London Star - Tuesday, May 21, 1895

THE WILDE SCANDAL
TAYLOR CROSS-EXAMINED BY
SIR FRANK LOCKWOOD
Little Prospect of an Early Finish of the
Trial, which will Probably Last the
Afternoon Through

Taylor was brought into the dock about a quarter past ten, when Mr. Grain, his leading counsel, who has still a long row to hoe, also arrived for a final consultation. It begins to be doubtful whether the case will finish to-day. A meeting of all the judges has been convened for four o'clock this afternoon. Taylor's cross-examination by Sir Frank Lockwood is certain to be long. Add to this Mr. Grain's address to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, the Solicitor-General's address on behalf of conviction, and Mr Justice Wills' summing-up, said there will be very little margin left on this side of four o'clock. It is just possible, of course, that the jury may agree to a verdict without leaving the box; but after the experience of the last trial, when the jury was "out" all the afternoon, this does not seem probable.

Sir Frank Lockwood arrived, breezy and burly, before half-past ten. Mr. C. F. Gill and Mr. Horace Avory were already in their places, arranging with Mr. Cuffe, the Public Prosecutor, the last stages of their case. Wilde did not put in an appearance to-day, and when the proceedings began his counsel, who yesterday stuck to their places persistently, were not in attendance.

Mr. Justice Wills had no sooner taken his seat than Mr. Grain called

"ALFRED TAYLOR,"

and the prisoner, with an alert, light step, left the dock and passed across to the witness-box, where he was sworn. He deposed that he was now 33 years of age, and was the son of the late Henry Taylor, who was a manufacturer of an article of food in large demand. Till the age of 17 he was at Marlborough School. After that he was educated by a private tutor at Preston, near Brighton. In 1882 he joined a militia regiment with the intention of seeking a commission in the Army. In 1883 he came of age and succeeded under the will of his father to a fortune of £45,000. He thereupon abandoned his military ambition and began a life of pleasure in town, which ended in his being made bankrupt. In 1893 he was living in Little College-street, but it was absolutely untrue that there or anywhere else he committed any act of indecency with either Charles or William Parker; and he certainly did not procure either of these persons to commit indecencies with Oscar Wilde. All this he said in a clear, composed voice, standing with his hands on his hips, and his blue cloth jacket thrown open, in an easy unconcerned attitude. He did not change his position when Sir Frank Lockwood rose to cross-examine, but his utterance became more nervous and staccato, and he rocked uneasily from one foot to the other.

"Since you left the Militia," asked the Solicitor-General "have you had any

FIXED OCCUPATION?"

No, Taylor had done nothing but spend his money. At Little College-street he had only one bedroom. He had a good many visitors there.

Boys of 16? - I don't remember anyone as young as 16, except Mrs. Grant's children, who brought up my milk in the morning.

Did Charles Mason stay with you? - Yes, about a week, when I first went there, in 1892. He is now 26 or 27.

Did he sleep in the same bed? - Yes.

Were you on terms of affection with him? - I don't understand your question. If you mean did I commit acts of indecency, I did not.

I did not use that term? - I knew him very well. He was a great friend of mine.

How did you address him?- As "dear Charlie."

In writing to him did you send him your love? - Yes, I generally do.

When you are writing to a young man? - It depends who the man is. If he is a great friend of mine, I might say "With love," "Yours affectionately," or something of that kind.

And that is how Mason would address you? - I suppose so.

Do you remember going through a form of marriage with Mason? - No, never.

Did you not tell Parker you had? - Nothing of the kind.

No burlesque ceremony? - No, nothing.

Had you articles of women's dress there? - Only an Eastern costume.

A woman's costume? - It was made for a woman. I wore it.

On what occasions? - At fancy dress balls, at the carnivals at Olympia, at Covent Garden, and at Queen's-gate Hall.

You

DRESSED AS A WOMAN?

- Hardly that. I wore knickerhockers and stockings under a long open cloak.

And a woman's wig? - No, the wig was made for a ball to which I went dressed as Dick Whittington.

Women's stockings? - Yes.

Asked how many different men had shared his bedroom, the witness with some hesitation recalled the names of Mason, the two Parkers, and Sidney Mavor. Then he stopped. Being pressed by the Solicitor-General he added the name of Harrington. Sir Frank Lockwood continued to urge him to disclose a complete list of his acquaintance, and he asked, "Must I mention my other friend's name?" "Yes," said the Solicitor-General, in a tone which showed he meant it.

"May I not write it down on a piece of paper?"

"No! We will have no names kept back."

"I would rather write it down."

His lordship here quietly interposed, "If you write it I shall read it out. I don't approve of mystery in cases of this kind. It is sometimes done good-naturedly, and great mischief is caused. It is supposed that there is some kind of mystery, and that judge and everybody else are in

A KIND OF CONSPIRACY.

We will have nothing of that kind."

The witness next succeeded in remembering the name of Ernest Macklin. He met him first at his mother's house. Must he mention where it was?

"No," said the Solicitor-General, "we will spare her that."

Macklin had slept at Little College-street. So had Freddy Atkins. So had Harrington.

And Martin? - No, never.

Can't you remember any others? - I'm trying to think. Perhaps you can assist me if you have the names.

Harrington introduced the Parkers to you? - He did.

Is he here? - I don't know.

"Call him," commanded the Solicitor-General with his finest brigadier-general air, and the shouts of the ushers promptly evoked a dark, good-looking young fellow with crisp black hair and a small moustache. Yes, that was Harrington, said the witness, who seemed more surprised than pleased at seeing him. He first met Harrington at the house of a man named Court in July, 1892.

Did you take him the same night to a restaurant in Victoria-street? - Not the same night, I never took him at all. It was my friend.

Who is your friend? - Must I mention his name?

Yes, you must. - Schwabe.

That is the person you say introduced Wilde to you? - Yes.

Was it not a man named Harold Henry? - I think you are right. It was. I had dined with Schwabe and Harrington, but it was on another occasion.

Who is Henry? - A musician; a clerk in a music publisher's.

Have you slept with him? - Yes; he was staying with me at that time.

He was in your bedroom? - Yes; whenever my friends came to see me they always saw all the rooms because they were

RATHER INTERESTED IN THEM.

The witness denied positively that he had been guilty of impropriety with Harrington. Mr. Grain took objection to the question being raised with regard to a man who had not been called in the case, but his lordship held that as cross-examination to character the question was relevant.

Taylor adhered to his story that the Parkers were introduced to him by Harrington in the St. James's Restaurant bar, and that he invited them to his rooms because he found them "very nice."

In what way were they "very nice"? Nice-looking? - No; pleasant-spoken and amusing.

When you first met them did you mention the name of Oscar Wilde? - No, not on that occasion.

Did you say that Oscar Wilde had lots of money? - Not then.

When? - Nor at any other time. Because I don't think he had.

Did you say he was fond of boys? - I may have said he was fond of young people--that he liked their society. I did not put it in the way you mean.

He met the young fellows afterwards-at the Alhambra, the Empire, the Pavilion, and the St. James's Restaurant. The Solicitor-General did not ask how it came that valets and grooms out of place could afford to frequent such places, but he asked, "Who paid? These are not free institutions!"

"We all paid for ourselves," Taylor replied. "I was not in a position to pay for other people."

At this stage in the proceedings the

MARQUESS OF QUEENSBERRY

came into court for the first time since his own acquittal. He was given a seat in the pew reserved for friends of the Corporation.

As to the charge of procuring the Parkers, the Solicitor-General cross-examined closely to show that Wilde had never set eyes on the lads till Taylor took them to dine with him at the Soho restaurant.

There were four of you at table, Oscar Wilde, yourself, the ex-groom, and the ex-valet? - Yes.

Why did you take them? - It was my birthday. They were my friends. Charlie Parker wanted to go on the stage. I thought Oscar Wilde would be a useful man to help them.

Your friends of a fortnight? - "You might say three weeks," said the witness, who added that the birthday party was of a convivial character. They all laughed a good deal.

At the humours of the Parkers? - No, the humours of Mr. Wilde.

It was he who was amusing? - I supposed it amused him to amuse us.

Did you hear him say that Charles Parker was the boy for him? - No, I did not.

Did Charles Parker leave the restaurant with Oscar Wilde? - No.

Up to that point the story of the Parkers is true? - Yes, up to that point.

And from that point? - The Parkers went in with me into the St. James's and had drinks, and then both went with me to Westminster and slept at my place.

You say that distinctly? - I do.

Taylor continued that at that time he understood that Charlie Parker had an allowance from his father.

You did not know that

HE WAS PENNILESS?

- No.

Except for what he got from the gentlemen he met? - Ah, I didn't know of that.

When Taylor and Parker were arrested in the raid at Fitzroy-st. Parker was living at 72, Regent-st.

How came you to go to Fitzroy-st.? - It was by Parker's invitation. He had two tickets. I supposed it to be a night club.

Did you see men there dressed as women? - No.

Taylor had met a man named Marling at the Knightsbridge Skating Rink, and been introduced by him to a lad named Scarfe, whom he understood to have just returned from the gold diggings. He introduced Scarfe to Wilde at St. James's-place. He did not know him to be the son of a domestic servant. Marling was one of the men arrested at Fitzroy-st. He did not know him to be a man of notorious character. He had heard it since.

As the morning passed away Taylor entirely recovered his sang-froid, even to the point of fencing with the Solicitor-General, and it is a bold man who crosses swords with Sir Frank Lockwood under cross-examination. He disclaimed all knowledge of the introduction of Wood to Wilde. He was lunching at the Florence one day and saw Wilde, Schwabe, and Wood coming downstairs from a private room together. He remembered Wilde giving Wood money to go to America, but he did not think it was blackmail, or that the money was demanded for the return of Wilde's letters, which were of no value, he added.

"What is Mavor?" he was asked, and replied, "A gentleman. I dined with him the night I was introduced to Wilde." Asked to define "a gentleman," he said Mavor had private means. Mason wa also a gentleman in this sense, and in addition had

SHARES IN A NEWSPAPER

Witness had known him and Macklin for many years.

The Solicitor-general read the following extraordinary letter from Mason to Taylor:--

"Dear Alf, -- Let me have some money as soon as you can. I would not ask you for it if I could get any myself. You know the business is not so easy. There is a lot of trouble attached to it. Come home soon, dear, and let us go out sometimes together. Have very little news. Going to a dance on Monday and to the theatre to night. With much love. -- Yours always, CHARLES."

In truculent tones the Solicitor-General demanded an explanation of the words, "Come home soon, dear," used between two men. Taylor, with a nervous laugh, replied that he did not see anything in it. And, anyway, he was not responsible for the expressions of another. "It is the way you read it," he added.

"Then read it yourself, sir!" thundered the Solicitor-General, "and then tell me if that is the kind of language you exchange with the men who were on such terms with you that they slept in your bed?"

Taylor smiled foolishly, and repeated that he "did not see anything in that." The incident ended in a scene, for Sir Edward Clarke, who, as yesterday, was keenly watching the case in Wilde's interest, was betrayed into saying something inaudible to most of those in court, which the Solicitor-General took as an interference. Turning round upon the ex-Solicitor-General, Sir Frank Lockwood, with

UNCONCEALED BRUSQUERIE

exclaimed, "You are not engaged in this case!" It was, of course, true, and Sir Edward Clarke had nothing to say at a very irritating juncture.

The judge had something to say to Mar Taylor: "You are an old public-school boy," he began. "Was it not repugnant to your public-school ideas, this habit of sleeping with men?"

>"Not to me," the witness replied with calm and unblushing front. "Where there is no harm done I see

NOTHING REPUGNANT

It was allowed to go at that, and the witness returned to the dock in his other character of prisoner. It could not be said that the cross-examination had extracted much from him in the nature of direct admission.

Mr. Grain appeared to think that the prisoner had emerged almost triumphantly from a trying ordeal, and that the jury would have no further doubt adding his denials on oath to the inherent improbabilities of the case, in finding him not guilty of the charges which were supported only by the tainted evidence of men everyone of whom had left the witness box as self-confessed criminal. He relied, in short, on the undoubted fact that there is no direct independent corroboration.

"How could there be?" asked Sir Frank Lockwood, in beginning his review of the evidence for the prosecution. Of its very nature this thing was done secretly. The learned counsel treated it as an accepted fact that Taylor's rooms at Little College-st. were "a place taken in this secluded street as a place where debased persons congregated. He dealt in minute detail with the evidence, and asked for what honest purpose the ill-assorted dinner parties at Kittner's could have been brought together."

At half-past one the court adjourned for luncheon.