London Star - Friday, April 26, 1895

OSCAR WILDE.
LAST SCENE OF THE SENSA-
TIONAL TRIAL.
The Prosecution Put Forward Twenty-
five Counts in Their Indictment,
and Sir Edward Clarke Objects to Wilde
Being Asked to Plead.

The reporters who, in the discharge of an unpleasant duty of which they would gladly have been relieved, attended the trial of Lord Queensberry for libel, were so ill-advised as to criticise the arrangements made by the Under-sheriff for the discomfort of the press. To-day, at the beginning of the trial of Wilde and Taylor, his deputyship more than got even with his critics by keeping them waiting in queues outside the court till it pleased his deputyship to say they might scramble for the few and inconvenient seats set apart for their use in this worse of all possible courts. The court was densely crowded, but the arrangements, so far as the police and the regular court officials were permitted to retain charge of them, were very good. The Junior Bar, as usual, took up a large proportion of the limited space, and the rest of the very mixed audience was of an equally negligeable character.

NINE COUNSEL

were engaged in the case. Mr. C.F. Gill, Mr. Horace Avory, and Mr. A. Gill had charge of the prosecution, instructed by Mr. Angus Lewis on behalf of the Public Prosecutor. Wilde was defended by Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys. Mr. J.P. Grain and Mr. Panl Taylor appeared for the prisoner Taylor, and Mr. Leonard Kershaw held a watching brief for the witness Mavor. All the counsel were early in attendance, and Mr. Charles Mathews passed down through the dock to the cells, doubtless to see the prisoner Wilde, before the arrival of Mr. Justice Charles, who did not take his seat till fully half-past ten. The prisoners were at once brought into the dock. Wilde, looking almost haggard, and fallen away from his old fleshiness, wore the dark overcoat and suede gloves which have been his attire throughout these painful cases, and still carried his scrupulously-brushed silk hat. Taylor for the first time wore an overcoat, of light brown cloth with a collar of slightly darker velvet, and was suede-gloved like his companion. He was neatly groomed as ever, but his fresh-coloured effeminate face wore a much more serious expression than when he was first brought up at Bow-st. Wilde leaned heavily on the front of the dock, Taylor stood erect and looked curiously about the court, which he last saw from a very different point of view.

The Clerk of Arraigns, having read the principle of the

25 COUNTS OF THE INDICTMENT

against the prisoners, called upon Wilde to plead first.

Sir Edward Clarke at once rose to take a preliminary objection to his client being called upon to plead at all. He pointed out that on the counts under the Criminal Law Amendment Act the prisoners are competent witnesses on their own behalf, while on the counts for conspiracy they are not. He submitted, therefore, that they could not be asked to make one plea to both indictments. The defendants had moreover the right to elect whether they would be put on their trial on the charge of conspiracy, on which they could not give evidence, or on the charge under the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885, under which they are competent witnesses.

Mr. Gill, in reply, said the prisoners were charged with acts of gross indecency, on which they could give evidence. The only other charge against them was one of agreement as to committing or attempting to commit these misdemeanors. To give evidence on the first would undoubtedly lay them open to cross-examination on both, but there was no hardship, he said, in the prisoners being indicted on counts so nearly similar.

Sir Edward Clarke said he was not discussing hardships, but a point of law.

Mr. Justice Charles held that the counts could lawfully be joined together in the same indictment. Otherwise the Criminal Law Amendment Act would be held to override the ordinary criminal law, under which misdemeanors could undoubtedly be joined. At the same time he appreciated the inconvenience of the position.

Wilde was then called to plead, and in clear tones replied,

"NOT GUILTY,"

Taylor was next called upon, and rather shakily replied in the same words.

Sir Edward Clarke rose again and demanded that the prosecution should now elect whether they would proceed under the charge of indecency or that of conspiracy. While this second question was being discussed the prisoners divested themselves of their greatcoats and made themselves as comfortable as the circumstances would permit.

Mr. Gill replied that the question of election was not entirely for the discretion of the charges.

His lordship said it was impossible for him to put the prosecution for election. The fact that the dual indictment was inconvenient would not justify him in requiring the prosecution to abandon one section of it.

Mr. Gill rose to open his case to the jury.

With regard to the nature of the case he said it would be idle to suppose the jury had not heard or read much about it already, but be trusted that they would dismiss prior knowledge as far as possible from their thoughts, and approach the consideration of a very serious case with impartial minds. Mr. Gill then proceeded to remind the jury of the facts of the two previous trials with which the public is acquainted, and to analyse charges against the prisoners. He appeared to classify them as principle and procurer respectively, and made it a merit on the part of the prosecution that the way in which the indictment was drawn would permit them to [...] the charge of conspiracy as well as the charge under the Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Here his lordship instantly interposed. "No, Mr. Gill,

I DO NOT AGREE

to that at all." If they give evidence they may be cross-examined on the whole case, but they will only be entitled to give evidence in chief of the counts of the indictment under the Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Mr. Gill proceeded to describe Taylor's rooms, with their heavily draped windows, their candles burning on through the day, and the languorous atmosphere with perfumes. Here, he said, men met together, and here Wilde was introduced by Taylor to youths who would give evidence in the case. Analysing the indictment, Mr. Gill said the first nine counts referred to misconduct with the lads named Parker, the next three to Frederick Atkins, the next five to Alfred Wood, two more to incidents at the Savoy Hotel, two to the young man named Mavor, three to charges of conspiracy, and the last to Mr. Wilde's conduct in regard to the lad Shelley. Taking them in their order he roundly accused Taylor of corrupting the first-named lads, and inducing them to meet Wilde by assuring them that he was liberal in his payments. In regard to Taylor the most serious counts of the indictment charge him with attempting the actual felony with both the lads named Parker, whose evidence was abundantly corroborated. Mr. Gill then went over the facts already published in connection with the Queensberry suit and the police-court proceedings as to Wilde's relations with the Parkers, Atkins, Mavor, and Wood, and with the latter's alleged attempt to extort blackmail. There was a difference about Wilde's acquaintanceship with Shelley, whom he met in the shop of his publishers, Messers. Mathews and Lane, where he was employed. It was an acquaintance with

A LITERARY SIDE,

but it went through the same stages. Tamely concluding, when he appeared to be in media res, with an assurance that the evidence which he would call would justify the jury in finding the prisoners guilty on all counts of the indictment, Mr. Gill called his first witness.

Charles Parker is now 21 years of age, a slim, clean-shaven lad, with a fair, girlish face. He deposed that prior to his acquaintance with Taylor he was employed as a valet. His brother, William Parker, was a groom. He then proceeded to give once more in detail the process by which Taylor introduced himslef at the St. James's Restaurant, and the dinner at the Solleride in Rupert-st, at which Wilde was present. They had a private room. The table was laid for four, and was lighted by candles with red shades. There was champagne, followed by cognac, and incidents followed which the witness described. Wilde meantime gazed at him fixedly, showing now embarrassment or feeling. There were mentionable particulars of other meetings, after each of which the witness received a sum of money. Wilde leaned over the front of the dock to whisper a few sentences into the ear of Mr. Charles Mathews, who nodded and left the court. Almost

AS IF BY ACCIDENT

Mr. Gill elicted a piece of evidence against Wilde more revolting than anything which has yet been told in the case. When Mr. Gill went on to refer to the arrest of the witness and Taylor in the Fitzroy-sq. raid in August, 1894, Mr. Grain rose for the first time and quietly protested against the introduction of matter extraneous to the indictment. "Surely I have enough to answer!" he said. Mr. Gill said he only desired to show that after that incident the witness ceased his acquaintance with Taylor, and went into the country, where he enlisted in the Army. It was there Lord Queensberry's solicitor found him, when seeking evidence in support of the plea of justification.

When the court adjourned for luncheon Wilde looked positively ill. Taylor, however, was apparently more cheerful, and took some trouble to scrutinise carefully the people in the public gallery, as though looking for someone, There was an interval of half an hour during which Sir Edward Clarke had time to plan a

CROSS-EXAMINATION

which would in all probability indicate the way in which the case would end.

When Parker was re-called into the witness-box at two o'clock Sir Edward Clarke first ellicited from him that he enlisted in September last, in his proper name. Then counsel passed to the blackmailing incident mentioned at Bow-st., where the witness admitted having received £30 as his share of a sum extorted from a gentleman. "I do not ask the name of the gentleman,'' said Sir Edward, "but I do ask the names of the men who extorted the money and gave you the £30." It appeared that they were the men Wood and Allen, and that the money was extorted on the ground of the witness's improper relations with the man who was blackmailed, at Camera-sq., Chelsea, where the witness was living. Wood and Allen said they got £300 or £400 from the man.

Was that £30 the first sum of the kind you had received? - Yes.

What did you do with it? - I spent it in about two days.

The case is proceeding.