Compare Documents

LONDON, SATURDAY.The doors of Bow Street Police Court were besieged at a comparatively early hour this morning, it being known that Mr. Oscar Wilde, who had been arrested on the previous evening, would be placed in the dock. That part of the building in which extradition cases are usually taken was speedily thronged to its utmost capacity, and the appearance of the prisoner was eagerly awaited.

Sir John Bridge took his seat a few minutes after eleven. Wilde was simultaneously brought up from the cells. He was attired in a heavy overcoat which he wore at the Old Bailey. He entered the dock with an easy air, and having deposited his silk hat upon the seat, bowed slightly to the magistrate, and then leant forward upon the rail, and listened attentively to Mr. Gill’s opening.

Mr. GILL, in stating the case for the prosecution, mentioned a series of charges that they would undertake to prove against the prisoner. In the first case the names of Taylor and Parker were introduced.

Charles Parker, a good-looking, well-dressed youth of 19 years of age, went into the witness box, and was giving evidence when Mr. GILL caused a momentary flutter of excitement by announcing the arrest of Taylor.

Pending Taylor’s arrival in the dock, Mr. C. O. Humphreys, Wilde’s solicitor, elicited from the magistrate that to-day’s proceedings would be of some length.

Taylor, a young man strongly resembling Parker in appearance and address, though somewhat older, was then brought in, and took his stand beside Wilde.

Parker then continued his evidence.

Alfred Wood, formerly a clerk, was next examined, and gave important evidence.

Arthur Mayor, who had been a guest of Wilde’s at the Albemarle Hotel, Anton Migge, Masseur; and Margaret Cottar, a chambermaid at the Savoy Hotel, were examined, and On the application of Mr. GILL, the magistrate remanded the prisoners until Thursday next.

His Worship declined to accede to the application for bail.

LONDON, SUNDAY NIGHT.Up to ten o’clock to-night no further arrest was made in connection with the Oscar Wilde case.

THE PRISONER AT HOLLOWAY.

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING.When Mr. Oscar Wilde arrived at Holloway Jail on Saturday after the proceedings at Bow Street, he was conveyed to one of the better class cells, occupation of which is provided for by the prison regulations on payment of about a shilling a day. It has been arranged that one of the prisoners at present at Holloway shall perform the menial duties which every prisoner is bound himself to perform unless prepared to pay for a substitute. His meals will be supplied by a local caterer, and he will be allowed to receive a daily visit from a friend. He will, however, be obliged to forego cigarette smoking and to attend the parade of the prisoners at jail awaiting trial.

THE DOUGLAS FAMILY AND MR. WILDE.

LONDON, SATURDAY.A correspondent of the London "Sun" called at the Holborn Viaduct Hotel, London, yesterday afternoon, with the view of obtaining from Mr. Wilde his own statement as to why he had decided to withdraw the prosecution and consent to a verdict against himself. Lord Douglas of Hawick said Mr. Wilde felt quite unable at the moment to bear seeing anyone. The young Lord, however, added that on Mr. Wilde’s behalf he was willing to answer any questions he could. He was, he said, himself, together with his brother Lord Alfred, under subpoena for the prosecution. He himself would have been quite willing to go into the box, and his brother was most anxious to be allowed to do so, and was exceedingly grieved that Mr. Wilde had prevented him. It was to prevent that, and because he felt "that no man could bear to have every little act and indiscretion of his life, and every word and thought produced against him and perverted in the basest way and placed in their worst possible light," that Mr. Wilde had resolved to retire from the prosecution. "You may say from me myself," went on Lord Douglas of Hawick, "that I and every member of our family, excepting my father, disbelieve absolutely and entirely the allegations of the defence. It is, in my opinion, simply a part of the persecution which my father has carried on against us ever since I can remember. I think Mr. Wilde and his counsel are to blame for not showing, as they could have done, that was the fact." His Lordship cited several alleged circumstances in support of his statement, and concluded by asserting, with considerable emotion, that scandal after scandal had been heaped upon them till he felt utterly unable to hold up his head.

In reference to above the Rev. Lord A. Douglas writes:—"My nephew, Lord Douglas, was certainly not authorised by my mother, my sister, and myself to say as reported. ‘Every member of our family except my father disbelieves absolutely and entirely the allegations of the defence.' We do most certainly believe them, and must repudiate any sympathy with the statement of my nephew."

[REUTER’S TELEGRAM.]

NEW YORK, SATURDAY.Oscar Wilde’s name will be removed from the bills of the programmes of the Lyceum Theatre when "An Ideal Husband" is running.

London, Saturday Evening.

The doors of Bow street Police Court were besieged at an early hour this morning, it being known that Mr Oscar Wilde, who had been arrested on the previous night on a warrant granted shortly after the termination of the Wilde-Queensberry case, would be placed in the dock. A few minutes before ten the doors were opened, but only the representatives of the Press were admitted. They quickly seized upon all available accommodation.

After a few minutes delay it was intimated that the case would be taken in the Extradition Court upstairs. Thereupon there was a wild rush to this part of the building on the part of the public, who had by this time got within the gates. The small court was thronged to its utmost capacity by an assembly of well-dressed men. Only one woman was present, and, seated immediately behind the dock, was the object of a great deal of curious and audible speculation.

Mr C T Gill, who in the libel action acted as junior to Mr Carson, Q.C, in defending the Marquis of Queensberry, entered at 11 o’clock. A moment later Sir Augustus Harris appeared, followed by several gentlemen understood to be connected with the drama. Sir John Bridge took his seat at five minutes past eleven.

Simultaneously the door of the passage leading from the cells was thrown open, and the prisoner was seen approaching, carrying a silk hat in his hand. He advanced with an easy and even stately step. He was wearing the overcoat which he wore at the Old Bailey with heavy velvet collar and cuffs. Having reached the centre of the dock Wilde calmly deposited his hat upon the seat at his side, bowed slightly at Sir John; then, crossing his arms over the rails, he bent slightly forward and listened attentively to the opening sentences which fell from Mr Gill.

Mr C F Gill, rising immediately the prisoner was placed in the dock, said that he appeared to prosecute the prisoner on a series of charges of inciting lads to commit a terrible crime and of actually committing acts of gross indecency, an offence under the 11th section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. With regard to the nature of the case, he did not think it desirable that he should trouble the Court with any opening detail. No good purpose would be served by going into this matter in an opening speech, and he would indicate to the Court generally what had occurred, and the evidence he proposed to adduce, and the nature of the charges upon which he should ask for the prisoner to be ultimately committed for trial would depend upon the evidence disclosed. The case which he proposed to go into, in the first instance, related to the conduct of the prisoner with regard to a young man named Charles Parker. It would appear that in 1893 the prisoner Wilde was staying at the Savoy Hotel. He stayed there from the 2nd March down to the 29th March. At the same time there was living at Little College street, Westminster, in the upper part of a house, a man named Taylor. He was a man closely connected with the prisoner Wilde, and the evidence would show that he was engaged in acting for Wilde. The prisoner would be charged with conspiring with this man for the purpose of procuring those lads for the commission of acts of indecency. Counsel proceeded to give details of the charges against Mr Wilde, and outlined the evidence for the prosecution. The main portion of the details of the statement are unfit for publication.

In concluding Counsel said there was only one end to a life like that which Wilde had lived and that was being brought to justice.

Charles Parker was then called, and as her entered the witness bay the prisoner who by this time was seated and supporting his head on his gloves band, looked steadily for a moment at the youth. Parker is a good-looking, well-set-up young man of 19 years. He was smartly dressed, having a full depth of white collar and a light velvet cuffed overcoat, approximating somewhat to the Newmarket cut. Answering Mr Fill he said he was formerly a valet. In 1893 he was out of employment. When visiting the St James Restaurant he was spoken to by a man named Alfred Taylor.

Mr C O Humphreys, solicitor, who defends a prisoner, at this stage interposed with an objection to the putting of any leading questions.

Witness was continuing his replies to Mr Gill to what conversation he had with Alfred Taylor on this particulate occasion, when the learned counsel startled the court by the sudden intimation that Taylor had been arrested, and he would postpone further examination of Parker pending Taylor’s arrival in the dock.

At this juncture Detective-Inspector Marshall announced "Alfred Taylor," and in obedience to call a young man of similar build and address to Parker stepped briskly into the dock and took his stand on Wilde’s left.

Parker, replying to Mr Gill, said he now identified Taylor as the man who conversed with him in St James’s Restaurant, and subsequently introduced him to Wilde on the occasion referred to. Taylor said Wilde was a good young man, and gave him an address in Little College Street so that he and his brother night call there. They did so. When they got into the place they saw Taylor’s rooms. He had a drawing room and bedroom and a kind of kitchen place. One of the rooms, the drawing room, was very well furnished.

Sir J Bridge — Did you go by appointment?

Witness — Yes, sir.

Continuing, in reply to Mr Gill, witness said he did noticed the windows of the room. It was in the morning that he called. Witness did not see any servant. He did not think the rooms were light; he was sure they were not. He saw Taylor there; no one else was present.

What did Taylor say?

Witness — I forget now.

Mr Gill pressed the question.

Witness — Taylor stated that he had arranged for him and his brother to be introduced to Mr Wilde. He thought Kettner’s or the Solferino was the place at which the introduction was to take place. The introduction was to take place at dinner at half past seven in the evening.

Sir John Bridge — What is Kettner’s?

Mr Gill — A restaurant. They are both restaurants.

The witness, furthering answering Mr Gill, said that after this conversation they all three came out of the house together. That evening he and his brother went to the restaurant, and they proceeded upstairs to a private dining room. Before going there they had met Taylor at St James’s Bar, and they all three went to the restaurant together. Dinner was lair for four in a private room. The table was lighted with candles, with red shades. Witness and his brother and Taylor waited for Wilde in this room. The latter then came in. Witness had never seen Wilde before. Taylor introduced them to him saying: "This is Mr Charles Parker, and this is Mr William Parker". They then had dinner together.

Was it good dinner? Yes; very good (a laugh).

What wine? Champagne.

Anything besides after dinner? Yes; coffee and brandy.

Did you smoke? Yes.

What? Cigarettes.

Did you said who paid for the dinner? Wilde wrote out a cheque.

During the examination of this witness Wilde moved restlessly about the corner of the dock, in which he had previously been seated, and occasionally passed his hand across his face in the way indicative of distress of mind. Parker resumed by saying he was arrested with Taylor last year in a raid at Fitzroy street, Fitzroy square.

Mr O O Humphreys here announced that he had instructed counsel for the defence, and Mr Travers Humphreys, who was with Sir Edward Clarke and Mr Mathews at the Old Bailey, now entered the court and took his seat at the barristers’ table.

Mr T Humphreys applied that is cross-examination of witness might be resumed. They had been taken quite by surprise in this matter.

Mr Gill said he did not desire to bring the witness there again.

Mr Travers Humphreys said he would give his friends noticed if he wished to cross-examine him at any adjourned hearing.

The application was granted.

Sir John Bridge — Taylor, do you wish to cross-examine him?

Taylor — I will reserve it.

Witness’s evidence having been read over and signed, he was bound over to give evidence at the Central Criminal Court.

The Court then adjourned for luncheon.

During the adjournment the gossip in court was that Sir Edward Clarke had written to Wilde’s solicitor, expressing his willingness to defend the prisoner without fee. On inquiry this statement proved to be well founded.

On the court resuming William Parker, a brother of the former witness, and strongly resembling him, was called. He deposed to being formerly a groom. In March, 1893, he, like his brother, was out of employment. He met Taylor at St James’s Restaurant under circumstances already described by this brother, Charles. Taylor introduced him to Oscar Wilde, "who was a gentleman and a good man for money."

The witness was being further questioned, but complained of feeling unwell. The usher thereupon accommodated him with a seat. Parker, who was suffused with a death-like paleness, said falteringly that Taylor suggested the introduction to Wilde. He and his brother met Taylor and went to a restaurant, where in a private room they were introduced to Wilde, and the four diner together. It was a very good dinner and champagne was drunk after dinner. Wilde turned to Charles with the remark, "This is the boy for me; are you coming to the Savoy." They went away together. That was the only time he saw Wilde. Subsequently witness received a communication from his brother, but he did not meet the prisoner again.

Mr Travers Humphreys did not cross-examine this witness on behalf of Wilde, but put a question as to the time at which the introduction to Taylor took place. Witness — It was in March 1893.

Sir John Bridge (to Taylor) — Do you wish to put any questions?

Taylor — No; I won’t say anything at present.

Mr Gill intimated that this was as far as he would go today in this class of evidence against Wilde, but he would call a witness against the prisoner Alfred Taylor.

The next witness was Mrs Grant, a middle-aged, rather good-looking woman, dressed in black. She said she was the wife of William Grant, and lived at 13 Little College street. The prisoner Taylor occupied rooms there for a year and eight months, beginning in 1892 and ending in 1893. The rooms he occupied consisted of a sitting room, bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen, for which he paid £3 a month. The apartments were furnished very nicely. The linen in the bedroom was very good. The windows of the room were very dark, especially the sitting room, there being muslin strained over the glass, lace curtains, and dark curtains. There was no daylight. The sitting room was lit by candles.

Did he furnish the place himself? Yes. Witness continued that Taylor kept no servant. He did his own cooking. He was visited by a great many gentlemen—young gentlemen. Witness was always given to understand that Taylor. Was a bachelor.

Mr Gill — What were the ages of the young gents who called?

Witness — From 16 upwards (sensation).

Answering the questions by Mr Gill, witness said he had seen ladies wigs and things for fancy dress about the rooms — stockings and shoes and things of the kind. Mr Taylor was very fond of scent — he sued to burn it and use it also. He had a large number of scent bottles.

Further questioned, witness said that she could not identify Wilde as one whom she had seen at the house.

The Magistrate (to Wilde) — Stand up.

The prisoner Wilde rose.

Witness — I cannot identify him. Answering the questions, she said she had heard Taylor call someone who was there Oscar. In January, 1893, a young man named Words was staying with Taylor and slept with him. He was there about three weeks and she had seen a boy named Sidney Mabor who had slept all night with Taylor. A boy named Charles Mason had slept there. The gentlemen who came to tea came from 4 to 6 o’clock. Witness had seen Taylor sewing on buttons (laughter). He decorated the rooms. He and woods used to go out together. There were others who stated there all the night, besides the names she had given. Letters and telegrams used to arrive for Taylor. Shortly before Taylor left, a sergeant of police came to the house as a friend of Mr Taylor’s, and placed himself in such a position that he could hear Taylor’s voice. Witness knew that the house was watched. Taylor never; old her what his occupation was.

Sir J Bridge — Was there nothing to show what business he was? No; he said he was a gentleman.

Sir J Bridge — Taylor, do you wish to ask any questions the witness?

Taylor — Not at present, sir.

Sir J Bridge (to witness) — Did you ever see the person walled Oscar? No.

Mrs Grant was then bound over to give evidence if necessary at the Central Criminal Court.

Alfred Wood, a slim, fair-looking youth, was next called, and deposed that he was formerly a clark, and he knew Mr Alfred Taylor. In January, 1893, he was staying with Taylor at 13 Little College Street. At the time he had been ouf of employment about a week. Taylor had no legitimate occupation. He knew Oscar Wilde, whose acquaintance he made at the Cafe Royal in January, 1893, about three months before witness went to America. He was alone at the time he met Wilde. They went to the Cafe Florence in Rupert street and had supper together in a private room. On leaving the Cafe Florence Wilde took him to his house in Tite street, Chelsea. Wilde’s family were away at Torquay.

Mr Travers Humphreys objected to leading questions.

Mr Gill — I wish yo save your client by not going much into details.

Resuming his evidence, Wood said he was under the influence of drink, as he not only had taken champagne with his supper, but also had whiskey and brandy, and at Wilde’s house hock and seltzer. Wilde gave him £3 before leaving the Florence. He again went to Tite street at prisoner’s request and had supper. There was no servant there, and Wilde went into the pantry for the food. He once met Wilde at Taylor’s rooms in Little College street. He had lunched and dined at the Cafe Florence with Wilde on two occasions. He had also seen Wilde at ten at 36 Langham street, where witness had a bed and sitting room. Witness afterwards took rooms at 4 Great Russell street, but he could not remember whether Wilde visited him there. Witness occupied the rooms in Great Russell street until his departure for America. Wilde gave him £3 or £4 on several occasions, also a watch and chain. About this time he expressed a wish to get away from Wilde and these people.

Mr Gill — Let us deal with the case from the point of view of Wilde alone, but I believe there were one or two other people who came to these tea parties? Yes.

One or two who are out of the country at the present time, I think? Yes.

Resuming, witness told Taylor he wished to go to America, and Taylor communicated this to Wilde. There was a meeting in Little College street, at which witness agreed to hand over certain letters to Wilde. After the letters had been given up Wilde gave him two ten-pounds ones and two five-pound notes. Next day they lunched at the Cafe Florence, where Wilde gave him another £5. Witness then left for the United States, where he remained fourteen months.

Sir John Bridge — Was it in consequence of something that was said to you that you want to the Cafe Royal? Yes. I had received a telegram from a gentleman.

Was that some gentleman you had met at Taylor’s of that you had heard of at Taylor’s? Yes.

Mr Gill — Was that the first time you saw Wilde — that time at the Cafe Royal? Yes.

Sidney Arthur Mabor, a young man of good appearance, said that he first knew Taylor in ’92, when the latter was living in Little College street, where witness visited him. He had stayed with him there. At that time witness had no occupation. Occasionally he went there to tea parties and met several men.

Jane Margaret Collar was the next witness to outer the box, and, as she was ushered in, Mr Wille Wilde, the prisoner’s brother, entered by the same door, and took up a position at the back of the court.

Miss Cotter described herself as a chambermaid at the Savoy. In March, 1893, during Wilde’s stay at the hotel, she discovered a youth in his bed. She reported this, and also the appearance of Wilde’s room on different days.

Mr Gill said he did not propose to go further today. He suggested that the proceedings should be resumed on Thursday next.

Sir John Bridge thereupon ordered a remand until Thursday next at 11 o’clock.

Mr Humphreys applied that Wilde might be admitted to bail, on the ground that though he must have known yesterday morning that a warrant would be issued for his arrest, he made no attempt to get out of the way, and there was no difficulty in finding him.

Sir J Bridge — I do not think it is a case for bail.

Mr Humphreys — I can offer substantial bail.

Sir J Bridge — It is not a case for bail at all. The prisoners were then conducted from the dock to the cells.

London, Sunday. The Press Association states that when Oscar Wilde arrived at Holloway Jail on Saturday after the proceedings at Bow street he was conveyed to one of the better class cells, the occupation of which is provided for by the prison regulations on payment of about a shilling a day. It has been arranged that one of the prisoners at present at Holloway shall perform the menial duties which every prisoner is bound himself to perform unless prepared to pay for a substitute. His meals will be supplied by a local caterer, and he will be allowed to receive a daily visit from a friend. He will, however, be obliged to forego cigarette smoking, and to attend the parade of prisoners at the jail awaiting trial.

The Hon and Rev A Douglas writes:— "My nephew, Lord Douglas, was certainly not authorized by my mother, my sister, and myself, to say as reported: ‘Every member of our family, except my father, disbelieves, absolutely and entirely, the allegations of the defence.' We do most certainly believe them, and must repudiate any sympathy with the statement of my nephew."

London, Sunday Night. Up to 10 o’clock tonight no further arrest has been made in connection with the Oscar Wilde case.

(DALZIEL’S TELEGRAMS.)

Mr Froham has removed Oscar Wilde’s name from forms the bills of "An Ideal Husband," now running at the Lyceum Theatre in this city.

Baltimore, Saturday. Mr Beerbohm Tree was interview this morning by a reporter in reference to the mention of his name in the course of the trial of Mr Wilde’s libel action against the Marquis of Queensberry. He declined to make any comment on the affair, and would say nothing beyond expressing his keenest regret that his name had been linked even remotely with it. He appeared to be greatly mortified and very sorrowful that he had been mention at all in connection with the case.

(REUTER’S TELEGRAM.)

New York, Sunday. The directors of the Lyceum Theatre have decided to discontinue the performances of Oscar Wilde’s play "An Ideal Husband," after this week. Miss Ross Coghlan, who has been playing "A Woman of No Importance" in the Western States, has resolved to omit the play from her repertoire.