The Adelaide Observer - Saturday, April 6, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
TRIAL OF MARQUIS OF QUEENSBERRY
London, April 2.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry on a charge of libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known dramatist and litterateur, was commenced this morning. The proceedings excited great popular interest, and not only was the Court filled to overflowing, but immense crowds thronged the passages, for whom accommodation could not be found.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry on a charge of libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known dramatist and litterateur, was commenced this morning. The proceedings excited great popular interest, and not only was the Court filled to overflowing, but immense crowds thronged the passages, for whom accommodation could not be found.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry on a charge of libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known dramatist and litterateur, was commenced this morning. The proceedings excited great popular interest, and not only was the Court filled to overflowing, but immense crowds thronged the passages, for whom accommodation could not be found.
After the case had been opened by the formal proof of the alleged libel, evidence was called on behalf of the defendant. It was represented that Mr. Oscar Wilde had levied heavy blackmail for his gushing letters to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis. Some of these letters had been found in old clothes which had been given away.
After the case had been opened by the formal proof of the alleged libel, evidence was called on behalf of the defendant. It was represented that Mr. Oscar Wilde had levied heavy blackmail for his gushing letters to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis. Some of these letters had been found in old clothes which had been given away.
After the case had been opened by the formal proof of the alleged libel, evidence was called on behalf of the defendant. It was represented that Mr. Oscar Wilde had levied heavy blackmail for his gushing letters to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis. Some of these letters had been found in old clothes which had been given away.
The defence relies upon the revelations of these letters, which it is alleged warranted the writing by the Marquis of the letter upon which the charge against him is based.
The defence relies upon the revelations of these letters, which it is alleged warranted the writing by the Marquis of the letter upon which the charge against him is based.
The defence relies upon the revelations of these letters, which it is alleged warranted the writing by the Marquis of the letter upon which the charge against him is based.
London, April 3.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known litterateur and dramatist, was continued to-day.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known litterateur and dramatist, was continued to-day.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known literateur and dramatist, was continued to-day.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry on the charge of having criminally libelled Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known author and dramatist, was continued to-day.
The trial of the Marquis of Queensberry on the charge of having criminally libelled Mr. Oscar Wilde, the well-known author and dramatist, was commenced to-day.
Mr. Oscar Wilde, the plaintiff in the case, was submitted to a stringent cross-examination by counsel for the defence, with a view of showing that the book entitled "The Picture of Dorian Gray" - which was originally published in Lippincott's Magazine, and afterwards republished in book form — and other articles, which counsel for the defence connected with the plaintiff, inspired criminal practices.
Mr. Oscar Wilde, the plaintiff in the case, was submitted to a stringent cross-examination by counsel for the defence, with a view of showing that the book entitled "The Picture of Dorian Gray" - which was originally published in Lippincott's Magazine, and afterwards republished in book form - and other articles, which counsel for the defence connected with the plaintiff, inspired criminal practices.
Mr. Oscar Wilde, the plaintiff in the case, was submitted to a stringent cross-examination by counsel for the defence, with a view of showing that the book entitled "The Picture of Dorian Gray" - which was originally published in Leppincott's Magazine, and afterwards re-published in book form - and other articles in the same magazine which bore the nom-de-plume of "Chameleon," and which counsel for the defence connected together, inspired criminal practices.
The plaintiff, however, insisted that the true interpretation of the book and articles referred to were merely an expression of artistic faculty.
The plaintiff, however, insisted that the true interpretation of the book and articles referred to were merely an expression of artistic faculty.
The plaintiff, however, insisted that the true interpretation of the book and articles referred to were merely an expression of artistic faculty.
The letters to Lord Alfred Douglas which were produced, and the prose and poems, of which it was alleged that he was the author, might perhaps be characterised as extraordinary, but they did not justify an immoral interpretation.
The letters to Lord Alfred Douglas which were produced, and the prose and poems, of which it was alleged that he was the author, might perhaps be characterised as extraordinary, but they did not justify an immoral interpretation.
The letters to Lord Alfred Douglas which were produced, and the prose poems, of which it was alleged that he was the author, might perhaps be characterised as extraordinary, but they did not justify an immoral interpretation.
He admitted that he gave one of the alleged blackmailers a sum of money amounting to £21, and afterwards had lunch with him in his private room.
He admitted that he gave one of the alleged blackmailers a sum of money amounting to £21, and afterwards had lunch with him in his private room.
He admitted that he gave one alleged blackmailer a sum of money amounting to £21, and afterwards had lunch with him in his private room.
It was also elicited in cross-examination that the plaintiff admitted to terms of intimacy two lads who were not his social equals, and that he had given them expensive presents and considerable amounts of money at various times. The plaintiff's plea was that he did so simply on the ground that he liked them.
It was also elicited in cross-examination that the plaintiff admitted to terms of intimacy two lads who were not his social equals, and that he had given them expensive presents and considerable amounts of money at various times. The plaintiff's plea was that he did so simply on the ground that he liked them.
It was also elicited in cross-examination that the plaintiff had admitted to terms of intimacy with two lads who were not his social equals, and that he had given them expensive presents, and considerable amounts of money at various times. The plaintiff's plea was that he did so simply on the grounds that he liked them.
During the examination of Mr. Oscar Wilde his extravagant gestures and postures, and his epigramatic and paradoxical style of replying to counsel caused a vast amount of amusement in the Court.
During the examination of Mr. Oscar Wilde his extravagant gestures and postures, and his epigramatic and paradoxical style of replying to counsel caused a vast amount of amusement in the Court.
During the examination of Mr. Oscar Wilde, his extravagant gestures and postures, and his epigramic and paradoxical style of replying to counsel caused a vast amount of amusement in the Court.
At the end of the day the Court adjourned, the Judge granting bail to the defendant for his subsequent appearance.
At the end of the day the Court adjourned, the Judge granting bail to the defendant for his subsequent appearance.
At the end of the day the Court adjourned, the Judge granting bail to the defendant for his subsequent appearance.
London, April 4.
The plaintiff's cross-examination was continued this morning. He said he was acquainted with three men named respectively Parker, Atkins, and Taylor. Taylor had introduced five young men to him on separate occasions to whom the witness had given money. He was unaware if any of them were gentlemen's servants. It was one of his pleasures to indulge in the company of bright happy people.
The plaintiff's cross-examination was continued this morning. He said he was acquainted with three men named respectively Parker, Atkins, and Taylor. Taylor had introduced five young men to him on separate occasions to whom the witness had given money. He was unaware if any of them were gentlemen's servants. It was one of his pleasures to indulge in the company of bright happy people.
The plaintiff also said that he had frequently visited Taylor's rooms, and he was aware that Taylor and Parker had on one occasion been arrested, but he still continued his friendship with them.
The plaintiff also said that he had frequently visited Taylor's rooms, and he was aware that Taylor and Parker had on one occasion been arrested, but he still continued his friendship with them.
Wilde admitted that on one occasion Atkins had accompanied him to Paris. Taylor had introduced to him a youth named Ernest Scarp, who subsequently became acquainted with Lord Alfred Douglas whilst travelling to Australia. Wilde acknowledged that he had made presents to Scarp and also to a youth named Mabor, and when pressed to give his reasons said he supposed it was "because he liked them."
Wilde admitted that on one occasion Atkins had accompanied him to Paris. Taylor had introduced to him a youth named Ernest Scarp, who subsequently became acquainted with Lord Alfred Douglas whilst travelling to Australia. Wilde acknowledged that he had made presents to Scarp and also to a youth named Mabor, and when pressed to give his reasons said he supposed it was "because he liked them."
Counsel for the defendant read certain letters from youths, whose names had already transpired in connection with the case, which showed the writers to be in a poverty-stricken condition; some of the letters implored assistance, and begged for employment.
Counsel for the defendent read certain letters from youths, whose names had already transpired in connection with the case, which showed the writers to be in a poverty-stricken condition; some of the letters implored assistance, and begged for employment.
Other correspondence read in Court showed that the Marquis of Queensberry had endeavoured to stop his son from visiting Oscar Wilde. In reply Lord A. Douglas telegraphed to his father that "he was a funny little man." The Marquis then called at Wilde's house, when a furious scene occurred. Wilde denied the charges laid by the Marquis, and showed him to the door.
Other correspondence read in Court showed that the Marquis of Queensberry had endeavoured to stop his son from visiting Oscar Wilde. In reply Lord A. Douglas telegraphed to his father that "he was a funny little man." The Marquis then called at Wilde's house, when a furious scene occurred. Wilde denied the charges laid by the Marquis, and showed him to the door.
Other letters were read in the court which showed that the Marquis of Queensberry had endeavoured to stop his son visiting Mr. Wilde, but his son (Lord Alfred Douglas) wired to the Marquis stating that "he (Wilde) was a funny little man." The Marquis then called at Mr. Wilde's house, and a furious scene ensued. Mr. Wilde denied the charge made against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Other letters were read in the court which showed that the Marquis of Queensberry had endeavoured to stop his son visiting Mr. Wilde, but his son (Lord Alfred Douglas) wired to the Marquis stating that "he (Wilde) was a funny little man." The Marquis then called at Mr. Wilde's house, and a furious scene ensued. Mr. Wilde denied the charge made against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Letters read in Court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, when a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Letters read in Court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, when a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Letters read in Court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, when a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Letters read in Court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house when a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Letters read in court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, when a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
Letters read in Court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, where a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
The letters read in court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son from visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was "a funny little man." The marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, where a furious scene took place. The latter denied at the time the charges levelled against him, and showed the marquis the door.
The letters read in court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavouring to stop his son from visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was "a funny little man." The marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, where a furious scene took place. The latter denied at the time the charges levelled against him, and showed the marquis the door.
Letters read in Court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavoring to stop his son visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was a funny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, where a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charge levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
The letters read in court proved that the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavoring to stop his son from visiting Wilde. The son wired back to his father that Wilde was "a funny little man." The Marquis subsequently called at Wilde's house, where a furious scene took place. The latter denied at the time the charges levelled against him, and showed the Marquis the door.
The Marquis then wrote to his wife complaining that she was encouraging their son's intimacy with Wilde. Not withstanding all this, however, the friendship of Lady Queensberry and her son with the plaintiff remained unbroken.
The Marquis then wrote to his wife complaining that she was encouraging their son's intimacy with Wilde. Not withstanding all this, however, the friendship of Lady Queensberry and her son with the plaintiff remained unbroken.
London, April 4.
Mr. Oscar Wilde was further cross-examined to-day during the hearing of his charge against the Marquis of Queensberry for criminal libel.
Mr. Oscar Wilde was further cross-examined to-day during the hearing of his charge against the Marquis of Queensberry for criminal libel.
Mr. Oscar Wilde was further cross-examined to-day during the hearing of his charge against the Marquis of Queensberry for criminal libel.
Mr. Wilde admitted a close companionship with the young men introduced by Taylor. He had dined with them in fashionable cafés, and several had stayed for the night as his guests at his hotels; but he denied that there was anything objectionable in the proceedings. He was regardless of the circumstances of social inferiority in his guests provided that they amused him.
Mr. Wilde admitted a close companionship with the young men introduced by Taylor. He had dined with them in fashionable cafes, and several had stayed for the night as his guests at his hotels; but he denied that there was anything objectionable in the proceedings. He was regardless of the circumstances of social inferiority in his guests provided that they amused him.
Mr. Wilde admitted a close companionship with the young men introduced by Taylor. He had dined with them in fashionable cafes, and several had stayed for the night as his guests at his hotels; but he denied that there was anything objectionable in the proceedings. He was regardless of the circumstances of the social inferiority of his guests provided that they amused him.
The letters which Mr. Wilde had written to Lord Alfred Douglas were read, showing that the writer had threatened to shoot the Marquis if his Lordship attempted to thrash him. In the letters of the Marquis there were references to eminent statesmen, but they were only of a political nature.
The letters which Mr. Wilde had written to Lord Alfred Douglas were read, showing that the writer had threatened to shoot the Marquis if his Lordship attempted to thrash him. In the letters of the Marquis there were references to eminent statesmen, but they were only of a political nature.
The letters Lord Alfred Douglas had written to his father were read, showing that the writer had threatened to shoot the Marquis if his Lordship attempted to thrash him. In the letters of the Marquis there were references to eminent statesmen, but they were entirely of a political nature.
Mr. Oscar Wilde's case was then closed.
Mr. Carson, Q.C., in opening the case for the defence, declared that Mr. Oscar Wilde's protégés were among the most undesirable characters in London. The learned counsel commented on the omission of the prosecution to call Taylor, and affirmed that Mr. Wilde's companionships were absolutely irreconcileable with his claims to be an exponent of culture. The literature of the prosecutor alone justified the defendant in the extreme course he had adopted. More than that, Wood, the chief blackmailer, would prove the case for the defence up to the hilt.
Mr. Carson, Q.C, in opening the case for the defence, declared that Mr. Oscar Wilde's protégés were among the most undesirable characters in London. The learned counsel commented on the omission of the prosecution to call Taylor, and affirmed that Mr. Wilde's companionships were absolutely irreconcileable with his claims to be an exponent of culture. The literature of the prosecutor alone justified the defendant in the extreme course he had adopted. More than that, Wood, the chief blackmailer, would prove the case for the defence up to the hilt.
Mr. Carson, Q.C., in opening the case for the defence, declared that Mr. Oscar Wilde's proteges were among the most undesirable characters in London. The learned counsel commented on the omission of the prosecution to call Taylor, and affirmed that Mr. Wilde's companionships were absolutely irreconcileable with his claims to be an exponent of culture. The literature of the prosecutor alone justified the defendant in the extreme course he bad adopted. More than that, Wood, the chief blackmailer, would prove the ease for the defence up to the hilt.
Mr. E.H. Carson, Q.C., M.P., in opening the case for the defence, declared that Wilde's protégés were among the most immoral men in London. He commented strongly on the fact that the prosecutor had not called Taylor as a witness. Wilde's intimacies were absolutely irreconcilable with his claim as an exponent of culture, and his literature alone justified the action of the Marquis. Mr. Carson said that among other witnesses he would call Wood, the chief blackmailer, and would prove his case up to the hilt.
Mr. E.H. Carson, Q.C., M.P., in opening the case for the defence, declared that Wilde's protégés were among the most immoral men in London. He commented strongly on the fact that the prosecutor had not called Taylor as a witness. Wilde's intimacies were absolutely irreconcilable with his claim as an exponent of culture, and his literature alone justified the action of the Marquis. Mr. Carson said that among other witnesses he would call Wood, the chief blackmailer, and would prove his case up to the hilt.
Mr. E.H. Carson, Q.C., M.P., in opening the case for the defence, declared that Wilde's protégés were among the most immoral men in London. He commented strongly on the fact that the prosecutor had not called Taylor as a witness. Wilde's intimacies were absolutely irreconcilable with his claim as an exponent of culture, and his literature alone justified the action of the Marquis. Mr. Carson said that among other witnesses he would call Wood, the chief blackmailer, and would prove his case up to the hilt.