Compare Documents

During the earlier days of his trial Oscar Wilde sat in the dock immovable, his back against the partition, his elbow resting on the front of the dock, his hand now supporting his chin, now gently pulling at his lips. Taylor and he sat at the extreme end of the dock, and never exchanged a word.

Inspector Richards proved the arrest on the evening of April 5, at the Cadogan Hotel. He said, "Mr Wilde, we are police officers, and hold a warrant for your arrest."

"Wilde replied, "Yes, where shall I be taken?"

"To Scotland Yard, and then to Bow street," Richards told him.

"Can I have bail?" asked Wilde.

"No, I don’t think you can," said Richards.

The next day witness went and searched Taylor’s rooms.

Inspector Brockwell proved the granting of the warrant, and Wilde being brought to Scotland Yard. Wilde wished to read the warrant, but was refused, and then asked the dates mentioned and was told them.

Sir Edward Clarke then asked that a letter which was found upon Wilde should be read.

His lordship read it, and said it seemed to amount simply to an expression of sympathy from a literary friend of the defendant’s.

Sir Edward Clarke did not press the point.

The letter was from Mr Robert Buchanan.

During the discussion Wilde amused himself by making a fancy pen-and-ink sketch with a quill, but apparently dissatisfied with it on completion, tore it up.

The documents found in Taylor’s hat-box were then put in and read—a note from Wood in America, a few returned cheques, and some telegrams to Taylor: "Could you call at six o’clock? Oscar. Savoy." "Cannot manage dinner tomorrow. Oscar." "Obliged to see Tree. cannot come. What about the friend? Oscar." Also a New Year’s card from Mavor.

Always a bob in your pocket to spend.Always a bob to lend to a friend.Wishing you these I add one wish more.A happy and prosperous ‘94.

Sidney Mavor.

Then a discussion took place as to whether Wilde’s evidence at the former trial should be put in and read, and finally Mr Gill proposed to read the whole of the cross-examination. At this prospect of hearing his verbal brilliancies sparkle in court once more, Wilde woke up and composed himself in a listening and critical attitude.

Mr Gill commenced the reading, but was too rapid for effect, and Wilde seemed almost as disappointed at the reading of the evidence as previously he had been at Mr Carson’s rendering of his letter. The points came out blurred, and there was missing the sharp contrast between Mr Carson’s impetuous brogue, and the cool, long drawn-out syllables of Wilde’s evidence, as it was given in the Queensberry trial. Shelley, "the intellectual youth from Vigo street," was sitting at the side of the court, and listened with rapt attention, breaking out now and then into a pleased smile. Through all the brilliant fencing of the "Phrases and Philosophies for the use of the Young," Mr Gill read on steadily, and as steadily worked through the cross-examination on "Dorian Gray," Wilde listening intently.

As Mr Gill read on, Mr Mathews reached up to the dock and handed Wilde a letter, which he read carefully, and prepared to write an answer.

On Tuesday morning, a surprise awaited the court. A crowded audience assembled to heal Sir Edward Clarke’s speech for the defence, and it was assumed that the case would finish late in the evening. No one anticipated that a change of affairs would come.

At half-past ten Mr Justice Charles resumed his seat. Wilde and Taylor were again placed in the dock. Mr Grain had a hurried consultation with his client, Taylor. Mr Chas Mathews, Wilde’s junior counsel, was speaking with his client at the rear of the dock. Mr Gill, the counsel for the Crown, rose at once, and it was thought that he was about to commence his speech for the prosecution. But it was to make a very remarkable and most important announcement.

In a hush reigning throughout the court, Mr Gill announced that, having had an opportunity of considering the indictments since the closing of the case, he, and those who were with him, had come to the determination not to ask for a verdict upon the counts as to conspiracy. Practically he withdrew the charges of conspiracy, and the opinion in court was that this was so as to meet the move of Sir Edward Clarke in putting in a formal demurrer which would have taken the case to the High Courts in consequence of what he considered was the error of trying the two defendants and the two indictments together. The surprise created was very great.

Sir Edward Clarke, looking very grave, said that had he known such an event had been likely he should have applied that the prisoners should have been tried separately.

The judge made a significant remark. After the evidence had been given it had occurred to him that the counts for conspiracy were unnecessary altogether.

Mr Gill—That was the conclusion, my lord, we had arrived at. My friend has said something about trying separately. But Taylor is charged with procuring, and that is a joint charge.

Sir Edward Grasped at once his advantage. Then I understand, he said, that my friend withdraws those counts because there is no evidence in support of them to go to the jury.

Mr Gill, however, would not admit that that was actually the position. He had taken the course so as to remove any difficulty which prevented either of the prisoners from giving evidence in their own defence.

Sir Edward followed up his advantage, and asked that the verdict of "Not guilty" upon those counts should be taken at once.

The judge hesitated as if in thought, but in the end said he could not assent to that.

At any rate I am entitled to that verdict at some time, replied Sir Edward.

All the judge felt it his duty at that moment to do was to accede to Mr Gill’s withdrawal.

Sir Edward once more said that he should at some time appeal for that verdict.

Are you going to say any more, Sir Edward? Asked the judge, and then came the next surprise, one which created a great sensation, and entirely altered the position of the trial as it stood the previous night.

"Yes, my lord," said Sir Edward, "I am going to address the jury."

The meaning was seen at once. The defendants were to be called for the defence.

Sir Edward soon made it quite clear. He at once commenced his address: not the speech which had been looked forward to; that was to come later: this was only the opening of his defence. Yet, all the same, it was a magnificent speech. He began by referring to the withdrawal of the charges of conspiracy, which he thought was one of the most remarkable acts in a very remarkable trial. If they had not been intended to have been proceeded with they ought never to have been put in the indictment. He would call Mr Wilde as a witness, but that decision had not been arrived at in consequence of what had just been said on the opposite side, though that had greatly strengthened his intention. He had felt [...] in justice to Mr Wilde to have required that certain other parts, the examination-in-chief, of the evidence read yesterday should have been read, and it then occurred to him that if Mr Wilde’s statement upon oath, when the jury came to deal with the case, were made to them from his own lips, it would be better than asking them to rely upon the evidence in the former trial.

Sir Edward was very brief, though eloquent.

Mr Wilde was called from the dock to the witness-box. How different he looked there from what he did just four weeks ago! There was something in his appearance, his pathetic and woful hollowness and weariness, that made a much deeper impression than that of four weeks previously. After going through his distinguished college career he gave an emphatic denial to the accusations laid against him.

You had rooms in St James's place? Yes; they were taken for literary work. I did not often sleep there. My house at home was very small, and I found it always most convenient to do my work outside my own house, so that I might not be disturbed, and it was entirely and solely for that purpose that I took the St James’s place rooms.

The evidence you gave in the Queensberry case was true evidence? Entirely true evidence.

You have heard the evidence in this case; is there any truth in any one of the allegations of indecent conduct made against you? There is no truth whatsoever; no truth whatsoever in any one of those allegations.

Sir Edward asked no more.

Mr Gill began the cross-examination, and intense excitement pervaded the court. "Dorian Gray" was the first subject, and the two poems which Lord Alfred Douglas wrote in the "Chameleon." As to the title "In praise of shame," he replied that it was not for him to explain another writer’s words, but that word "shame" was used in the sense of "modesty," that is in the sense that we say, "We are ashamed to do a thing."

As to the line, "The love that dare not speak its name," Mr Wilde made quite a long explanation, and the result was astonishing. It completely took hold of the body of the people in the court, and the applause at the end was loud and vehement. That love, said Mr Wilde, had most certainly no reference to an unnatural love. It is that great affection between a mature man and a younger man, such as that between David and Jonathan, and formed the basis of Plato’s great work. It is that deep, spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect, which has formed the motive of great works, the sonnets of Shakespeare, and of Michael Angelo, and of my own two letters which you have handed up to me—the affection which is so misunderstood in this century—an affection which certainly has nothing unnatural about it, but is beautiful, intellectual, and natural. The applause was loud and long. Mr Justice Charles did not like it. Three times he said he would have the court cleared were there such manifestations of feeling.

When the crowd gathered in the Old Bailey for the last time on Wednesday, the role question among them was as to what the judge’s summing up would be and what the verdict of the jury. Mr Justice Charles is known as an exceedingly exact man, a judge of almost singular punctiliousness, and it is very rarely indeed that he takes, as many judges do, any "view" of the case he has to try. In avoiding that his habit is to go minutely into the whole of the evidence—so minutely sometimes that in the end it often stands before the jury a maze of greater confusion even than before. The tone which it was anticipated he would take was, therefore, almost well known to those who have sat frequently beneath him. But the verdict of the jury was a point upon which there was the greatest possible division of opinion. The strongest feeling existed on behalf of Wilde. There was, beyond all doubt, among those who had sat throughout the trial a deep revulsion of feeling.

Mr Justice Charles was on that morning for the first time during the trial a few minutes late. So punctual had he been all through that the few minutes attracted attention. About 25 minutes to eleven his lordship entered the court, accompanied by two aldermen, robed in scarlet and deep fur gowns. At once Wilde and Taylor were put into the dock, and took again their chairs and their easy positions. Wilde was looking better. Taylor for the first time did not come up smiling.

THE SUMMING UP.

Almost immediately the judge began his summing up. He commenced by reciting the charges of the indictment, and said at once that as to those referring to conspiracy and as to one other which he would mention later against Taylor, he would direct the jury to return a verdict of Not Guilty. Then he appealed to the jury to apply their minds to the evidence that had been placed before them. It had been for some time past impossible to open a newspaper without seeing some remark of another hearing upon the case. But he hoped that no one of them had any preconceived opinion, and he felt that he should not ask in vain for them to cast away from them anything they had read or heard before going into the jury box. It was always of great importance in every case that nothing should arise in their minds except

THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE

before them. It was even more so in this case. One of the prisoners—both of them, in fact—were men of education: one of them was a man of high intellectual gifts.

For more than 200 years it had been the wholesome practice of English justice that no man could be convicted upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. It was a most wise rule. How great the wrongs might be that could be done were a man at the mercy of those who declared they were accomplices! If there had been no corroboration in this case of the evidence of those young men who had been in the witness-box, it would have been his duty at once to direct the jury to give a verdict of acquittal upon all the counts. There was, however, some corroboration. He would show what later. He would only at that moment remark further as to the young men or, at least, three of them, Parker, Wood, and Atkins, that they had not only been accomplices, but had been rightly described by Sir Edward Clarke as blackmailers, and Atkins had been proved out of his own mouth to have told most corrupt untruths. Moreover, the jury would see that those young men were of such character as they had admitted themselves to be.

His lordship then at once turned to the

HISTORY OF THE PROSECUTION,

and, with deep emphasis, reminded the jury that the verdict is the Queensberry trial was nothing whatever to them, and they were not to allow themselves to be influenced by it in any way at all. Then as to the literature part of the case.

Here his lordship used phrases that will become historic. Leaning back in his seat, a soft smile diffusing his face as he gazed upon the jurymen, seemingly endeavouring to make them feel as he felt, he briefly told the story of "Dorian Grey." Then: "You are asked to pass an unfavourable inference upon the fact that Wilde is the author of ‘Dorian Gray.’ But you were told yesterday that a great author has said, ‘Judge no man by his books.’ I would rather say, "Judge no man by, or confound no man with, the persons he has created." He

QUOTED SCOTT AND DICKENS

as men who had not written, so far as knew, one single unwholesome line. "But," he added, and there was his point, "there are great writers, especially in the 18th century, very great writers, perfectly high-minded and unexceptional men in themselves, yet who have allowed themselves to pen volumes which it is painful for any person of ordinary modesty to read."

AS TO THE APHORISMS.

the "Phrases and Philosophies for the Young." printed in the "Chameleon," and upon which they were also asked to draw an unfavourable inference—what were they? Some of them were amusing, some were cynical, and, if he might be allowed to say, some of them were silly. But wicked—wicked in the sense of hearing the inference that Wilde was capable of having committed the crimes into which they were inquiring—they certainly were not.

His lordship turned from the aphorisms to the story of the "Priest and the Acolyte," which appeared in the "Chameleon," and it was, said his lordship a most disgusting and revolting work. But it was not the work of Wilde. And if one was not the judge a man by his own writings, to judge him by the writings of another would be absurd.

Then the sonnets of Lord Alfred Douglas in that same publication. They were asked to consider that those sonnets were indecent, immoral, and of unnatural tendency, and they were asked to believe that Wilde approved of them in that sense. What did Wilde say of them? They had [...] He had explained that the word "shame" used for those [...] meant modesty. "We know that modesty, we know [...] of the same word shame," said the Judge, again leaning back, and smiling at the jury. "We know that our first parents felt it in the Garden of Eden." The jury would, however, have to use their own judgment.

THE LETTERS—

Wilde’s two letters to Lord Alfred Douglas. They were asked to regard them as of a horrible, shocking, and indecent character. Again, however, what did Wilde say of them? The jury would remember the description the prisoner gave yesterday. He had no sense of shame in them, he said, and told them that the affection he described was possible between one man and another, an honest, pure affection, without any notion of anything unnatural or of physical affection whatever. There, again, it would be for the jury to use their discretion. They would, however, remember that the letter which was regarded as the worst of the two had been produced by Mr Wilde himself.

The literature disposed of, his lordship turned to

THE EVIDENCE

of the witnesses, and began with Shelley. There was the crucial point, and the words of the judge upon it were listened to with a deep hush, even an anxiety. It was, indeed, commenced his lordship, an anxious task the jury had in dealing with the case in regard to the testimony of this young man. He thought, however, that he should direct their attention to the demeanour of the witness when called into the box. He was in a most excited state, and, in the judge’s opinion, rather indicated that what he declared to have taken place all took place against his will. But yet that could hardly be the case, having regard to what followed, for on the next night he went back to the hotel to supper, and continued to go about with Wilde in a very friendly manner.

The whole of Shelley’s letters to Wilde were read through. Then came the phrase, "Let God judge the past," that Mr Gill had made so much of. The jury would have, said the judge, to attach to it what importance they thought it called for. In his opinion, the letter was that of a person

IN AN EXCITED CONDITION.

to say the least. In all the letters, however, there was much which did not support the story which Shelley told. Mr Gill, at the same time, had asked why Shelley should go into the box and say what was not true? Did he do so because the condition of his mind was disordered? Yet disordered in the sense that the youth did not know what he was saying, his mind was not. It was a terrible responsibility to have to determine whether his testimony could be relied on or whether it could not. There his lordship stopped, expressing no opinion of his own whatever, hardly even hinting or shadowing one forth.

THE STORY TOLD BY ATKINS

of his visit to Paris and getting his hair curled was next dealt with. Speaking of the Moulin Rouge, his lordship gave an amusing illustration of judicial ignorance. His lordship has no personal knowledge of the place of entertainment. "I gather," said he, "from what was said, that the Moulin Rouge is a place where had women congregate." But so intent was everyone on the gravity of the issue that was shortly to come to settlement that not even a smile was allowed to acknowledge the judge’s ingenuous declaration of innocence.

Throughout the summing-up as to Shelley Wilde kept his eyes upon the judge, and seemed to be drinking in every word with nervous anxiety. But when Atkins was being referred to he grew indifferent, and amused himself sketching caricatures upon the sheet of foolscap before him.

His lordship called Atkins a "reckless" witness, a wonderfully mild term, to say the least, and as illustration of the marked colourlessness with which Mr Justice Charles spoke. He went at great length into the denials this youth gave with eagerness, and of how subsequently he was made to admit that he was taken to Rochester-row Police-station. But in making that admission Atkins even told a lie. He said that he was charged with "hitting a man at the card table." The record at the station showed that the charges was nothing of the sort, but was a most gross act of blackmailing. In contrasting Atkins’s story with Wilde’[s there could be little doubt that Wilde’s was the true one.

Then came the next most serious portion of the case of prosecution, the evidence from the Savoy. That evidence, said his lordship, again gave rise to a most serious question. Cotter, the chambermaid, swore that upon one occasion she did see a dark, sallow boy in Wilde’s bed. Wilde swore that there never was any boy in his bed at the hotel. It was certainly an extraordinary thing that with that boy there Wilde should have rung this woman up to light the fire. The housekeeper was called to confirm part of the chambermaid’s story. "I really, gentlemen, cannot assist you," said the judge. "You must make up your own minds." As to what Migge had said as to his also having seen a boy in Wilde’s bed, they likewise would have to judge for themselves whether the man told them the truth. If he did do so, and Cotter too, spoke truly, then Wilde’s evidence was not true, and

IT WAS OF VAST IMPORTANCE

for the jury to make up their minds. It was right that he should say there was nothing against those two people as there was against some of the other witnesses, and the question was, Did they come to the court as the witnesses of truth, or had they made a mistake? There again his lordship gave no hint of his own opinion.

To Wood his lordship gave considerable time—indeed more than was taken up with the Savoy stories. Again contrasting the evidence—Wood’s this time with Wilde’s—the judge pointed out that the jury would have to decide which of the stories was the true one. One thing however, was certain—Wood was a levier of blackmail. It was beyond all doubt, for he himself had admitted it.

In analysing the testimony of Charles Parker, Taylor came in for attention—the too-artistic arrangement of his College street rooms, the number of his young men visitors, and his frequent tea-parties at which there never were lady guests, but at which Wilde was often present. In judging between Parker’s allegations and the denials of the prisoners it was necessary to remember that Charles Parker was also a young man who

ENTERTAINED MANY YOUNG MEN.

Indeed, it was quite true, what Sir Edward Clarke had pointed out, that the three young men upon whom main reliance was placed were all affected in the same way. But there was nothing to show that William Parker was so tainted, and his evidence was of great importance, as it confirmed his brother’s, which was tainted. In dealing with the credibility of the evidence on one side as against the other, confirmation of one witness by another was of the utmost importance. Charles Parker’s story as to what happened at the dinner was confirmed by William Parker. His story that Wilde visited him at Park place was corroborated by the woman Bancroft.

Into the evidence his lordship did not go at any length, dismissing it by saying that it proved no act of indency. Then came

THE PERORATION.

"I have had to sum this case up to you with some minuteness, because of its importance to the community and its gravity to the accused. It is important that if they thought the practices were proved that they fearlessly say so. But, on the other hand, it was of vast importance that people should not be convicted of acts which they have not committed. Wilde has the right to ask you to remember that he is a man of high intellectual gifts, a man whom one would suppose was incapable of such acts. So is Taylor. He belongs to a class of people of whom it is difficult to suppose they would be guilty of these practices. But still you must deal with the evidence fearlessly, remembering the two defendants’ position on the one hand and your duty to the public on the other. If you feel you ought not to act on the evidence of these witnesses, why, say so, and acquit Wilde of the charge of committing these shocking acts, acquit Taylor of the charge of committing them, and of the charge of procuring their committal. But if you feel constrained to believe the evidence, then you must return the verdict which it is your painful duty to return. Gentlemen,

I SHALL ASK YOU

whether you find that

(1) Wilde has committed acts of indecency with Shelley, whether with Wood, whether with person or persons unknown at the Savoy Hotel, whether with Charles Parker,

I shall as you (2) whether you find that Taylor procured, or attempted to procure, these acts, or any of them, and whether

(3) Wilde and Taylor, or either of them, attempted to incite Atkins to commit indecencies, and whether

(4) Taylor committed indecent acts with Charles Parker or William Parker.

THE JURY RETIRE.

The [...] interval had been reached when the summing up was [...] The jury asked to retire, and after the [...] ceremony of swearing in the official half [...] half [...] who looks after them, the judge left the bench and retired to his room. The prisoners were taken below, but hardly any one else left the [...] The general belief seemed to be "a quarter of an hour will decide it." Those who had been far-sighted enough to [...] themselves brought out parcels of sandwiches. Everyone praised the summing-up and discussed the verdict; there was a buzz, almost a din of conversation. One thing was noticed about the summing-up; the learned judge had never formally told the jury that any doubt in their minds must be resolved in favour of the prisoners.

Below sat the prisoners. When they were taken down to the cells, on the retirement of the jury, it was the usual lunch hour, and their lunch was really. They hurried over it. The time seemed to pass slowly, and no news came.

For a long time no one in the court below budged. The air was thick, and when the gas jets were lit to lighten the darkness of an approaching storm, it grew worse. Still no one stirred out of court, but just struggled to and fro, talking, estimating chances, anticipating results. The bar went out to lunch in detachments in the Old Bailey messroom, and an hour went by. Then a note came from the jury; were they coming back? An instant restle, and strained attention everywhere for a few brief moments, then almost a groan of disappointment. The jury wanted their lunch. They had it, and once more the court waited. The newspapers came into court with the printed account of the summing-up, but still the jury were away. The winner of the Two Thousand created some slight excitement, which lasted but for a few minutes, however, and once more the court fell to weary waiting. The atmosphere of the court grew stifling in spite of the open windows, for the customary half-hour of fresh air at the luncheon interval had been missing, and the crowd had been great all day.

Three o’clock, four o’clock, five o’clock went by. Waiting by now had become mechanical.

At last, noon after five, the judge sent for the Clerk of Arraigns, who conveyed a message to the jury. The message having been replied to, and the reply having been answered, the jury came back into court at 5 13. The prisoners were put into the dock, and stood up, Wilde with his hand on the dock rail, as if about to address the court. Anxiety and suspense had told their tale, and in the first moment as he stood moistening his parched lips, he looked more haggard and troubled than ever before. Then he recovered his self-possession. Taylor still wore his set, artificial smile.

The jury were at once asked if they had been able to agree upon their verdict. They had not; except upon the count charging the two prisoners with procuring Atkins, on which they were prepared to return a verdict of Not Guilty, they were hopelessly disagreed.

His lordship was unwilling to do anything which should look like compelling a jury to deliver a verdict, but the inconveniences of another trial were great. Was there any prospect of their agreeing? None, said the foreman, absolutely none.

Then they were discharged, but not before they had formally returned a verdict of Not Guilty on the conspiracy counts, and on the counts relating to Mavor and Wood.

Sir Edward Clarke applied for bail, and Mr Gill had no objection to offer, but Mr Justice Charles did not feel able to accede to the request. Any further application must be made to a Judge in Chambers.

It was arranged that the new trial should be taken next sessions, and then the two prisoners were taken once more below, Wilde with a heavy look of resignation, Taylor with his air of smiling unconcern.

Monday was the third day of the trial of Oscar Wilde and Taylor. When Mr. Justice Charles had taken his seat, Mr. Grain, addressing him, said he did not know whether his Lordship had on his notes, with regard to the witness Shelley, that he said Taylor was a stranger to him. The question was put to him at the police court, but not, he believed, at the trial.

Mr. Gill: Certainly there is no evidence that the prisoner Taylor ever knew Shelley.

Mr. Justice Charles: I ought not strictly to add it, because it has not been sworn here. But did he say so before the Magistrate?

Mr. Grain: He did, my lord.

Mr. Justice Charles: Very well.

Antonio Miggie, a masseur, Jane Cotter, a chambermaid, and Mrs. Perkins, formerly housekeeper at the Savoy Hotel, having given evidence as to Wilde's stay at the hotel.

William Harris, a detective sergeant, who obtained access by a subterfuge to Taylor's rooms at 13, Little College-street, in May, 1893, described the interior of the draped and artificially-darkened rooms. It was this officer who arrested Taylor at Denbigh-street, Pimlico, on the present charge.

Mr. Grain's cross-examination suggested that Taylor had heard a warrant was out, and was on his way to give himself up.

Detective-inspector Richards described again the arrest of Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel, Sloane-street, on the evening of the 15th ult., after the collapse of the case against Lord Queensberry.

Detective-inspector Brockwell proved receiving Wilde in custody at Scotland Yard, and conveying him to Bow-street, where he was searched. Among other things found upon him was a slip of paper in Taylor's handwriting. It was addressed to Sidney Mavor, Esq., and was as follows: "Dear Sid; -- I could not wait any longer. Come on at once and see Oscar at 16, Tite-street, Chelsea. -- Yours, Alf. Taylor." There was also found upon him a letter from Taylor, stating that he had left the above note at his rooms for Sidney Mavor, in case he should call, but on arriving home found that a police officer had called, and had been admitted, for the purpose of writing a letter. His (Taylor's) letter to Sidney Mavor had been opened, and a note had been left stating that Inspector Littlechild wanted to see him, and would look out for him at the Old Bailey on the following morning. The note was left on April 4.

In cross-examination the Police Witnesses admitted that Taylor as in attendance at the Old Bailey during the hearing of the Queensberry case.

Mr. Gill next read the papers found in Taylor's hat-box at Chapel-street, Chelsea. Most of them have already been published. Among the new ones was a New Years card from Mavor to Taylor:--

Always a bob in your pocket to spend, Always a good and trusty friend, Wishing you these I add one wish more, A happy and prosperous '94.

Mr. Henry Read, Clerk of Arraigns, formally proved the documents in the charge of libel against the Marquis of Queensberry, and added that the jury returned a verdict of "Not guilty" against the Marquis.

READING EVIDENCE GIVEN AT THE PREVIOUS TRIAL.

Mr. Gill then commenced reading the evidence given in cross-examination by Mr. Wilde as the prosecutor in those proceedings.

At half-past two Mr. A. Gill reached his seventy-third folio, and Mr. C.F. Gill took up the running. Wilde's description of Taylor is worth recording: "I do not call him an intimate friend. He was a friend of mine."

When the reading came to the question of the relations between Wilde and Taylor, Mr. Grain rose to object that Wilde's cross-examination in another case should not be made evidence against his client.

Mr. Justice Charles said he could not exclude it on that ground. It was evidence against Wilde, and that made it legal to read it. Whether it was also evidence against Taylor depended on a number of considerations, which he would take care were not lost sight of.

The ordinary time for adjourning the day's proceedings arrived, and still the reading went drearily on. Mr. Horace Avory had taken the place of Mr. Gill.

It was a welcome change when Sir Edward Clarke rose at a quarter-past four to begin his part of the weary business by reading the re-examination. And the court heard with gratitude his promise to cut it as short as possible. Sir Edward had the opportunity of reading the letters of Wilde to the Scots Observer, in which he wrote, "The criminal and illiterate classes do not read anything except newspapers, and they are certainly not likely to be able to understand anything of mine." Again, "as for the mob, I have no desire to be a popular novelist, it is far too easy."

Shortly before five the last folio had been read, and Mr. C.F. Gill announced that the case for the

PROSECUTION WAS NOW CLOSED.

When the prisoners had left the dock Sir Edward Clarke handed to his lordship a written statement of the objection he had taken at the opening of the case to the charges under the Criminal Law Amendment Act and those for conspiracy against the accused being joined in one indictment, and he had to ask that a case might be stated.

Mr. Justice Charles said he was under the impression that if there was anything substantial in the point that it should be raised by a case stated for the Court of Crown Cases Reserved. He would, however, take time to consider the matter.

Mr. Justice Charles did not take his seat till eleven o'clock on Tuesday. By that time all the counsel engaged in the case--and half a hundred who only wished they were--had taken their seats. A few of the briefness ones, however, lounged about on the staircases.

THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE CONSPIRACY CHARGES.

Mr. Gill said: My lord, I have had an opportunity of considering the indictment since the case for the prosecution was closed, and, in consultation with my friends Mr. Avory and Mr. Gill, I have come to the determination not to ask for a verdict on the counts of the indictment charging conspiracy. Of course I do that having in my mind that no evidence has been given here at all which was not directly material to the other charges.

Subdued expressions of surprise were audible in the public gallery when Mr. Gill delivered himself of the announcement.

Sir Edward Clarke said that if that had been done in the first instance he should have asked for the charges against the two prisoners to be heard separately. Of course, Mr. Gill had a legal right to withdraw the counts at any stage of the case.

Mr. Justice Charles said the evidence had suggested to his mind that the conspiracy counts were unnecessary.

Sir E. Clarke: I ask that a verdict of the jury of "Not guilty" shall be taken at once.

Mr. Justice Charles: I cannot consent to that.

Sir E. Clarke said he must ask that such a verdict be taken at some time.

Mr. Justice Charles said all he would say now was that he accepted to Mr. Gill's application.

Sir E. Clarke: I shall claim a verdict of "Not guilty," and I shall probably find it in my duty to comment upon the course taken by the Crown later in the day. It was, he continued, a very remarkable incident in a very remarkable trial. He intended to call Mr. Wilde. His decision to do so had not been arrived at in consequence of the statement just made by Mr. Gill. These charges of conspiracy, if they were not to be proceeded with, ought not to have been put in the indictment. He was aware that his putting the prisoner into the box entitled Mr. Gill to the right of reply, and exposed him to the penalty of having the evidence commented upon. But he never attached so much importance to

THE LAST WORDS

as some of the advocates who taught him his profession used to do. With regard to the literary part of this case, he was obliged to make some observations. Mr. Gill, in opening the case, urged upon the jury that it was their duty to dismiss from their minds all they had heard elsewhere. The case had been commented upon by a large section of the Press, which was disgraceful. Such comments were calculated to imperil the administration of justice, and was in the highest degree injurious to the interests of his client. He did not think it quite fair of Mr. Gill to have insisted upon reading Wilde's cross-examination upon his books and writings. It was not fair to judge a man even by his books, but the prosecution had gone further than that, and had sought to judge Wilde by books which he did not write, and by an article which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. He pointed out that the latest date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was eighteen months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry that brought the matter before the public. He (Sir E. Clarke) with the counsel acting with him was responsible for the advice given to Mr. Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly owing to that fact that he was there again on Mr. Wilde's behalf to meet the accusation which could not properly be tried then. Men charged with offences alleged against Mr. Wilde shrunk from investigation, and he submitted that the fact of Mr. Wilde's taking the initiative of a public trial was evidence of his innocence.

EXAMINATION OF OSCAR WILDE.

Sir E. Clarke having called out his name, the defendant Oscar Wilde stepped lightly from the dock, walking erectly to the witness-box, and, leaning across the rail in the same easy attitude that he assumed when he was examined by Mr. Carson in the previous case, quietly answered the questions addressed to him by Sir Edward Clarke, which in the first place dealt with his earlier career. In 1884 he married Miss Lloyd, and from that time to the present he lived with his wife at 16, Tite-street, Chelsea. He also occupied rooms in St. James's-place, which he took for the purposes of his work, it being out of the question to get quietude at his own house when his two young sons were at home. He had heard the evidence in this case against himself, and asserted that there was no truth in any one of the allegations of indecent behaviour.

THE CROSS-EXAMINATION

Mr. C.F. Gill rose to cross-examine; and after reference to "Dorian Gray," he said: Lord Alfred Douglas contributed two poems to the Chameleon, and they were beautiful poems? - Yes.

Shame" concluding, "Of all sweet passions, Shame is the loveliest."

"May I---?" said Mr. Wilde.

"No!" Mr. Gill sharply replied. "Kindly answer my questions!"

"Certainly," said Wilde; but Mr. Justice Charles interposed, "If you have any explanation to add to your answer you may do so."

Witness: I will merely say this, my lord. It is not for me to explain the work to anybody else. It does not belong to me. But the word "shame" used in that work is a word used in the sense of modesty. I mean I was anxious to point out that "shame that burns cold lips"--I forget the line exactly--"to fire" is a quickened sense of modesty.

Mr. Gill: Your view, Mr. Wilde, is that the shame mentioned there is that shame which is a sense of modesty?

Witness: That was the explanation given to me by the person who wrote it. The sonnet seems to me obscure.

During 1893 and 1894 you were a good deal in the company of Lord Alfred Douglas? - Oh yes. He read that poem to me.

The next poem is one described as "Two Loves." Was that poem explained to you? - I think that is clear.

There is no question as to what it means? - Most certainly not.

Then what is the love described?

Witness: The "Love that dare not speak its name in this century" is such a great affection of an elder for a younger man as there was between David and Jonathan, such as Plato made the very basis of his philosophy, and such as you find in the sonnets of Michael Angelo and Shakespeare--that deep, spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect, and dictates great works of art like those of Shakespeare and Michael Angelo and those two letters of mine, such as they are, and which is in this century misunderstood--so misunderstood that on account of it I am placed where I am now. It is beautiful, it is fine, it is the noblest form of affection. It is intellectual and it repeatedly exists between an elder and a younger man when the elder man has intellect and the younger man has all the joy, hope, and glamour of life. That it should be so the world does not understand. It mocks at it, and it sometimes puts one into the pillory for it.

At this stage there was loud applause and hisses in the gallery of the court, and the learned judge at once said, speaking very sternly, "I shall have this court cleared if there is the smallest manifestation of feeling. There must be complete silence preserved."

Cross-examination continued: You were staying at the Savoy Hotel with Lord Alfred Douglas at the beginning of March, 1893? - Yes.

And after that he went into rooms? - Yes.

I understand you to say that the evidence given in this case by the witnesses called in support of the prosecution is absolutely untrue? - Entirely.

Entirely untrue? - Yes.

Did you hear the evidence of the servant from the Savoy? - It is absolutely untrue.

Had you a little quarrel with Lord Alfred Douglas in that week? - No; we never did quarrel--perhaps a little difference. Sometimes he said things that pained me, and sometimes I said things that pained him.

Had he that week said unkind things? - I always make a point of forgetting whenever he says anything unkind.

Mr. Gill then read the letter written by the witness to Lord Alfred Douglas which was produced in the Queensberry case--the first containing references to the slim gilt soul and the red rose-leaf lips, and the second saying, "You are the divine thing I want," and describing Lord Alfred Douglas's letter as being "delightful red and yellow wine to me."

"There is nothing in that," said the Witness, "of which I am ashamed. It is full of deep affection. The other letter was more of a prose poem, more of a literary answer to a sonnet he had sent me."

Passing to the incidents at the Savoy Hotel, Mr. Gill asked if the witness would entirely contradict the evidence of the hotel servants. "It is entirely untrue!" he replied, and with some temper added, "Can In answer for what hotel servants say years after I have left the hotel?

IT IS CHILDISH.

I am not responsible for hotel servants."

You had an opportunity of seeing the plea of justification in the Queensberry case, and you saw the different names? - Yes.

At the hearing of that case before Mr. Justice Collins, except the hall porter of your club and yourself no other witness was called? - No.

You had seen Taylor within a few days of the trial? - Yes.

He was not called? - No, he was subpoenaed by the other side. I knew that he was here.

And you knew that while the counsel for Lord Queensberry was addressing the jury the case was interrupted, a verdict of "Not Guilty" was agreed to, and the jury found that the justification was proved and the libel published for the public benefit? - I was not in court.

But you knew it? - No, I did not. I knew my counsel had considered it would be impossible to get a verdict on the question as far as the literature went, and it was not for me to dispute their superior wisdom. I was not in court, nor have I ever read any account of that trial.

What is there untrue in the evidence of Shelley? - I say his account of what happened is entirely untrue. It is true that he came to the Independent Theatre with me, but it was in a box with some friends. Witness added that Shelley was in the habit of writing him morbid letters, which he tore up, and in which he said he was a great sinner and anxious to be in closer communication with religion. Proceeding, he denied emphatically that Parker had ever been to the Savoy with him. Atkins had never tried to blackmail him. He found him bright and amusing, and invited him to go to Paris because he (witness) did not care to travel alone. Atkins had given a grotesque and monstrous account of the dinner party at the London restaurant. It was also entirely untrue that Wood ever went to Tite-street. Wood was introduced to him by Lord Alfred Douglas and Taylor by Mr. Schwabe. He went to Taylor's rooms because he there met actors and singers of many kinds.

He burned incense, did he not? - Pastilles, I think.

Did it strike you that this place was at all peculiar?--Not at all. I thought it Bohemian.

Not a sort of street you would usually visit in. You had no other friends there? - No. This was merely a bachelor's place.

Rather a rough neighbourhood? - That I don't know. I know it was near that Houses of Parliament. I went there to amuse myself by smoking cigarettes, singing, chatting, and nonsense of that kind.

Did you see a boy named Tankard at Calais? - Oh, no.

Think.--Do you mean after the plea of justification was issued?

You were at Calais about that time? - Yes. I remember I saw Tankard. That was before the plea was put in.

Tankard was employed at the Calais Hotel, and you were going abroad with Lord Alfred Douglas? - Yes.

Did you know last year of Taylor's arrest? - Oh, yes; I read it in the papers.

You knew the circumstances? - Yes. I saw that the charge was dismissed by the Magistrate.

That satisfied you? - What satisfied me was that I did not see on what grounds the police went there at all.

I may take it, Mr. Wilde, that you see no reason why the police should keep observation at Little College-street? - No.

With regard to your friendship towards the persons I have mentioned, may I take it, Mr. Wilde, that it was as you describe, the deep affection of an elder man to a younger? - Certainly not. One feels that once in one's life, and once only, towards anybody.

In re-examination by Sir F. Clarke, Wilde said he became aware at one time that Wood had some letters, and he communicated with Sir George Lewis.

Wood returned them? - He gave me three letters back. They were not what I would call matters of great consequence, but no one likes their private letters read. They contained some slighting allusions to other people which I should not have liked made public.

Wilde then left the witness box.

TAYLOR IN THE BOX.

"Alfred Taylor" was called by Mr. Grain. He described himself as thirty-three years of age, and the son of a manufacturer whose business was now being carried on as a limited company. Up to the age of sixteen or seventeen he was educated at Marlborough School, afterwards going to a private tutor at Preston, near Brighton. He afterwards entered the militia, 4th Battalion Royal Fusiliers, City of London Regiment, with the idea of going into the army. On coming of age in 1883 he came into a fortune of £45,000, and since that time had had no occupation, living a life of pleasure. The charges of gross misconduct being put to him seriatim, he denied them categorically as "Certainly not true," "Absolutely untrue."

Cross-examined by Mr. C.F. Gill, he admitted that the witnesses who had sworn to it had slept at his rooms at Little College-street, and that he had there certain articles of female apparel. The dress came from Constantinople, and was obtained for use at a fancy dress ball.

At the time you were living at Chapel-street were you in serious money difficulties? - I had just gone through the Bankruptcy Court.

Did you know Wilde well? - Yes.

Did you tell certain lads he was fond of boys? - No, never.

Do you know that he is? - I believe he is fond of young people. He had introduced Charlie Parker to Mr. Wilde because he thought the latter might use his influence to obtain for him some work on the stage.

SPEECH FOR THE DEFENCE.

After the luncheon adjournment, Sir E. Clarke addressed the jury on behalf of Wilde, and again referred to the tardy withdrawal of the charge of conspiracy. Had the prosecution evidence which made them put that count upon the indictment? If they had not, why was the count of conspiracy put on the record, and why were the counsel for the defence placed for three days under the embarrassment of meeting an indictment with regard to part of which they could call evidence and with regard to another part of which they could not? He contended that counsel for the Crown ought to have made up their minds on the point at the outset, and that a cruel hardship had been inflicted on Mr. Wilde. Continuing, Sir Edward said he could not help expressing astonishment that after he had protested as he did in his former speech against the way in which public feeling had been excited and fanned against Mr. Wilde by the quotation of passages in literature for which he was not responsible, his learned friend should have devoted the whole of that part of this cross-examination which dealt with literary questions to interrogating him regarding two poems of which he was not the author. Again, he asked, had Mr. Wilde not been innocent would he not have recoiled from going into the witness-box, which he had entered fearless as to what might be produced againt him. Adverting to the letters about which so much had been said, Sir Edward remarked that Mr. Wilde was not an ordinary man. He was a man who had written poetry and prose, brilliant dramas and charming essays—a man who from his youth upwards [...] world—not of this England of ours alone, but of those Empires whose glories were to us only now a name. They must bear in mind, therefore, that when he wrote a letter in a tone which might to others seem highflown, exaggerated, and absurd, and when that man came forward and said, "I do not shrink from the judgement of the world upon these productions," they could not say that

SUCH A MAN WAS NOT TO BE BELIEVED.

Had the defendant in this case not given the jury the best proof of his innocence? Innocence, he declared, had courage and faith in the ultimate judgement of mankind. Having laid stress on the fact that all Wilde's movements had been open and submitted, that the evidence called for the prosecution was not reliable testimony, that the principal witnesses for the prosecution, whose evidence was wholly uncorroborated, belonged to a wretched gang of blackmailers, and that Shelley had admitted that his mind was disordered at the time he wrote some of the letters that had been produced. He concluded his address thus: "I know with what extreme difficulty it is that juries are able to efface from their recollections things that bias their judgement, and to address themselves only to that evidence which is sound and true. Before you deal with this case, therefore, I implore you to make that effort and only your judgments to be affected by those witnesses with regard to whom you can say with a clear conscience that you, as honourable and right judging men, are entitled to be guided by true, and honest, and honourable testimony. If you guard yourselves from these prejudices which have floated about, and which have been dissipated to some extent by the incidents of the last few days, but from which it is impossible that this atmosphere should be absolutely clear, then I trust the result of your deliberations will be to gratify those thousands of hopes which hang on your decision, and will clear from this fearful imputation one of the most renowned and accomplished men of letters of to-day, and in clearing him, will clear Society from a stain."

An outburst of applause followed the conclusion of counsel's speech, which had occupied two hours, but the demonstration was at once silenced. Mr Wilde, who was visibly affected, wrote a brief note, which was handed down to the learned counsel.

Mr Grain then replied to the charge against Taylor. He said that all the resources of the Crown had been unable to produce any corroboration of the charges made by the two Parkers. Taylor, he added, having run through his money, had been living on an allowance made by members of his late father's firm.

Mr. Gill replied in a speech which occupied two hours in delivery for the Crown. When commenting upon the evidence of Sydney Mavor, his lordship interposed, and said although the witness's evidence was important, he had denied that he had been guilty of impropriety, and he did not think the count in reference to Mavor could stand. After some discussion, this count was struck out of the indictment. Before concluding, Mr. Gill went on to deal in detail with statements made by the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution, remarking that there was nothing to support the suggestion of Sir E. Clarke that Shelly, who had shown himself to be an absolutely respectable and trustworthy witness, was in a disordered state of mind; while for those witnesses who had been described as blackmailers they could have had no conceivable object in bringing the accusations against the accused unless they were true in substance and fact.

Counsel did not conclude his address till seven o clock, at which hour the Court adjourned.

JUDGE'S SUMMING UP.

The trial was concluded on Wednesday. On the prisoners being placed at the bar, Mr. Justice Charles proceeded at once to sum up. He commenced by expressing his surprise that conspiracy count had been joined in the indictment; and upon them, as also upon two other counts, he directed a verdict of acquittal. They were fully aware, he was sure, of the solemnity of the occasion. They were trying two men of education--one of high intellectual gifts. As to the witnesses called by the prosecution, his Lordship laid it down that persons who proved acts of indecency committed upon them, but not against their will, were accomplices in those wicked acts; and by a wholesome practice of the law of England, for certainly 200 years, no person could be convicted on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice. Otherwise innocent persons might be exposed to terrible danger by designing or spiteful people. In this case, therefore, had there been no corroboration of the young men to whom the jury had listened, he should have at once directed an acquittal; but he was clearly of opinion that

THERE WAS CORROBORATION

in the sense that the law required--not corroboration by eye-witnesses, for that could not be expected, but corroboration as to acquaintanceship, and to many of the incidents arising out of it. The witnesses were not accomplices, but in the case of Charles Parker, Wood, and Atkins they were blackmailers, and to the jury should remember what they had admitted against themselves. His lordship then shortly sketched the proceedings which led up to the present trial, making the point that Wilde, on his own initiative, had challenged inquiry into the accusation made against him in the Queensberry suit libel. Passing on to what Sir Edward Clarke had styled "the literary part of the case," the Judge said he did not think that in a criminal case the jury should draw any favourable inference from the fact that Wilde was the author of "Dorian Gray." It was, unfortunately, true that some of their most distinguished and noble-minded writers, who had spent their lives producing wholesome literature, had given the world books which were

PAINFUL TO PERSONS OF ORDINARY MODESTY

and decency to read. In dealing with the association which it was attempted to prove of Wilde with the magazine called the Chameleon, his Lordship described the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte" as filthy and disgusting--a story of which the author ought to be thoroughly ashamed; but he pointed out that with that story Wilde had nothing whatever to do. Of "The Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young," by Wilde, which prefaced the magazine, it was sufficient to say that they were amusing, cynical, and, if he might criticize some of them, silly. Without much comment, his Lordship declaimed Lord Alfred Douglas's two poems, "In Praise of Shame" and "The Two Loves," and then read the two celebrated Wilde letters to that personage, known as "the yellow wine" and "the red rose-leaf lips" letters. Proceeding with the consideration of the charges contained in the indictments, his Lordship dealt first with Shelley, who was

NOT A TAINTED WITNESS

like Wood, Atkins, Parker. Shelley, when he appeared in the witness-box, was certainly in a very excited state, and his testimony rather indicated that the acts he alleged against Wilde were committed against his will; but on that point it would be the anxious task of the jury to reconcile his subsequent letters to "My dear Oscar" and the positive denials of Wilde with such a suggestion. The Judge then carefully went through the evidence of Atkins--the most reckless witness who had proved himself to be unscrupulous and untruthful. He put it to the jury, could they rely on his testimony? Next in order, his Lordship dealt with the evidence from the Savoy Hotel, pointing out that if the witnesses on that head were speaking the truth, then the denials of Wilde were false. It was for the jury to say on which side the balance of credibility lay. In like manner, Mr. Justice Charles submitted the cases of Wood and the two Parkers. In conclusion, his Lordship observed that undoubtedly this was

A VERY IMPORTANT CASE--

important to the community at large. If they found that the charges against the defendants had been proved they should fearlessly say so. On the other hand, it was of the greatest importance that innocent persons should not be convicted of crimes they had not committed. He committed the case to the jury with the utmost confidence. The Judge left the following questions to the jury:--

(1) Do you think that Wilde committed indecent acts with Edward Shelley and Alfred Wood, and with a person or persons unknown at the Savoy Hotel, or with Charles Parker?

(2) Whether Taylor procured or attempted to procure the commission of these acts, or any of them?

(3) Did Wilde or Taylor, or either of them, attempt to get Atkins to commit indecencies?

(4) Did Taylor commit indecent acts with Charles Parker or with William Parker?

THE JURY DISAGREE.

The jury retired to consider their verdict at twenty-five minutes to two. They lunched in their room, and did not return to court till 5:12.

The Judge: I have received a communication from you to the effect that, with the exception of the minor question I put to you in regard to Atkins, you are unable to arrive at an agreement.

The Foreman: That is so, my lord. We cannot agree upon three of the questions you submitted to us. The Judge: Is there any prospect that if you retired to your room--you have not been inconvenienced, you know, because I ordered what you asked--and continue your deliberations a little longer, you would be able to come to an agreement at least on some of the questions?

The Foreman: I put that also to my fellow jurymen. We have considered the questions for three hours, and the only result we have come to is that we cannot agree.

The Judge: That being so, I do not feel justified in detaining you any longer.

Sir E. Clarke asked for a verdict of "Not guilty" on the conspiracy count and two other counts, and after some demur on the part of Mr. Gill the jury, under the direction of the judge, formally returned that verdict.

The jury were then discharged.

Sir E Clarke: I have now to make an application that Oscar Wilde be admitted to bail. I should think that after what has taken place the Crown would make no objection.

Mr Clarke Hall made the same application on behalf of Taylor.

The Judge: I do not feel I am able to accede to the applications.

Sir E. Clarke: I suppose that I may renew the application, on other material, to a Judge in chambers.

The Judge: Yes, I think the application must be renewed in the ordinary way to a Judge in chambers.

Sir E. Clarke: I don't think such a trial as this ought to take place again immediately. The burden and pressure on those engaged in the case has been very great. The Treasury, too, I should think would like to have an opportunity of considering what they will do.

Mr. Gill: The case will certainly be tried again; but whether at the next session or not will depend upon which is the most convenient course. Probably the most convenient course will be that it should be taken at the next sessions.

Wilde and his fellow prisoner were conveyed, as before, to Holloway, in the prison van. The next session of the Central Criminal Court commences on May 20.

BAIL FOR OSCAR WILDE

The question of bail for Oscar Wilde in connection with the charges still pending against him was tentatively settled yesterday. An application was made before Mr. Baron Pollock on the previous day, when his lordship expressed his willingness to accept bail, but declined at the time to fix the amount, although Mr. Charles Mathews, who appeared for Wilde, suggested that two sureties in £1,000 each would be forthcoming. Yesterday the legal representatives of both sides were present in Mr. Baron Pollock's private room, and his lordship announced that he had decided to fix the amount of bail at £5,000. The prisoner would gave to give his personal security for £2,500, and two other sureties in £1,250 each. Mr. Mathews, hearing this, intimated that there might be some difficulty in finding two sureties for the amount fixed, but said he should have no difficulty finding one surety for a much larger sum. Mr. Baron Pollack replied that, in that event, another application had better be made on Monday. Detective-inspector Brockwell was present in chambers, and Mr. Humphreys, Wilde's solicitor, informed him who the sureties would in all probability be, but formal notice of this fact will gave to be given to Bow-street in order that the police may make the usual inquiries. At present no application has been made of Taylor. It is said that Oscar Wilde's liberation is not likely to take place before Tuesday.

From numerous letters we have received dealing with the morals of Society to-day we select typical views: T. St. John Murray, of 21, Ampthill-square, N.W., after suggesting satirically that a Bill may be brought into Parliament shortly to annul the Act against unnatural offences, states that the police in their action against immoral practices are paralyzed by orders from above to see that nothing is done, otherwise many now held in high respect would be regarded as the scum of the earth. There are, he believes, members of Parliament, Judges, artists, actors, others guilty of such offences, and that propensity is as widespread now in England as it was in Rome at the time of Juvenal.

"A Woman of No Importance," writing from Holloway, makes a vigorous plea for mercy to Wilde on the score that a man so gifted, however excessive his eccentricities, could not possibly be really guilty of the odious vices laid to his charge. The world hates genius, she adds, and this accounts for the ferocity with which it is pursuing Wilde, who, in her opinion, is the most pathetic figure of the age

"One of the Masses" writes from Teignmouth repudiating the statement of Mr. Palmer that the masses indulge in sexual vices even more than the leisured and privileged classes. The propensities of the people as a whole, he believes, run in a natural direction, and not to loathsome practices.

The Marquis of Queensberry met with an accident on Monday while cycling, and is now confined to his room.