Compare Documents

London, Friday.

Oscar Wilde, 40, and Alfred Taylor, 33, appeared in the dock at the Central Criminal Court, to-day, to meet the charges made against them.

Mr Justice Charles took his seat at half past ten o'clock.

Mr Gill was leading counsel for the Treasury and Sir Edward Clarke conducted the defence, several junior counsel holding briefs on both sides. Wilde appeared in the dock looking ill, and evidently suffering from acute mental depression, but his companion viewed the scene with a rather impassive air.

Sir Edward Clarke took a preliminary objection that the prisoners could not be called upon to plead, because under that portion of the indictment which alleged conspiracy the accused were competent witnesses; on the other counts they were not competent witnesses. He, therefore, entered a demurrer.

Mr Justice Charles overruled the objection, and both prisoners then pleaded not guilty.

Sir E Clarke then raised the further point that the prosecution must elect whether they would proceed on the count of conspiracy or of misdemeanour.

Mr Justice Charles declined to put the prosecution to election as to the counts upon which they would offer evidence.

Mr Gill thereupon opened the case to the jury. Mr Gill dealt with in all twenty-five separate counts, and concluded by saying that he had little doubt the Treasury would bring them all home to the accused.

During the greater part of the learned counsel's address Wilde sat dejectedly with his hand to his face, but Taylor seemed to be less impressed.

Witnesses having been examined, the case was adjourned until to-morrow (Saturday).

London, Friday.

Oscar Wilde, 40, author; and Alfred Taylor, 33; no occupation, appeared in the Central Criminal Court, London, today. The approaches to the Old Bailey presented much the same aspect as during the heading of the action of Wilde v. The Marquis of Queensberry, out of which the present action has arisen, but by some alteration of the arrangements for admission made by the Under Sheriff the crowding within the building was less. There was no legion of junior members of the Bar blocking up the passages, although the learned gentlemen elbowed each other in the seats usually reserved for counsel. The public galleries were filled long before the jury filed into their box.

Mr CF Gill, Mr Horace Avory, and Mr A Gill conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Treasury. Sir Edward Clarke, Q C. M P; Mr Mathews, and Mr Travers Humphreys defended Wilde. Taylor was represented by Mr J P Grain and Mr Paul Taylor. Mr Ker shaw held a watching brief for the witness, Sidney Mavor.

Mr Justice Charles took his seat at half-past ten o’clock.

Wilde, on taking his place in the dock, appeared pale and ill. He was attired as he appeared at Bow Street, and wore a dark blue overcoat, with velvet collar and cuffs. He leaned languidly on the bar. Taylor, great coat of light brown cloth was in strong contrast to the darker attire of his companion, surveyed the court with a somewhat impassive air, his gloved hands joined in front of him. The accused being called upon to answer.

Sir E Clarke rose and made a preliminary objection, the gist of which was that neither of them could be asked to plead, because, one part of the indictment being under the Criminal Law Amendment Act they could upon that he competent witnesses. Upon the charge of conspiracy, which was another part of the indictment they could not be competent witnesses.The learned counsel based his arguments upon certain cases in the law reports, and he submitted a demurrer on the ground that the counts had not been lawfully joined.

Mr Gill having replied — His Lordship said there was very little assistance from the authorities, as there were broad distinctions between this case and those upon which decisions had been given. He, however, thought that the case of the Queen v Owen, to which attention had been called by Mr Gill, pointed against his acceding to the request of Sir Edward Clarke. Though he felt into the inconvenience of the present seats of things, as already expressed by the late Lord Chief Justice in the Queen w Whalen, he did not agree to the view of the learned counsel that the several counts could not be lawfully joined.

The prisoners were accordingly asked to plead, and to the several indictments they replied "Not guilty."

Sir E Clarke then raised the point that the prosecution must elect whether they would proceed on the count of conspiracy or upon the count of misdemeanor.

Mr Gill submitted that it was entirely for the discretion of the learned judge. His lordship said he agreed, and he felt it impossible in this case to put the prosecution to the election as to which of the. Counts they would offer evidence upon. Mr Gill then opened to the jury, intimating at the outside that he was there to conduct the prosecution by the direction of the Public Prosecutor. Though much had been published about the case, he appealed to them to approach its conduction without bas. He briefly sketched the circumstances of the actions of Wilde v the Marquis of Queensberry, the subsequent arrest of Wilde, and the apprehension of Taylor during the preliminary examination of Wilde at Bow street, prefacing his statements with the aberration that it was an extraordinary fact that a man like Wilde should have been in contact at all with Taylor. The learned counsel detailed the circumstances under which Charles Parker, valet, and William Parker, groom, were introduced to Wilde by this fellow prisoner, and stated the nature of the evidence as to their subsequent relations at various addresses in London, Passing from the incident of the mock wedding between Taylor and Charles Parker, Mr Gil traced their later movements, Parker’s visit to Wilde, and the relations of the two prisoners as disclosed by correspondence in possession of the prosecution. The allegations to other persons mentioned in the several counts in the indictment were next described as at considerable length, and in this connection Wilde’s visit to Paris was alluded to, also his conduct in making presents and giving money. Counsel next adverted to the alleged Savoy Hotel incidents. The youth, Charles Parker, valet, was the first witness sworn. He described his introduction to Oscar Wilde by Taylor, and repeated the evidence given by him at Bow street.

After luncheon Sir Edward Clarke began his examination of Parker, who said it was after he joined his regiment that Mr Russell, the solicitor, found him. He had not in the meantime communication with any person. He had spoken in his examination at Bow street of having received £30 as part of a sum of money extorted from a gentleman upon an allegation of misconduct with witness. The men who extorted the money were Wood and Allen. The misconduct took place at Camera square.

How much money did Wood and Allen get? Three or four hundred pounds (sensation).

When you had spent your portion you went into the army? Yes, I spent it in three or four days.

At Sir Edward Clarke’s request Parker wrote the name of the gentleman in whose employ he had been as valet before meeting Taylor. The name was handed to his Lordship, the learned counsel remarking that as the gentleman had no connection whatever with this case there could be no object in mentioning the name in open court.

Replying to further questions, Parker said that after leaving this particular gentleman’s employ he received a letter from him charging him with stealing clothing. He sent the articles back to his late employer. He told Wilde about his own parentage, and expressed a wish to go on the stage.

He knew of the man Wood having got possession of some letters of Wilde, which he had found in some clothes given to him. Wilde’s rooms in St James’s place were very "public", and servants came in and out.

Do you mean to assert that in the rooms thus described this sort of conduct went on again and again? Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr Grain — He was not introduced to Taylor by another person named Harrington, although Harrington (who was a clerk) was in the bar at the St James’s Restaurant when the witness made Taylor’s acquaintance Wood visited witness at Camera square frequently.

Was £30 the only sum you over received under similar circumstances? Yes.

What means of subsistence had you when you met Taylor in St James’s Restaurant? I had just left a situation.

How much money had you in your possession? A few shillings.

He went to Paris with an operatic composer in 1893. It was as valet that he went. He knew a man named Burton and went with him to Monte Carlo.

Re-examined by Mr Gill — He knew neither Wood, Allen, or Burton until he became acquainted with Taylor. He knew Lord A Douglas. The letters which Woods had possession of were supposed to be letters received by Lord A Douglas from Wilde.

Mr Gill called attention to another part of Parker’s deposition at Bow street, and examined the witness upon it with the view to prove that there was no discrepancy in his testimony as a whole.

After a lengthened sitting the Court adjourned till tomorrow.