Compare Documents

LONDON, THURSDAY.The hearing of the libel action brought by Mr. Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry was resumed to-day at the Old Bailey.

Mr. CARSON, Q.C., resumed the cross-examination of Mr. Wilde, who said he used to go to the upper part of a house, 13 Little College Street, occupied by a man named Taylor. The rooms were artistically furnished and perfumes were burnt. He used to attend tea parties at Taylor’s rooms, but did not know that one of the men frequenting Taylor’s house had disappeared within the past week. He did not know that Taylor and a companion named Parker were arrested in a raid on a house in Fitzroy Square last year. Taylor introduced witness to five young men, to all of whom he gave money. He invited a party to dinner at Kettner’s Restaurant, but was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a coachman.

MR. CARSON—Was there plenty of champagne?

Witness—What gentleman would stint the valet? (Much laughter.)

Further cross-examined, Mr. Wilde denied driving with one of these men to the Savoy Hotel. He never saw Parker at a house in Camera Square. He did not know that certain men who were arrested in the Fitzroy Square raid were connected with the Cleveland Street scandals. The Fitzroy Square arrest made no difference in his friendship with Taylor. He was introduced to a young man named Freddy Atkins, and took him to Paris, being joined there by a gentleman whose name was written yesterday, and passed to counsel. Atkins was addressed as Freddy, and was plaintiff’s guest. He gave Freddy money to go to the Moulin Rouge. They stayed at the same hotel, but no unseemly conduct ever took place. Freddy suggested he should have his hair curled.

COUNSEL—Did he have it curled?

Witness—No; I should have been very angry if he had. (Laughter.) The gentleman whose name had been written also introduced him to two young men named Scarp and Mabor. The latter met him on his return from Scotland in October, and they stayed at the same hotel in town. He gave Mabor a cigarette case at the rooms occupied by Lord Alfred Douglas. Further examined—he knew a masseur at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that the masseur made any unusual discovery on entering his bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to a visit on one occasion to Paris.

At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Sir E. CLARKE began the re-examination by putting in certain letters of Lord Queensberry. In part of these, written from Chater’s Hotel to Lord A. Douglas, the defendant called upon his son to have nothing more to do with the man Wilde, whose wife he (defendant) had heard on good authority was petitioning for a divorce. Lord Alfred replied by wire:—"Queensberry, what a funny little man you are." The plaintiff denied the suggestion of a divorce petition. Lord Queensberry, in a further letter, called Lord Alfred an impertinent jackanapes, and threatened to cut off supplies. In another letter addressed to the father of his former wife he repeated the accusations against Wilde, to whom he referred in the following terms—"He plainly showed the white feather; he is a cur and a coward of the Rosebery type." Then alluding to his former wife Lord Queensberry also said, "I am convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone Royal insult came to me through my other son, Drumlanrig, whom I saw on the river last night, and it rather upset me. It shall be known some day that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen and to Gladstone, but also has made a life-long quarrel between my son and me." Other letters having been read, the case for the plaintiff closed, and Mr. Carson began his address for the defence.

In opening for the defence, Mr. CARSON said all that Lord Queensberry had done he stood by, and not one of those letters or acts would he withdraw. Lord Queensberry had been consistent throughout, and his only object had been to save his son from the dangerous companionship of Oscar Wilde, who admitted to being a friend of a man known to be engaged in immoral practices. Continuing, counsel read the letter to Lord Alfred Douglas, which the prosecutor termed a sonnet, but which he maintained, if sent by a father to a son 20 years his junior, would still be an abominable and disgusting production. The other letter, of which no mention of publication was made, however, was even more extravagant.

Counsel had not concluded his address when the Court rose.

London, Friday.The hearing of the action brought by Mr Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensbery was resumed to-day at the Central Criminal Court.

Mr Carson, continuing his address for the defence, said he hoped he had convinced the jury that the defendant was justified in bringing to a climax the association of his son with Wilde. It would be his painful duty to call several young men to tell their own tale. He would show that Taylor acted on behalf of Wilde. Mr Carson remarked with much emphasis that it was a wonder the man Wilde had been tolerated in London society so long. He regretted to have to call the young man Parker because he had joined the service of his country, and now bore an excellent character. The learned counsel characterised Wilde’s behaviour to a Worthing fisher boy as an instance of his disgusting audacity.

Mr Carson was continuing his argument, when Sir E Clarke and Mr Mathews retired from the court for a moment.

Wilde had up to this point been absent.

Consent to a Verdict.

Sir E Clarke on returning whispered to Mr Carson, who resumed his seat.

Sir E Clarke then, addressing the Court, said he had to make a statement under the gravest responsibility. Mr Carson, by saying yesterday that he hoped he had said enough regarding Mr Wilde’s letters and literature to influence the jury, relieved him from the necessity of dealing in detail with the other issues. Those representing Mr Wilde had therefore before them a terrible anxiety, and could not conceal from themselves what the judgment of the jury might be, and that the jury might say Lord Queensbery was justified in using the words he had done. The position he (Sir Edward) stood in was that without expecting to obtain a verdict he would be going on from day to day investigating circumstances of a most appalling character. Under those circumstances he hoped his lordship would think he was taking the right course. After consulting with Mr Wilde in reference to the letters and literature he felt that he could not resist a verdict of not guilty in regard to the words "posing as a ——." He therefore asked on behalf of Mr Wilde to withdraw from the prosecution and submit to a verdict of "not guilty" in respect to that part of the particulars connected with the publication of "Dorian Grey" and "Chameleon."

Sir Edward Clarke’s statement produced a profound sensation in court.

Mr Cason said the verdict of "not guilty" involved a verdict also of justification.

Justice Collins said that if the jury found a verdict of not guilty they would also find that the justification set up was true in substance and in fact, and that statement was published for the public benefit.

The jury, after a moment’s consideration, returned a verdict of "not guilty" against the Marquis of Queensbery, the foreman adding that what he had written was published for the public benefit.

The Judge thereupon ordered the Marquis of Queensbery’s discharge from custody, and certified for costs.

The Marquis, on descending from the dock, was heartily congratulated by his friends, and the court soon rapidly cleared.

The letter written by Mr Russell and accompanying documents is as follows—"In order that there may be no miscarriage of ujstice, I think it my duty at once to send you a copy of all our witness’s statements together with the copy of the shorthand notes of the trial."

WILL A PROSECUTION ENSUE?

Wilde’s Movements To-Day.

London, Friday Evening.The Press Association on enquiring of Lord Queensbery’s solicitors (Messrs Russell and Day) is informed that it is not his lordship’s intention to take the initiative in any criminal prosecution of Oscar Wilde, but after the finding of the jury this morning in the libel action the whole of the documents with proofs of the evidence upon which the defence had intended to rely were forwarded to the Public Prosecutor, the Hon Hamilton Cuffe.

As was surmised Wilde was in the precincts of the Old Bailey when the speech for the defence of Lord Queensbery was resumed. It was for the purpose of holding a conference with Wilde that his leading counsel left the Court. At the close of the consultation in one of the waiting rooms Wilde hailed a hansome and drove away leaving Sir E Clarke to formally withdraw from the prosecution.

The Dramatis Personae.

Our London Correspondent wrote last night:—"The Wilde case has attracted the largest and most heterogeneous crowd to the Old Bailey that has been seen there for many years. It is largely a fashionable crowd—minus the ladies—and it includes many persons well known in theatrical circles. It was not easy to gather how the sympathies of this motley throng went, but judging from the manifestations in court they were not seemingly very strongly enlisted for the complainant. Unlike his appearance at the police-court, when he drove up in a splendidly appointed carriage and pair, he now arrives in an unpretentious hansom unaccompanied. His imperturbability, under Mr Carson’s ruthless cross-examination, was quite noteworthy—only once or twice did he speak harshly, and then as it were from sheer weariness. The Marquis of Queensberry, however, is more cool and collected still, in fact he looks quite pleased at the development of the case. He is a determined little man, though he has the eccentricity which marked all the Douglases.

"Mr. Carson is making a decided mark at the Bar, though his position in the House is scarcely improving. He has great gifts as an advocate of a certain order, but these very gifts are against his success in the House. In such a case as that in which he is now engaged, however, he is quite invaluable. He has decided courage, great keenness and resource, and showed a masterly indifference to Mr Oscar Wilde’s shower of carefully prepared epigrams. They did not turn Mr Carson in the least from his point, and he pursued the witness with undeviating determination right through the case. There was an expression of disgust on his face at times that was very telling with the jury, and an occasional shrug of the shoulders or raising of the heavy eyebrows that told volumes. Some of the English barristers make fun of Mr Carson’s brogue—which, to his credit, he does nothing to temper—but all the same his cross-examination in this case has been a revelation to the Old Bailey. Since the early days when Sir Charles Russell practised there no such display has been seen."