The Standard - Saturday, May 25, 1895

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Wills.)
THE TRIAL OF WILDE.

The trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment charging him with certain mis- demeanours.—The Solicitor General (Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C). Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted ; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travel Humphreys defended.

Sir E. Clarke, in his speech for the defence, said the area of the case was very limited now, and he would not go into the details of the evidence, but he would call his client, who would for a third time deny on oath the allegations made against him, and subject himself a third time to cross-examination, this time by another assailant. If the Jury felt that the evidence brought home to their minds with certainty the guilt of the Prisoner, he had no right for one moment to challenge their decision, and they ought to convict ; but they had a right to ask that the evidence should be Bound and trustworthy upon which they were invited to convict. It should be the evidence of facts ; it must not be suspicion, insinuation, or inuendo. He had now only to deal with the remnant ot a case, which had steadily broken down piece by piece, and it justified the hope which his client had entertained from the first, that ultimately his character would be vindicated by the verdict of the Jury. Broken down by being kept in prison, without being allowed bail, contrary to practice, and, he believed, to law, and by the worry, anxiety, and the mental strain of three successive trials. Mr. Wilde would again enter the witness-box and on oath deny the charges ; and he trusted that the Jury, after they had heard him, and considered carefully the whole case, would acquit him.

Mr. Wilde was called, and allowed to be seated whilst giving evidence. In cross-examination, he said Lord Alfred Douglas was now in Paris. He was in communication with him still. The two letters produced could not be taken as samples of the letters that he usually sent to Lord Alfred Douglas. The wording of the letters might be fantastic and extravagant, but it was quite decent, in his opinion. The Witness was questioned in detail relative to the literature aud the correspondence connected with the case, and he gave his explanation of the various phrases appearing in the correspondence, which was practically a repetition of what he said during cross-examination at the last trial. No definite charge was made against him by the Marquess of Queensberry. He went abroad with Lord Alfred Douglas after the committal of the Marquess of Queensberry for libel, and stayed away about a week. Being questioned as to his association with Taylor, Sir E. Clarke submitted that the learned Solicitor General was not entitled to ask the Witness for his opinion of another person ; he had only a right to cross-examine as to facts. — The Judge declined to interpose, observing that the stage of the cross-examination made discussion on the point unnecessary. — Witness had put to him the names of several young men with whom it was alleged he had dined, and he was invited to explain the reasons for such associations. — Sir E. Clarke, interposing, submitted that the learned Counsel was exceeding the limit of cross-examination, which ought to be limited to the persons alone in regard to whom charges were made. — The Judge was of opinion that the cross-examination was in order, the Witness being on the same footing as a witness in any other case, where the question as to his credit was involved. — ln re-examination, Witness said he had no idea that Taylor was an immoral man, nor had he heard that suggestion made, until these proceedings.

Sir E. Clarke, continuing his speech for the defence, said one of the most important features for comment favourable to the Prisoner was the fact that in the whole of the evidence there was not one single bit of independent corroboration. It was not enough to discredit the evidence of the Prisoner, the Crown must persuade the Jury to believe the evidence of their Witnesses if their case was to be established. The action of Mr. Wilde had not been in the least inconsistent with that of a man who, conscious of innocence, was prepared to face the charges of blackmailers. A guilty man could not have undergone the terrible ordeal of examination and cross-examination on three different occasions. He submitted that he was entitled to claim a verdict of acquittal for Mr. Wilde. If the Jury were compelled to give an adverse verdict, let them do so firmly. A brilliant promise had been clouded by these accusations, and a light and a reputation nearly quenched by the torrent of prejudice, which a few weeks ago swept through certain portions of the Press. He trusted that they would be glad to think in the future that their verdict saved that reputation from absolute ruin, and left the Prisoner — a distinguished man of letters, a brilliant Irishman — to live amongst them a life of honour and repute, and to give, in the maturity of his genius, gifts to literature of which they had only had the promise in his youth (applause).

The Solicitor General replied on behalf of the Crown, and had not concluded his address when the Court rose.