The Times - Monday, May 27, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT, May 25.
(Before Mr. JUSTICE WILLS.)
The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40, author, upon a charge of unlawfully committing acts of gross indecency with Charles Parker and Alfred Wood and with persons whose names were unknown, was resumed.
(Before MR. JUSTICE WILLS.)The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40 , author, upon a charge of unlawfully committing certain acts with Charles Parker, Alfred Wood, and Edward Shelley, and with persons whose names were unknown, was resumed.
(Before Mr. JUSTICE WILLS.)The trial of OSCAR WILDE, 40, author, upon an indictment charging him with unlawfully committing certain acts with Charles Parker and Alfred Wood, and with certain persons whose names were unknown, was resumed.
The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.
The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F.Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory conducted the prosecution; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.
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. Travers Humphreys defended.
The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C.F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.
The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.O.), Mr.C. F . Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions; Sir. Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.
The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C.F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avery appeared for the prosecution on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.
The Solicitor General (Sir F. Lockwood), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Treasury. Wilde was represented by Sir Edward Clarke, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys.
The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke and Mr. Charles Mathews defended.
The Solicitor-General (Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr, C.F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Wilde; and Mr. J.P. Grain defended Taylor.
Sir Frank Lockwood, Mr C F Gill, and Mr Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution, and the prisoner was defended by Sir Edward Clarke, Mr Charles Matthews, and Mr Travers Humphreys.
Sir Frank Lockwood, Mr C F Gill, and Mr Horace Avory appeared for the prosecution, and the prisoner was defended by Sir Edward Clarke, Mr Charles Matthews, and Mr Travers Humphreys.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL continued his address on the part of the prosecution. In the course of his speech there was a laugh in the portion of the Court set apart for the public, whereupon the Solicitor-General expressed his surprise that there should be any stray laughter, and
Mr. JUSTICE WILLS observed that such exhibitions of feeling on the part of people who had no business to be there, and who were only present for the purpose of gratifying their morbid curiosity were most offensive to him, and if there was anything of the sort again he would have the Court cleared.
Tho SOLICITOR-GENERAL referred in detail to the evidence which had been given on the part of the prosecution. With regard to the appeal which Sir Edward Clarke had made as the literary past and the literary future of Wilde, the Solicitor-General observed that with that they had nothing whatever to do. Wilde had a right to be acquitted if they thought he was an innocent man, but if on their consciences they believed that he was guilty of these charges than the jury had only one consideration, and that was to follow closely the obligation of the oath which had been imposed upon them.
Mr, JUSTICE WILLS then summed up, and in the course of his remarks said that the passing of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which made a defendant a competent but not compellable witness, was never intended to alter or to infringe upon the sacred old principle of English law that the prosecution must make out the charge against the accused. His Lordship commented upon the beneficial nature of the provision in that Act of Parliament enabling a defendant to be called as a witness, and went on to say that it would be a bad day for the administration of justice in England when juries ceased to take their direction on points of law from the Judge, or when they surrendered to any Judge in the land--no matter what his learning, experience, or ability was--their own independent judgement on the facts which were before them. It was the province of the jury to decide upon the facts. The learned Judge proceeded to refer in detail to the circumstances of the case.
The Foreman of the Jury said that the jury wanted to know whether a warrant against Lord Alfred Douglas was ever issued.
The foreman of the jury said they were anxious to know whether a warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas had ever been issued.
The Foreman of the Jury said they were anxious to know whether a warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas had ever been issued.
The foreman of the jury said they were anxious to know whether the warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas had ever been issued?
The foreman of the jury said they were anxious to know whether the warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas had ever been issued?
The foreman of the jury said they were anxious to know whether the warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas had ever been issued?
The Foreman of Jury said they were anxious to know whether a warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas had ever been issued.
Mr. Justice Wills replied that he could not say, but he should think not. They had not heard of it.
The Foreman of the Jury.--Or ever contemplated?
Mr. Justice Wills replied that he could not say. He did not think they need discuss that. The issue of a warrant depended always on what evidence there was. The mere production of letters was not sufficient; there must be evidence of some act.
The Foreman of the Jury.--If we are to deduce any guilt from those letters it would apply equally to Lord Alfred Douglas.
The Foreman.— If we are to deduce any guilt from these letters, it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the Defendant.
The Foreman: If we are to deduce any guilt from these letters, it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the defendant.
The Foreman—But if we are to deduce guilt from the letters it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the defendant.
Mr. Justice Wills said that they had nothing to do with that. The question which the Jury had to decide was whether Wilde was guilty of the charge made against him. His Lordship reviewed the evidence which had been given in the case, and pointed out to the jury the questions for their consideration. There was only evidence as to one of the counts in reference to St. James's-place.
The jury retired to consider their verdict at half-past 3 o'clock, and at 26 minutes past 5 o'clock they returned and asked a question in reference to the evidence as to St. James's-place.
Mr. JUSTICE WILLS read his note of the evidence of a witness on the subject, and
The jury retired again, but returned into Court about five minutes afterwards and said they found Wilde Guilty on all the counts except that which charged him is respect to Edward Shelley, upon which they found him Not guilty. That count, it will be remembered, was withdrawn from the jury by Mr. Justice Wills on Thursday.
The announcement of the verdict was greeted with a cry of "Shame" in a portion of the Court reserved for the public.
The defendant Taylor was then placed in the dock.
SIB EDWARD CLARKE asked Mr. Justice Wills not to pass sentence until next sessions, as there was a demurrer to be argued in reference to the indictment.
Sir Edward Clarke applied for a postponement of sentence until the next Sessions, on the ground that a demurrer had to be argued affecting the validity of the indictment.
Mr. J. P. GRAIN, who appeared for the defendant Taylor, said that the argument of the demurrer would affect Taylor equally, and he therefore made the same application as Sir Edward Clarke.
The Solicitor-General opposed the application. The passing of sentence now would not interfere with the argument of the demurrer.
MB. JUSTICE WILLS.--There was a verdict of not guilty.
SIK EDWARD CLARKE.--That does not affect it.Mr. JUSTICE WILLS.--What is the objection?SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--That the indictment is bad?
MR. JUSTICE WILLS.--What is the point?SIR EDWARD CLARKE.--The point is the joining of two sets of counts on one set of which the defendant could be called as witnesses and on the other could not.
Mr. JUSTICE WILIS said that, as the passing of sentence now would not affect the argument of the demurrer, be thought it his duty to complete the proceedings here.
MR. JUSTICE WILLS, addressing Wilde and Taylor, said that it had never been his lot to try a case of this kind so bad. One has to put stern constraint upon oneself to prevent oneself from describing in language which he would rather not use the sentiments which must rise in tho breast of every man who had any spark of decent feeling in him and who had heard the details of these two terrible trials. Ho could not do anything except pass the severest sentence which the law allowed, and in his judgment it was totally inadequate to such a case as this. The sentence was that each of them be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years.
On the sentence being pronounced there were cries of "Shame" and hisses in Court.