Compare Documents

London, May 22.

It was not Lord Alfred Douglas, but Lord Douglas of Hawick, with whom the quarrel occurred. The latter accused his father of sending insulting letters to Lady Douglas, because he (Lord Douglas) was one of Wilde's sureties.

The Marquis of Queensberry shouted out that he was anxious to renew the fight for £10,000, and, addressing the crowd, said he disowned his son.

Both were bound over in sureties of £500 each to keep the peace.

Wilde's trial is now proceeding.

Wilde is being tried on a charge of indecency in connection with Taylor, Parker, Woods and Shelley.

The Marquis of Queensberry is attending the trial.

London, May 21.

Oscar Wilde is being re-tried to-day before a new jury.

Wilde is being tried on the charge of indecency with Taylor, Parker, Woods and Shelly.

The Marquis of Queensberry is attending the trial.

London, May 22.

The relations existing between the Marquis of Queensberry and his son (Lord Alfred Douglas), as the result of the Oscar Wilde scandal, continue strained; and in Piccadilly to-day the Marquis severely chastised his son.

Both were arrested, and subsequently admitted to bail.

Lord Alfred Douglas began the quarrel by calling the Marquis of Queensberry a liar and a slanderer.

The latter eventually knocked his son down, and a furious struggle resulted until the police interfered and separated the pair.

LATER.

It was not Lord Alfred Douglas, but Lord Douglas of Hawick, who quarrelled with his father the Marquis of Queensberry, in Piccadilly.

Lord Douglas accused his father of sending insulting letters to Lady Douglas because he was one of Wilde's sureties. Lord Queensberry shouted out that he was anxious to renew the fight for £10,000; and addressing the crowd he said be disowned his son.

Both the disputants were bound over, in sureties of £500 each, to keep the peace.

February 24.

Oscar Wilde's case has been adjourned.

The charge against him in conjunction with Shelley has been withdrawn, as there was no corroborative evidence.

OSCAR WILDE CONVICTED

London, May 25.

The trial of Oscar Wilde concluded to-day.

The summing up of the Judge occupied three hours, and the jury were absent two hours in considering their verdict.

At the end of that time they returned with a verdict of guilty on all counts.

His Honor, in sentencing the prisoners Wilde and Taylor, spoke with great emotion. He said that to his mind the verdict was a correct one, beyond all shadow of doubt, and it-appeared to him useless to address the prisoners, who were evidently dead to all sense of shame. The case was the worst of its kind he had ever had before him; and in passing the most severe sentence the law permitted, he regretted that it was totally inadequate to the dastardly nature of the offence.

He then sentenced each of the prisoners to two years' hard labour.

Taylor left the dock with a firm step, but Wilde appeared haggard and dazed.

London, May 26.

Wilde after being sentenced appeared quite dazed and horror-struck.

In his despair he weakly muttered a request to be permitted to address the Court, but this was unheeded, and the warders hurried him off to his cell.

During the trial Wilde, who appeared to be suffering from weakness, was allowed to remain seated in the witness-box while giving evidence on his own behalf.

He said he always understood Taylor to be a respectable man, and, referring to his association with him, said the reason for the friendship was because he personally liked praise, and lionising was delightful to him.

Sir Edward Clark, Q.C., counsel for the accused, declared that the witnesses were blackmailers, and that it was impossible to believe them.

The jury asked whether it was intended to arrest Lord Alfred Douglas.

The Judge replied that he was not aware of the intention of the police, but in any case it did not affect the present trial.

The jury thought that if Wilde's letter showed him to be guilty, the guilt applied equally to Lord Alfred Douglas.

His Honor concurred in this opinion, but added that the suspicion of the jury that the son of the Marquis of Queensberry was being allowed to escape owing to his connections was both unfounded and impossible.

London, May 27.

The Marquis of Queensberry and his two sons Lord Alfred Douglas and Lord Douglas of Hawick were all present at the close of the trial of Wilde and Taylor.

Our London correspondent gives the following interesting particulars concerning the above horrible case. Writing under date of April 12th, he says:—Though the public owes a debt of gratitude to the Marquis of Queensberry for branding the High Priest of a cult which has been a black disgrace to London for the last fifteen years, the less said about his motives the better. The role of affectionate father resolved at all costs to save his son from the clutches of a foul fiend does not exactly suit. In the words of Lord Douglas of Hawick, "My father has persecuted us ever since I can remember. Scandal after scandal has been heaped upon us till I feel utterly unable to hold up my head." Lord Queensberry disliked Oscar Wilde the first time he met him, and later intervened spasmodically in the family affairs (as he was in the habit of doing from time to time) to stop Lord Alfred's acquaintance with him. The sons Lord Percy and Alfred stood by their mother, who had divorced the estimable Q. for particularly objectionable conduct some time previously. They repudiated their father's authority, and his interference re Oscar Wilde merely aggravated Lord Alfred's friendship for the apostle of "culchah." Moreover, not content with defying his erratic parent (which probably wouldn't have mattered much), Lord Alfred chaffed him and scoffed at him. In reply to an indignant epistle calling Oscar unpleasant names, the son wired "Oh! you funny little man," whilst Oscar himself calmly ignored the Marquis.

This treatment not unnaturally turned Lord Queensberry's smouldering dislike into active malignity. He went about raving against Oscar, and the latter having many enemies and having grown careless with immunity, awkward evidence was soon in his lordship's possession. The statements the Marquis made everywhere became very serious but for "Old Q." being a notorious "crank," Wilde couldn't possibly have ignored them as long as he did.

The scene on the premier of "The Importance of Being Earnest" brought things to a head. Mr Alexander expected Oscar to take Lord Queensberry and his bouquet of vegetables as a joke to be skillfully turned against the joker. But Oscar seemed terrified, sent for the police, and had every entrance strictly guarded. The actors and actresses were amazed.

Two days later a very influential personage in the art world intimated to Oscar that Lord Queensberry's mouth must be stopped. His allegations were too specific to be ignored. Mr Wilde thereupon pledged himself to take action at the first opportunity.

This was the time to bolt or rather to "leave England for an indefinite period." Oscar neglected the opportunity. His conceit and egotism were colossal. He had turned many awkward corners in the past. Mother wit and brazen impudence must enable him to negotiate this one.

Lord Queensberry like "brer Rabbit" lay low. The proceedings at the Police Court reassured Oscar greatly. It was rumoured the defence meant to rely on the "Priest and the Acolyte," and the "Portrait of Dorian Gray" chiefly, "and they," as Oscar said to "Boysey" (Lord Alfred Douglas) "wont settle us."

THE ARREST

Wilde's explanation of his collapse is that he could not prove his case without putting Lord Alfred Douglas in the box against his parent, and this he declined to do. "I prefer to bear whatever ignominy and shame may result from my prosecuting Lord Queensberry myself."

The new Public Prosecutor lost no time in following up the verdict. Within three hours the police, Sir Jas. Ingham (Chief Magistrate at Bow street), the Home Secretary and the aforesaid official had reviewed the depositions, and at 2 p.m. "Oscar Wilde is wanted by the police" had been wired to every station in the Metropolis.

The morning papers thus describe the arrest:—

"At Scotland Yard, Inspector Brockwell handed the warrant to Detective-Inspector Richards and Detective-Sergeant Allen. They took a cab to the Cadogan Hotel, Sloane street, arriving at 6.20.

"To the hall porter they said, 'Is Oscar Wilde staying here?' They were answered in the affirmative. 'Will you show us to his room?' they asked, notifying that they were police officers. The porter, somewhat flurried, summoned the waiter, who conducted the two detectives to Wilde's sitting-room, No. 53, where they found their man. In the room were two young men. Wilde was seated by the fireplace in a saddle-bag chair, calmly smoking a cigarette. He raised his enquiring eyes to the intruders. Inspector Richards said, 'Mr Wilde, I believe?' Wilde languidly responded, 'Yes! yes!' The floor of the room was strewn with some eight or nine copies of evening papers, which had evidently been hastily scanned and then thrown aside. Inspector Richards said, 'We are police officers, and hold a warrant for your arrest.' Wilde replied, 'Oh, really!' Inspector Richards added, 'I must ask you to accompany me to the police-station.' 'Whither shall I be taken?' enquired Wilde. 'To Scotland Yard,' replied the Inspector, 'and thence to Bow street.' 'Shall I be able to obtain bail?' plaintively said Wilde. The officer sternly replied, 'That is a matter for the Magistrate.' With a deep sigh he dropped an evening paper, and raising himself by the aid of the arms of the chair into standing position, he remarked, with characteristic nonchalance, to the officers, 'Well, if I must go, I will give you the least possible trouble.' Wilde then passed over to a couch, picked up his overcoat, and was assisted in putting it on by one of the young men present. Carefully he lifted and adjusted his hat. He grasped his suéde gloves in one hand and seized his stick with the other. Then he picked up from the table a copy of 'The Yellow Book,' which he placed in security under his left arm. Before departing with the police officers, he asked one of the young men present to go to his house and obtain some clean linen and forward it to the police-station whither he was to be conveyed. Then said he to the detective, 'I am now, gentlemen, ready to accompany you.'

"Detective Allen, acting upon his condescension, ran down the stairs and hailed a four-wheeled cab from the rank in Cadogan square. When the party came down to the hall, the porter, by force of habit, politely opened the door, while the waiter as politely showed them into the cab. It was about 6.45 when the departure took place. It was noticed that Wilde looked considerably flushed, but he did not appear in any way to have lost the arrogant self-possession which he displayed at the Court, and that he never for a moment relaxed the grasp of his arm upon 'The Yellow Book.' One of the young men referred to as having been in the room of the hotel—a sallow-complexioned young fellow, wearing a fur-lined coat and a silk hat—exhibited the intention of entering the cab, but, on a strong hint from one of the detectives, he desisted. The detectives and Wilde were now fairly seated in the growler. Detective Allen directed the cabman to drive by the shortest route to Scotland Yard. The driver accordingly proceeded by way of Cadogan square, and as he passed the cab rank he cried out to some of his brethren, 'I've got him inside.' The man was evidently animated by the full glory that he had captured a distinguished fare. The four-wheeler then proceeded by way of Hobart place, Buckingham Palace road and St. James's Park to Scotland Yard.

"Detective Allen alighted first, and Wilde came next. In alighting he missed the carriage step and nearly fell to the stone pavement. Quickly recovering his position and still retaining between his teeth the cigarette which he was smoking, he dived his hand into his pocket and pulled out some money for the purpose of paying the cabman. Detective Allen interposed, 'I'll pay.' 'No! No!' said Wilde, 'allow me, if you please,' but on being informed that it was a way they had at Scotland Yard of paying for the conveyance of prisoners Wilde returned the coins to his pocket. Wilde was then hurried by the two detectives into 'the Yard,' where he was detained for some time, and subsequently removed to Bow street. To that place he was conveyed at 8 p.m. in a cab. On the road Wilde smoked his cigarette and made divers enquiries of the detectives: Could he have a private cell? Would he be allowed to smoke? Might he order his food from outside the prison? At Bow street Wilde was placed like other alleged criminals in the station dock. The warrant upon which he had been arrested was read out to him. It charged him with indecencies with male persons on March 25th, 1895, and on divers other dates. Wilde, leaning on the side of the dock, smiling, made no reply to the charge. He, however, requested that the dates be repeated. He was searched according to the police regulations, and then conveyed to one of the ordinary cells of the station."

AT THE POLICE COURT

Oscar Wilde was brought up at Bow street on Saturday and charged under the eleventh section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act with felonious practices. The case had hardly begun before Taylor, the alleged procurer of lads for vicious purposes, was placed in the dock beside Oscar, having just been arrested. Mr Gill (for the Crown) said that the police had known of Taylor's infamous occupation for years but could never secure satisfactory evidence to lay him by the heels. Now, however, they thought they had all that was necessary.

Four witnesses were examined on Saturday, two brothers (Charles and William Parker), Taylor's landlady and Sydney Mavor. Charles Parker is a valet and William Parker a groom. Both are slight, fair young fellows and were in deadly fear. They evidently had been assured that there was no alternative save between the witness-box and the dock. Charles Parker deposed that when out of a situation in March, 1893, he went to the St. James' Restaurant one afternoon with his brother. They there met Taylor, who said Oscar was "a good man" (for money) and kind to youths. A dinner at a restaurant followed and a number of meetings in private, at which certain improprieties took place, and for which witness received money. William Parker and Mavor gave similar evidence.

It is right to state here that the charge at present alleged against Wilde is NOT (as most of the public imagine) the most serious which could be made. It is merely filthy, and the maximum penalty under the Criminal Law Amendment Act is two years. The papers talking about Oscar 10 and 15 years simply "dunno where they are." Of course, the more infamous charge may still be tabled. But at present the prosecution put forward nothing of the kind.

Taylor's landlady, a stupid old woman, evidently selected to wait upon him because of her denseness, described his rooms. He burnt quantities of pastilles, and the curtains in the drawing-room were drawn and the gas lit day as well as night. Young men were constantly coming to see Taylor. They usually drank champagne. Witness did not recognise the prisoner Wilde. To the best of her belief she had never seen him before.

Wilde heaved a sigh of relief.

"But you've heard of Mr Wilde?" enquired Mr Gill, taken aback.

"Never 'eard 'is name," replied the woman.

"Didn't you ever hear Parkins or Taylor mention him?" said Mr Gill.

"No, never," persisted the witness.

"Whom did they talk about, then?"

"They was allus going on about a man called Hosker."

"Oscar, you mean?"

"Yes, that's 'im." (Laughter.)

At the close of Saturday's proceedings, the case was adjourned till yesterday (Thursday), bail being refused. Mr Wilde was removed in "Black Maria" to Holloway Castle, in a cell whereof he has had abundant time to distinguish between the beautiful and the degradingly prosaic.

A UNITED FAMILY

Lord Douglas of Hawick stated to a reporter on Friday that "every member of our family, excepting my father, utterly and absolutely disbelieves the allegations of the defence concerning Mr Wilde." This, however, was promptly contradicted by his lordship's uncle, the Hon and Rev Lord Archibald Douglas, who, on behalf of Lady Queensberry and his sister, stated that they did "most certainly believe the allegations against Wilde, and repudiated all sympathy with his nephew's statement."

Between the police court proceedings in the libel case and the trial, Lord Queensberry sent Oscar a contemptuous message, advising him to bolt, but not to take Lord Alfred with him. If he did, the Marquis might follow, and shoot him. Oscar's reply was to go abroad at once with Lord Alfred and to send "Old Q." his address.

PUBLIC OPINION

Great is the power of the verdict of a British jury. On Friday morning last the plaintiff in the Queensberry libel case was "Mr Oscar Wilde," the "apostle of culture," and an undoubted leader of London society. Despite the rumours concerning his gross and fœtid immorality which have been freely current for over twenty years there were very few smart houses where he was not an honoured guest. To be quite just, certain well-known persons, as for instance Lord and Lady Bath and Mr and Mrs Gladstone, have never stomached him. But these exceptions were not numerous. Even as late as Thursday night Oscar was the hero of a big "crush." It was his last. Twenty-four hours later the reporters no longer prefixed the well-known name with "Mr." He became "Wilde," or "the man Wilde," or the "infamous Wilde."

The papers with one or two exceptions passed by the trial without comment. The Daily Twaddlegraph, which has on many occasions "gushed" fulsomely anent Oscar's "coruscating wit" and "undoubted genius," now dilated on his "spurious brilliancy, inflated egotism, diseased vanity and shameless disavowal of all morality." I preferred the tone of the Chronicle, which summed up the situation and its moral accurately thus:—

"For long past London life, or—let us say—as small and obscure section of it, has been under the shadow of a black cloud. Everybody has suspected and feared: nobody—no decent person—has known. There was some centre whence a most deadly infection spread; it was apparent in a certain class of literature. Now the jury has declared that even a man of unattractive character has done a public benefit in branding one of the most prominent figures in our drama, our literature, and a by no means 'unfashionable' section of society. Upon the genesis of this pose—upon the causes of this degradation of great natural abilities and talents almost amounting to genius—we will not dwell. Suffice it to know that as some return for the undamming of this putrid stream, our life—to go no step beyond the verdict of the jury yesterday—is rid for ever of a pestiferous poseur. 'Decadence' among us has received a death-blow, and the way has been cleared for an increased wholesomeness of life. Public opinion has been so sharply screwed up during the past two days that certain things in current art and literature, no less than in conduct, will be intolerable for at least a long time to come.

"One aspect of this sombre and dreadful case forces itself on the public view, and cannot be withheld from it. We seem for some unhappy hours to have been the shuddering witnesses of a bastard revival of society under the later Roman Empire, or of the dark background of the Italian Renaissance. That is a grave fact, which must be recorded, albeit we set it down with 'mourning and lamentation and woe.' The æsthetic movement has been dragged into the mud. Great names are associated with its earlier influences, names as great as those of Keats, and of Ruskin, and of Dante Gabriel Rossetti, and as pure and high as the name of Christina Rossetti. But all things—even the noblest—are subject to contamination, and we must bear, with what patience we may, the feeling that essentially right and inevitable tendencies in art and in literature have been foully prostituted."