and the writer addressed him as "My own boy," and asked: "Why are you alone in London?" The letter was signed [...] said that it might seem extravagant to those who were in the habit of writing commercial letters; but he added, it was mere poetry. (Laughter).

Interest in the case has heightened when Sir Edward Clarke, upon finishing the direct examination of his client, turned the latter over to Mr. E. H. Carson, Q. C., M. P., counsel for the Marquis of Queensberry, for cross-examination. Mr. Carson began the presentation of the case for the Marquis by reading passages from "Dorian Gray," one of Oscar Wilde’s novels of modern life, to show that the author upheld an unnameable crime, the plaintiff following counsel with a copy of the book, and laughing at Mr. Carson’s insinuation. Mr. Carson, addressing the plaintiff, asked: "Do you think that the description of ‘Dorian Gray,' given on page 6 is a moral one?"'

"Yes," replied: "just what an artist would notice in a beautiful personality."

"Did you ever adore madly, as described in ‘Dorian Gray,' any person of the male sex younger than yourself?" Was Mr. Carson’s next question.

In reply Wilde said: "I took the idea from Shakespeare’s sonnets"

During this portion of the proceedings the Marquis of Queensberry followed his counsel with a copy of "Dorian Gray" in his hands, with seeming enjoyment.

Replying to other questions put to him by Mr. Carson, Wilde said that the letter to Lord Alfred was "merely poetical," and he added that he had "undying love" for Lord Alfred, who, he claimed, was his best friend.

It was also developed during the cross-examination of Wilde that in writing he did not concern himself to produce morality or immorality. He had no purpose in the matter, and was concerned merely with literature, beauty, wit and emotion. He rarely thought if anything he wrote was true: indeed, he might say never, in regard to "Dorian Gray." Sir Edward Clarke objected to Mr. Carson cross-examining his client on that novel as it appeared in Lippincott’s Magazine, and not as it was published in England. Wilde thereupon descended from the witness box and whispered a few words to his counsel after which the objections were withdrawn.

The cross-examination was very severe and brought out the great differences in the ages of Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas — the former was born in 1856, and the latter in 1879 — how the two had visited various towns together, stopped at the Savoy Hotel together, and how Lord Alfred visited Wilde’s chambers in St. James place, which the plaintiff maintains, in addition to his house at 16 Tite Street, S. W. Mr. Carson drew out Wilde’s opinions regarding literature in general, to which line of cross-examination the plaintiff made many smart responses in the same line as in his plays.

"The interpretation of my works does not concern me," said Wilde. "I do not care 'tuppence', for what the Philistines think about me." But Mr. Carson severely repressed the levity of the witness, and began the more serious phase of the cross-examination by questioning Wilde about his intimacy with a newsboy, eighteen years of age, belonging to Worthing, and brought out the fact that Wilde took the boy to a hotel at Brighton.

"Why did you seek the boy’s society?" Asked Mr. Carson. "Was it for an intellectual treat?"

"Oh, he was a bright, careless, amusing creature," replied the witness. Mr. Carson here produced a sliver cigarette case a handsome silver-mounted cane and a book, which Wilde admitted he had presented to the newsboy referred to.

The cross-examination then touched upon Wilde’s relations with various boys and men, and the questions put to the witness were so pointed as to be unprintable. Wilde, however, empathically denied that he had done anything improper; but he was troubled and confused under the terrible cross-examination to which he was subjected, and frequently drank water. In fact, he seemed ready to faint, and a chair was placed inside the witness stand for his use. Throughout the questioning of the plaintiff, the Marquis of Queensberry stood facing him, and did not take his eyes off the man in the witness box.

The cross-examination of Wilde was not finished when the court adjourned for the day at 5 P. M. A large crowd of persons assembled about the Old Bailey in order to see Wilde leave the court.