Compare Documents

At the Central Criminal Court this morning, before Mr Justice Wills, the second trial was commenced of Oscar Wilde on certain serious charges. The court was densely crowded.

Sir Frank Lockwood, Mr C F Gill, and Mr Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury, and the prisoner was defended by Sir Edward Clarke, Mr Charles Mathews, and Sir Travers Humphreys.

Oscar Wilde entered the court at half-past ten o'clock precisely, and when the judge came in shortly afterwards he went into the dock and took a seat in the right-hand corner. He looked very worried and careworn, and was very restless.

Sir Frank Lockwood opened the case for the Crown.

Edward Shelley was called and was examined by Mr Gill. He said that in 1892, when he was 17 years of age, he met Wilde at the offices of the publishers, where he was employed. Wilde invited him to dine with him at the Albemarle Hotel. After dinner he went with Wilde to his bedroom. Witness said his intimacy with Wilde continued for about three months, and he gave details of certain acts which took place in different places. He had to leave his berth in consequence of his friendship for Wilde. It became talked about. Eventually it also reached his father's ears.

Cross-examined by Sir Edward Clarke, witness said he left his employment in March, 1893, about nine or ten months after he had been about with Wilde. He quarrelled with Wilde at the Savoy Hotel in the Spring of 1893, and a few days afterwards wrote saying that he would not see him again.

Did you, at the police court, say that you wrote that letter at the end of 1893, or beginning of 1894? If I did so, it was a mistake.

A number of letters from witness to Wilde was read thanking defendant for his many kindnesses to witness, and appealing for help.

In cross-examination witness admitted that several statements contained in those letters were either exaggerations or untruths, and that when they were written he was becoming very well mentally. This was through overstudy, and he was very unwell in August 1894, but there was nothing the matter now. On the first occasion at the Albemarle Hotel he was not drunk but excited. He was shocked at what took place, but went again within a week and, notwithstanding what had taken place in February, 1892, his friendly relations with Wilde continued unbroken up to 1893.

Sir Edward Clarke read the following extract from the letter from witness to Wilde, dated 27th October, 1892:— "Do not think me forgetful in not coming before. I shall never forget kindnesses, and I am conscious that I can never sufficiently express my thankfulness."

"What kindnesses?" asked Sir Edward Clarke.

Witness — He was friendly with me and helped me with advice about literature.

Do you mean to tell the jury that having in your mind what you say happened at the Albemarle Hotel you could write that? He seemed sorry for what he had done, and was very kind to me. He once offered me £100 to help me in my studies.

Sir Edward Clarke then read several letters from the witness to the defendant in which he addressed the defendant as "Dear Oscar," in one which he asked for a loan of £10. Wilde did not send him the money. In another letter he said that he was ill through overwork and through trying to live on £4 3s 4d a month, and he had to do so much for his mother and brothers. One of his brothers had a disordered mind. Mr Lane, a member of the firm in Vigo street, objected to his acquaintance with Wilde, and had offered to assist him with money as compensation for his leaving the firm. Yet in a letter to Wild about a year and a half afterwards witness had referred to Mr Lane as a viper, and said he despised him.

Witness now admitted that he should not have used the term.

The letter continued that witness's mother and brothers were dependent upon him, and he appealed to the defendant for help.

Witness now said that that was an exaggeration. His salary was very small, and he found it difficult to pay for his board and keep. At the time those letters were written he was very ill mentally through overstudy, and many of the statements they contained ought not to have been written. He got gradually worse up to August, '94, but there was nothing the matter with him now.

ln January last you committed an assault upon your father? Yes, I lost my temper.

And you were locked up? Yes.

And when you were arrested you asked that the messenger should go for Mr Wilde? Yes.

At that time was your mind deranged? I think I must have been out of my mind to insult my father.

Examined by Sir Frank Lockwood, witness said that before he met Wilde he was in congenial employment and was a happy boy. Wilde’s books and Wilde himself had fascinated him. His position in the firm at Vigo street became uncomfortable during the three months when he was going about with Wilde. Other persons besides Mr Lane had spoken to him about his acquaintance with Wilde.

What was the assault on your father about? It was in connection with Wilde. My father used a nasty expression and I threw a teacup at him.

Charles Matthews, publisher in Vigo street, formerly in partnership with Mr John Lane, deposed that Shelley was in his employ in 1892 and left in February, '93. He had seen a letter in Wilde's handwriting addressed to Shelley.

Mr Vogel, proprietor of the Hotel Albemarle, said that the defendant had stayed at his hotel various times, in April, 1892, people visited defendant who did not appear to be gentlemen.

AIfred Wood was the next witness called. He repeated the evidence which has already been published respecting his connection with Alfred Taylor, of 13 Little College street, Westminster, and with the defendant, whom he met on the 1st of January, '93, at the Cafe Royal, and with whom, after a sumptuous supper, he went home. The defendant gave witness money, and bought him a watch and chain, and some clothes. In March, '93, witness having expressed a desire to go to America, defendant gave him £30, and witness believed he gave to the defendant some letters in Wilde's handwriting addressed to "Dear Alf." On the following day defendant sent him another £5, and witness went to America at the end of March. Lord Alfred Douglas [...] appointment for witness to meet defendant.

Cross-examined by Sir Edward Clarke, witness said he was [...]. Formerly he was a clerk, but he could not say when he left his employment. He could not swear that he left in 1890.

By a Juryman—Can you not say within a year or two? [...] he had returned from America [...] had worked for his brother [...] He was living at present with a detective provided by the Crown (laughter).

Have you obtained money dishonestly in this country? No, not dishonestly.

Did you obtain in August last a sum of £[...]75? I had it given me.

Proceeding.

At the Central Criminal Court this morning—before Mr. Justice Wills—the second trial was commenced of Oscar Wilde, who is charged with committing indecent acts. The court was densely crowded. Sir Frank Lockwood, Mr. C.F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury, and the prisoner was defended by Sir Edward Clarke, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys.

Oscar Wilde entered the court at half-past ten precisely, and when the Judge came in shortly afterwards he went into the dock and took a seat in the right-hand corner. He looked very worried and careworn, and was very restless during Sir Frank Lockwood's opening statement.

In opening the case Sir Frank Lockwood said the prisoner was charged with offences against the Criminal Law Amendment Act, that he did with various persons commit acts of gross indecency. The indictment comprised charges from February, 1892, to October. 1893. The defendant who was thus charged was a man, he believed, of literary attainments, and the author of various dramatic works of power and interest. The first charge was in connection with a youth named Edward Shelley, in February, 1892, and Shelley at the time was employed by a firm of publishers who had acted tor Oscar Wilde. There Oscar Wilde made the youth's acquaintance, and invited him to dine with him at the Albemarle Hotel. Shelley accepted the invitation and dined with his host in the public room. Afterwards, at Wilde's invitation, they adjourned to a private room, and eventually indecent acts were committed. The intimacy continued for some time, and he should produce certain corroborative evidence of Shelley's statement. In cases of this kind it could not be expected that the corroboration was to be extended to the full length of the accomplishment of these offences in all their details. They were not committed in the light of day, but in the strictest secrecy. But in the case of Shelley there would be corroboration which would support the evidence up to the limits within which they would expect any corroboration to be forthcoming. The next case was that of Wood, a clerk out of employment. In consequence of a communication he received by telegram he went to the Café Royal. He had never seen Oscar Wilde, but as he went to a seat in the Café Royal he passed Oscar Wilde, who said to him, "Is your name Alfred Wood?" He said it was; and in this strange fashion the acquaintance commenced. Wood was entertained to a sumptuous supper, and then they both went to Wilde's rooms, where certain acts took place. On various occasions money was given by Wilde to Wood, and the acquaintance lasted from January up to the month of March, 1893. At this time Wood expressed a desire to go abroad, and this was communicated to Wilde. A meeting was arranged by a man named Taylor, who had rooms at 13, Little College Street, and Wilde gave Wood two £10 notes and two £5 notes, and Wood gave Wilde certain letters. After this Wilde occupied rooms at the Savoy Hotel, Lord Alfred Douglas occupying an adjoining bedroom, and when Lord Alfred Douglas left on the 8th March Wilde took other rooms, a sitting-room and bedroom adjoining. The evidence he was prepared to offer from the Savoy Hotel was very direct. He should call a chambermaid who would state what she saw on going into the room in the morning. A masseur who had attended Wilde would give similar evidence. Sir Frank Lockwood then told of Wilde's meeting with the brothers Parker, and said that the evidence of Charles Parker would be corroborated in very material particulars. On one occasion Wilde visited Parker at his lodgings, and a woman living in the same house would tell that she heard Parker come in with someone, and that she saw Wilde leave the house. In consequence of a statement which she made to the landlady Parker left his rooms next day. Counsel said that in his opening statement he had studiously avoided imparting any colour to the evidence upon which the prosecution relied. He had endeavoured to limit himself to a plain and simple statement of the class of testimony which the prosecution were in a position to call. He could only invite the earnest and careful attention of the jury to the evidence, for it was upon the evidence, and not upon any statement of counsel, that the defendant must be judged.

Edward Shelley was then called, and was examined by Mr. Gill. He said that in 1892, when he was 17 years of age, he met Wilde at the offices of the publishers where he was employed. Wilde invited him to dine with him at the Albemarle Hotel. Alter dinner he went with Wilde to his room, where certain acts were committed. Witness said his intimacy for Wilde continued for about three months, and he gave details of certain acts which took place in different places. He had to leave his berth in consequence of his friendship with Wilde. It became talked about. Eventually it also reached his father's ears.

Cross-examined by Sir Edward Clarke: Witness said he left his employment in March, 1893, about nine or ten mouths after he had been about with Wilde. He quarrelled with Wilde at the Savoy Hotel in the spring of 1893, and a few days afterwards wrote saying he would not see him again.

Did you, at the police office, say that you wrote that letter at the end of 1893 or beginning of 1894?—If I did so, it was a mistake.

On the first occasion, at the Albemarle Hotel, he was not drunk but excited. He was shocked at what took place, but went again within a week, and notwithstanding what had taken place in February, 1892, his friendly relations with Wilde continued unbroken up to 1893.

Sir Edward Clarke read the following extract from a letter from witness to Wilde, dated 27th October, 1892:—"Do not think me forgetful in not coming before. I shall never forget your kindness, and I am conscious that I can never sufficiently express my thankfulness."

"What kindness?" asked Sir Edward Clarke.

Witness: He was friendly with me, and helped me with advice about literature.

Do you mean to tell the jury that, having in your mind what you say happened at the Albemarle Hotel, you could write that?—He seemed sorry for what he had done, and was very kind to me. He once offered me £100 to help me in my studies.

Sir Edward Clarke then read several letters from witness to defendant, in which he addressed defendant as "Dear Oscar," in one of which he asked for a loan of £10. Wilde did not send him the money. In another letter he said he was ill through overwork, and through trying to live on £4 3s. 4d. a month, and he had to do so much for his mother and brothers. One of his brothers had a disordered mind. Mr. Lane, a member of the firm in Vigo Street.had objected to his acquaintance with Wilde, and had offered to assist him with money as compensation for his leaving the firm. Yet in a letter to Wilde about a year and a half afterwards witness had referred to Mr. Lane as a viper, and said he despised him. Witness now admitted that he should not have used the term. The letter continued that witness's mother and brothers were dependent upon him and he appealed to defendant for help. Witness now said that that was an exaggeration. His salary was very small, and he found it difficult to pay for his board and keep. At the time those letters were written he was very ill mentally through overstudy, and many of the statements they contained ought not to have been written. He got gradually worse up to August, 1894, but there was nothing the matter with him now.

In January last you committed an assault upon your father?—Yes, I lost my temper.

And you were locked up?—Yes.

And when arrested you asked that a messenger should go for Mr. Wilde?—Yes.

At that time was your mind deranged?—I think I must have been out of my mind to assault my father.

Re-examined by Sir Frank Lockwood: Witness said before he met Wilde he was in congenial employment, and was a happy boy. Wilde's books and Wilde himself fascinated him. His position in the firm at Vigo Street became uncomfortable during the three months when he was going about with Wilde. Other persons besides Mr. Lane had spoken to him about his acquaintance with Wilde.

What was the assault on your father about?—It was in connection with Wilde. My father used a nasty expression, and I threw a teacup at him.

Charles Matthews, publisher in Vigo Street, formerly in partnership with Mr. John Lane, deposed that Shelley was in his employ in 1892, and left in February, 1893. He had seen a letter in Wilde's handwriting addressed to Shelley.

Mr. Vogel, proprietor of the Hotel Albemarle, said defendant had stayed at his hotel various times. In April, 1893, people visited defendant who did not appear to be gentlemen.

The Court here adjourned for luncheon.

(Continued on Page 4.)

Alfred Wood was the first witness called after luncheon. He repeated evidence which has already been published. Witness was living at present with a detective provided by the Crown. (Laughter.)

Cross examined by Sir E. Clarke: Have you obtained money dishonestly in this country?—No, not dishonestly.

Did you obtain in August last a sum of £175?—I had it given to me.

What had you done to deserve this £175?—Nothing. Allen, who gave him the money, had received £400 from a gentleman as blackmail. He had made the acquaintance of Lord Alfred Douglas a few weeks before he met Wilde. Had found the letters which he gave Wilde in a suit of clothes given him by Lord Alfred Douglas.

Charles Parker, who was next called, repeated the evidence which he gave at the previous trial.

The case was adjourned till to-morrow.