Compare Documents

The collapse of Oscar Wilde's case and subsequent arrest, says the correspondent of the 'New York World' on 5th April, have cause a sensation without parallel in London since the exposure and flight of the forger Pigott during the sitting of the Parnell Commission. Still, since Wilde's first day's testimony the result was foreseen. The expectation was that the jury would stop the trial and return a verdict for Lord Queensberry. Wilde's lawyers acted wisely in consenting to a verdict at the stage the suit had reached. If Lord Queensberry's witnesses had been examined the judge would have had no recourse, but must have issues a warrant for Wilde's arrest on a charge entailing as a maximum a penalty of twenty years' imprisonment, but upon the evidence already unfolded, if Wilde is convicted, it can only be of a misdemeanor, for which the maximum penalty is two years' imprisonment. Wilde looked a changed man this morning as he slunk into the court buildings. His complexion was ghastly, and altogether he had the aspect of a man who had passed a wakeful and anxious night. To an interviewer Wilde stated, in a nervous tone quite unlike his flippant audacity as a witness, that he had withdrawn from the case to spare Lord Alfred Douglas the pain of testifying against his father, adding that he willingly sacrificed himself for his friend. That was the hollowest "bluff." The truth is that Wilde's chief lawyer, Sir Edward Clarke, decided after the close of Thursday's proceedings to withdraw from the suit. This decision was immediately communicated to Oscar, hence the restless, hopeless night he passed. Wilde's lawyers say that up to that time he had never evinced the slightest appreciation of the enormity of the accusations against him. It was only when the imminent prospect of his taking Lord Queensberry's place in the dock dawned upon him that he lost his self-command The mass of testimony ready to be given against him, as foreshadowed by Lord Queensberry's counsel, took Wilde completely back. The 'Word's' correspondent hears that this testimony was tendered by the police to Lord Queensberry's lawyers, it having accumulated during their investigations. They had planned a public prosecution if the case had proceeded. It is rumored that one of the reasons why Sir Edward Clarke decided to stop the trial was that to go on would have involved the disclosure of the names of distinguished personages, but this story is discredited. If Wilde had escaped to the Continent he would have been safe from arrest, as he could not have been extradited under the charge. It was reported he had fled, but he was seen in Chelsea at 4 p.m. to-day, and was arrested by 7 p.m. Mrs Wilde, who is distracted with grief at the turn affairs have taken, has about £500 a year of her own. For the last three years she has received no financial help from her husband.

Ever since the Police Court proceedings the bookings for both Wilde's pieces have steadily declined. The London public will never tolerate the performance of any more of his plays. Thus his principal means of livelihood is gone, and as he lived very extravagantly he has nothing from the large income he has had for some years.

FLIGHT PROJECTED.

A later London cable says:—"Oscar Wilde was arrested by a detective of Scotland Yard this afternoon on charges growing out of his own evidence given in the libel suit against Lord Queensberry, which was decided against the dramatist to-day. The warrant was issued on the application of Sir George Lewis on behalf of the Public Prosecutor. After the trial this afternoon Wilde went to the Westminster Bank, where he drew out the funds to his account, after which he was constantly shadowed. He returned to his hotel, accompanied by Lord Alfred Douglas, only remaining a few minutes, after which they drove off to Ely place, and thence to the Cadogan Hotel, where they vanished. The Scotland Yard authorities issued descriptions of Wilde, and spread them over the city, and he was captured before he could get out to the country, as was evidently his intention. He was taken to Scotland Yard and locked up; then he was taken to Bow street and placed in the dock. At the police station he stood with his hands in his pockets while the charge against him was being taken. The police inspector then read the charge aloud, and asked Wilde if he had anything to say, adding the usual warning that anything he said might be used against him. The prisoner, apparently indifferent, made no reply. He was then searched, after which he was locked in a cell. Subsequently Lord Alfred Douglas went to the police station and inquired whether Wilde would be admitted to bail. The police inspector explained that Wilde was arrested for a criminal offence, which did not allow of bail being accepted until he had been arraigned in court. Lord Alfred seemed greatly distressed by this information. Sworn informations have been lodged against several persons mentioned in the trial, some of whose names were not made public. They will be arrested."

WILDE'S EXPLANATION.

The 'Evening News' to-day received the following letter from Oscar Wilde, written upon note paper of the Holborn Hotel:—"It would have been impossible for me to have proved my case without putting Lord Alfred Douglas in the witness-box against his father. He was extremely anxious to go into the witness-box but, I would not let him. Rather than put him in so painful a position I determined to withdraw from the case and bear upon my own shoulders whatever ignominy and shame might result from my prosecution of the Marquis of Queensberry."—Oscar Wilde.

LONDON, April 5.

The hearing of the charge against the Marquis of Queensberry of criminally libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde was resumed this morning at the Central Criminal Court, before Mr. Justice Henn Collins. The defence was a justification of the libel. The counsel for the prosecution were Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys. Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C. F. Gill, Q.C., and Mr. A. Gill appeared for Lord Queensberry; while Mr. Besley, Q.C., and Mr. Monckton watched the case for Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis.

The public galleries were again crowded, the greatest interest being shown in the proceedings. His lordship took his seat at half-past ten. Mr. Oscar Wilde was not present when Mr. Carson rose to resume his speech for the defence.

Mr. Carson said that at the adjournment yesterday he had dealt as fully as he intended to deal with the question of Wilde's connection with the literature that had been produced in this case, and also with the two letters that had been read, and he almost hoped that he had sufficiently demonstrated upon these matters, which were not really in dispute, that Lord Queensberry was absolutely justified in bringing to a climax, in the way that he did, the question of the connection between Mr. Oscar Wilde and his son. He had, unfortunately, a more powerful part of the case now to approach. It would be his painful duty to bring before the jury those young men, one after another, to tell their tale. It was, of course, even for an advocate, a distasteful task; but let those who were inclined to condemn these men for allowing themselves to be dominated, misled, and corrupted by Oscar Wilde remember the relative position of the two parties, and that they were men more sinned against than sinning. He was not going in great detail to criticise the evidence of Wilde with regard to the several transactions as to which he crossexamined him. There was a general observation applicable to all the cases. There was a startling similarity between each of them, on Wilde's own admission, which must lead the jury to draw the most painful conclusions. There was the fact that in not one of these cases were the parties upon an equality with Wilde in any way. They were not educated parties such as he would naturally associate with, they were not his equal in years, and there was a curious similarity between the ages of each of them. Mr. Wilde said that there was something beautiful and charming about youth that led him to adopt the course he did, but was he unable to find more suitable companions who were at the same time young among the youths of his own class? The thing was absurd. His excuse in the box was only a travesty of what was the reality of the matter. Who were these young men? They were out of employment, and of their antecedents Wilde professed to know nothing. All of them were from 18 to 20 years of age, or thereabouts, and in the manner of their introduction to Wilde and his subsequent treatment of them all were in the same category, leading to the same conclusion, that there was something unnatural and what might not ordinarily be expected in the relations between them. Parker was a gentleman's servant out of employment. He and his brother were in a restaurant in Piccadilly and were met by Taylor, and when a day or two later Wilde gave Taylor a dinner on his birthday, telling him to bring any friends he liked, what an idea he must have had of Wilde's taste when he brought a groom and a valet! If that one fact was true-and the main features had been admitted by Wilde-why did Taylor speak to those young men at all, and why did he bring them to dine with Wilde? There could be no explanation of these matters but the one that Taylor was the procureur for Wilde. They would hear from Parker, when he came to tell his unfortunate story, that he was poor, out of place, and fell a victim to Wilde. He would tell them that on the first evening they met Wilde addressed him-the valet-as Charlie, and that he addressed this distinguished dramatist, whose name was being spoken everywhere in London as the author of a most successful play, as Oscar. He did not wish to say anything about Wilde's theories of putting an end to social distinctions. It might be a very noble and generous instinct in some people to wish to level down all social barriers; but one thing that was plain in this case was that Wilde's conduct was not regulated by any very generous instincts towards these young men. If he wanted to assist Parker was it of benefit or a man in Wilde's position in society and literature to take him to a magnificent dinner and prime him with the best champagne? All the ridiculous excuses of Wilde would not bear a moment's examination. Wilde pretended that, the whole of these dinners and lunches were mere generous actions on his part. He gave no explanation of why he had that suite of rooms at the Savoy Hotel. It was a large hotel, and Wilde had no difficulty in taking Parker into his rooms, where he treated him with whiskey and sodas, and some of that iced champagne which his doctor forbade Wilde to have, and so worked him up to what followed. There had been no open scandal at the Savoy Hotel; but a man could not live that kind of life without gossip going abroad, and reports being circulated in the circles in which he mixed. After they had heard the evidence from the Savoy Hotel they could wonder, not that the gossip reached Lord Queensberry's ears, but that the man Wilde had been tolerated for years in Society as he had. He referred to the youth Parker, who was coming there with the greatest reluctance, and was now earning for himself a good character in the country, and Wilde's dealings with the boy Conway.

Here came a sensational surprise. Sir Edward Clarke plucked Mr. Carson by the gown, and the indulgence of the court was craved while counsel consulted. Sir Edward and his junior, Mr. Mathews, had both been out of the court for an interval before this surprise came. After a few moments whispering Mr. Carson retained his seat, and Sir Edward Clarke rose and said: Will your lordship allow me to interpose and make a statement, which is, of course, made under a feeling of very grave responsibility? My learned friend Mr. Carson yesterday addressed the jury upon the question of the literature involved in this case, and upon the inferences to be drawn from admissions made with regard to the letters read yesterday my learned friend began his address by saying that he hoped the need of having the jury deal with those details could be avoided. I think it must have been present to your mind that the representatives of Mr. Oscar Wilde have before them in this case a very terrible anxiety. They could not conceal from themselves the inferences which might be drawn might not improperly induce the jury to say that when Lord Queensberry used the words "posing as a --" he was using words for which there was a sufficient justification for a father to use. That in our view might not be an improbable result of that part of the case. I and my learned friends who are with me had to look forward to this-that a verdict given in favour of the defendant upon that point might be regarded as a finding with regard to all parts of the case. The position we stood in was that, in view of the finding of a verdict, we would be going through long evidence dealing with matters of a most appalling character. In these circumstances, I hope your lordship will think I am taking the right course of action. Having regard to what has been already said in respect of the literature and of the letters, I feel that I could not resist a verdict of not guilty in this case-not guilty, that is, having reference to the words "posing as --." In these circumstances I hope your lordship will think that I am not going beyond the bounds of duty, and that I am doing something to save and to prevent what would be a most terrible task, however it might close, if I now interpose to say that, on behalf of Mr. Oscar Wilde, I would ask to withdraw from the prosecution. If your lordship does not think that at this time of the case, and after what has taken place, I ought to be allowed to do this, I am prepared to submit to a verdict of not guilty, having reference-if to any part of the particulars-to that part of the particulars which is connected with the publication of "Dorian Gray" and with the publication of the Chameleon. I trust, my lord, that that may make an end of the case.

Mr. Carson: I do not know that I have any right whatever to interfere in any way with this application my learned friend has made. I can only say, as far as Lord Queensberry is concerned, that if there is a plea of not guilty, a plea which involves that he has succeeded in his plea of justification, I am quite satisfied. Of course my learned friend will admit we must succeed upon the plea in the manner in which he has stated, and that being so, it rests entirely with your lordship as to whether the course suggested by my learned friend is to be taken.

His lordship: Inasmuch as the prosecutor in this case is prepared to acquiesce in a verdict of not guilty against the accused, I do not think it is any part of the function of the judge or jury to insist on going through prurient details which can have no bearing upon a matter already concluded by the assent of the prosecutor to an adverse verdict. But as to the jury putting any limitation upon the verdict of justification, the justification is one which is a justification of the charge, which is "posing as - -." If that is justified, it is justified-if it is not, it is not; and the verdict of the jury upon it must be guilty or not guilty. I understand the prosecutor to assent to a verdict of not guilty. There can be no terms, and no limitations. The verdict must be guilty or not guilty. I understand him to assent to a verdict of not guilty, and of course the jury will return that.

Mr Carson: Of course the verdict will be that the plea of justification is proved, and that the words were published for the public benefit.

Sir E. Clarke: The verdict is not guilty. His lordship: The verdict is "not guilty," but it is arrived at by that process.

The jury then returned a verdict accordingly, that the justification was proved, and that it was published for the public benefit, and that the accused was not guilty.

The verdict was received with applause, and becoming known in the streets, there was a demonstration of approval on the part of a large crowd.

Mr. Carson: The costs will follow. May I ask that Lord Queensberry should be discharged? His lordship: Certainly.

When the formal announcement of his discharge was made the Marquis left the dock amid a salvo of applause, which the officials of the court only half-heartedly attempted to stop.

Mr. Wilde left the Old Bailey a few minutes before sir Edward Clarke made his withdrawal. He drove in his carriage, drawn by a pair of horses, to the Holborn Viaduct Hotel, where he has been lunching daily during the trial. Here Mr. Wilde, Lord Alfred Douglas, Mr. Wilde's solicitor, and one or two other gentlemen remained for some time in consultation.

On leaving the court Lord Queensberry's solicitor addressed the following letter to the Public Prosecutor:-

37, Norfolk-street, Strand. To the Hon. HAMILTON CUFFE, Director of Prosecutions. DEAR SIR,-In order that there may be no miscarriage of justice, I think it my duty at once to send you a copy of all our witness's statements, together with a copy of the shorthand notes of the trial.-Yours faithfully, CHARLES RUSSELL.

The Marquis of Queensberry said to a Press representative this afternoon:--

"I have sent a message to Oscar, saying: 'If the country allows you to leave, all the better for the country; but if you take my son with you, I will follow you wherever you go, and shoot you.' "

Letter from Oscar Wilde.

The Evening News states that it has received the following letter from Oscar Wilde, written on the notepaper of the Holborn Viaduct Hotel:-

"TO THE EDITOR- "It would have been impossible for me to have proved my case without putting Lord Alfred Douglas in the witness-box against his father. "Lord Alfred Douglas was extremely anxious to go into the box, but I would not let him do so. "Rather than put him in so painful a position, I determined to retire from the case, and to bear on my own shoulders whatever ignominy and shame might result from my prosecuting Lord Queensberry. OSCAR WILDE."

"An Ideal Husband," Oscar Wilde's society play, comes to a timely finish at the Haymarket to-morrow evening, and it is understood that the project for reviving it at the Criterion has been abandoned.

The name of Mr. Oscar Wilde has been removed from the playbills and programmes of the Haymarket and St. James's Theatres.