The Yorkshire Evening Post - Tuesday, April 30, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
TO-DAY'S LATE NEWS.
WILDE IN THE WITNESS-BOX.
POINTS IN THE CROSS-EXAMINATION.
A REPLY THAT ELICITED
A DEMONSTRATION.
The trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor was resumed to-day at the Old Bailey—before Mr. Justice Charles and a jury—the Crown case having closed at the hour of adjournment yesterday. There was again a large attendance of the general public, but the court was scarcely so crowded as heretofore. Pending the arrival of the judge, Taylor was brought into the dock for a consultation with his counsel, Mr. Grain. When Mr. Justice Charles took his seat Mr. Gill, on behalf of the Crown, withdrew the counts for conspiracy.
Sir Edward Clarke said that had he known these counts would be withdrawn he should have asked that the prisoners be tried separately, and he now asked for a verdict of not guilty, so far as the allegations related to conspiracy.
Mr. Gill observed that he had adopted this course to avoid any difficulty in the way of the prisoners giving evidence.
His Lordship, in acceding to Mr. Gill's application, said he could not consent to the adoption of the course suggested by the learned counsel for the defence.
Sir Edward Clarke replied that he did not wish to appear tenacious, and he would at a later stage of the case ask for a verdict of not guilty upon those particular counts.
Sir Edward at once began his address for the defence of Wilde. Having at the outset given, on his client's behalf, an absolute denial to the charges brought against him, the learned counsel animadverted on the conduct of a large section of the press, which, he alleged, was such as to prejudice his client and imperil the interests of justice. He accused the Crown counsel of having yesterday read the cross-examination of Wilde in the action brought against Lord Queensberry for the sole purpose of inducing the jury to believe that the man who wrote "Dorian Grey" was likely to commit indecency, but, as Coleridge said, a man should be regarded as superior to his books. There was no single page in "Dorian Grey" where the statement was made of any person being guilty of abominable sin. From "Dorian Grey" Sir Edward passed on to comment on the Chameleon, many of the passages in which, from Wilde's pen, he described as merely smart phrases. In that magazine his client saw the story of "The Priest and the Acolyte," a production which was a disgrace to the man who wrote it, to the editor who accepted it, and to everybody concerned with it, and Mr. Wilde became so indignant that he wrote to the conductor of the magazine declining to be longer associated with it. The literary controversy had nothing whatever to do with the questions before the jury. The controversy as to the morality of Shakespeare's sonnets was likely to last as long as the question of who wrote the letters of Junius, or as to the character of certain sonnets of Michael Angelo to one of his friends. He therefore asked the jury altogether to discard what had been urged against the prisoner in relation to "Dorian Grey" and the Chameleon. Coming to Wilde's association with the Queensberry family, he observed that prisoner was still a friend of Lady Queensberry, who divorced her husband.
Sir Edward Clarke replied that he did not wish to appear tenacious, and he would at a later stage of the case ask for a verdict of not guilty upon those particular counts. Sir Edward at once began his address for the defence of Wilde. Having at the outset given on his client’s behalf an absolute denial to the charges brought against him, the learned counsel animadverted on the conduct of a large section of the Press, which, he alleged, was such as to prejudice his client and imperil the interests of justice. He accused the Crown counsel of having yesterday read the cross-examination of Wilde in the action brought against Lord Queensberry for the sole purpose of inducing the jury to believe that the man who wrote "Dorian Grey" was likely to commit indecency, but, as Coleridge said, a man should be regarded as superior to his books. There was no single page in "Dorian Grey" where the statement was made of any person being guilty of abominable sin. From "Dorian Grey" Sir Edward passed on to comment on the "Chamleon," many of the passage in which, from Wilde’s pen, he described as smart phrases in that magazine. It had been said the story of the "Priest and the Acolyte," was a production which was a disgrace to the man who wrote it, to the editor who accepted it, and to everybody concerned with it, and Mr Wilde became so indignant that he wrote to the conductor of the magazine declining to be longer associated with it. The literary controversy had nothing whatever to do with the questions before the jury. The controversy as to the morality of Shakespeare’s sonnets was likely to last as long as the question of who wrote the Letters of Junius or as to the character of certain sonnets of Michael Angelo to one of his friends. He, therefore, asked the jury altogether to discard what had been urged against the prisoners in relation to "Dorian Grey" and "The Chameleon." Coming to Wilde’s association with the Queensberry family, he observed that the prisoner was still a friend of Lady Queensburry, who divorced her husband.
Sir Edward Clarke replied that he did not wish to appear tenacious, and he would at a later stage of the case ask for a verdict of not guilty upon those particular counts. Sir Edward at once began his address for the defence of Wilde. Having at the outset given on his client’s behalf an absolute denial to the charges brought against him, the learned counsel animadverted on the conduct of a large section of the Press, which, he alleged, was such as to prejudice his client and imperil the interests of justice. He assured the Crown counsel of having yesterday read the cross examination of Wilde in the action brought against Lord Queensberry for the sole purpose of inducing the jury to believe that the man who wrote "Dorian Grey" was likely to commit indecency, but, as Coleridge said, a man should be regarded as superior to his books. There was no single page in "Dorian Grey" where the statements made of any person being guilty of abominable sin. From "Dorian Grey" Sir Edward passed on to comment on the "Chameleon," many of the passages in which, from Wilde’s pen, he described as smart phrases in that magazine. It had bee said the story of the "Priest and the Acolyte," was a production which was a disgrace to the man who write it, to the editor who accepted it, and to everybody concerned with it, and Mr Wilde became so indignant that he wrote to the conductor of the magazine declining to be longer associated with it. The literary controversy had nothing whatever to do with the questions before the jury. The controversy as to the morality of Shakespeare’s sonnets was likely to last as long as the question of who wrote the Letters of Junius or as to the character of certain sonnets of Michael Angelo to one of his friends. He, therefore, asked the jury altogether to discard what had been urged against the prisoners in relation to "Dorian Grey'' and "The Chameleon." Coming to Wilde’s association with the Queensberry family, he observed that the prisoner was still a friend of Lady Queensberry, was divorced her husband.
Mr. Gill: I protest against any attack upon Lord Queensberry, who is not now represented. It is altogether irrelevant to say here that Lord Queensberry was divorced.
Mr Gill — I protest against any attack upon Lord Queensberry, who is not now represented. It is altogether irregular to say here that Lord Queensberry was divorced.
Mr Gill—I protest against any attack upon Lord Queensberry, who is not now represented. It is altogether irregular to say here that Lord Queensberry was divorced.
Sir Edward Clarke said that to hear his learned friend rebuking irrelevance was rather amusing. (Laughter.) In the case of Wilde v. Queensberry he (Sir Edward) and the learned counsel acting with him for Wilde took the responsibility of accepting a verdict of not guilty. It was perfectly clear that the jury then sitting would not have found Lord Queensberry guilty of a criminal offence For the course then adopted he (Sir Edward) was responsible, and he was here again to meet on his client's behalf a case which could not be properly tried at the former trial, but which could now be determined upon a proper issue. If Mr. Oscar Wilde had been guilty of the charges against him, would he have provoked investigation as he did, bringing an action for libel? It was said there was a species of insanity which caused men to commit unnatural crime, but what would they think of a man who, if he had been guilty of such offences, insisted upon bringing them before the world? He was confident that the evidence of his client would be a complete answer to the allegations against him.
Sir Edward Clarke said that to hear his learned friend rebuking irrelevance was rather amusing (laughter). In the case of Wilde v Queensberry he (Sir Edward) and the learned counsel acting with him for Wilde, took the responsibility of accepting a verdict of not guilty. It was perfectly clear that the jury then sitting would not have found Lord Queensberry guilty of a criminal offence. For the course then adopted he (Sir Edward) was responsible, and he was here again to meet on his client’s behalf a case which could not be properly tried at the former trial, but which could now be determined upon a proper issue. If Mr Oscar Wilde had been guilty of the charges against him would he have provoked investigation, as he did by bringing an action for libel? It was said there was a species of insanity which caused men to commit unnatural crime; but what would they think of a man who, if he had been guilty of such offences, insisted on bringing them before the world. He was confident that the evidence of his client would be a complete answer to the allegations against him.
Sir Edward Clarke said that to bear his learned friend rebuking irrelevance was rather amusing (laughter). In the case o’ Wilde v. Queensberry: he (Sir Edward) and he learned counsel acting with him for Wilde, took the responsibility of accepting a verdict of not guilty. It was perfectly clear that the jury then sitting would not have found Lord Queensberry guilty of a criminal offence. For the course then adopted he (Sir Edward) was responsible, and he was here again to meet on his client’s behalf a case which could not be properly tried at the former trial, but which could now be determined upon a proper issue. If Mr Oscar Wilde has been guilty of the charges against him would he have provoked investigation, as he did by bringing an action for libel? It was said there was a species fo insanity which caused men to commit unnatural crime; but what would they think of a man who, if he had been guilty of such offences, insisted on bringing then before the world. He was confident that the evidence of his client would be a complete answer to the allegations against him.
Oscar Wilde was then called from the dock and sworn. He answered the questions of Sir E. Clarke in subdued tones.
The learned counsel first took him through his academical career at Dubin and Oxford, and passed from this to his career as a dramatist and playwright.
Sir Edward: In cross-examination in the Wilde v. Queensberry case you denied all the charges against you. Was the evidence then given by you absolutely and entirely true evidence?—Witness: Entirely true evidence.
Sir Edward — In cross-examination in Wilde v. Queensberry you denied all the charges against you. Was the evidence then given by you absolutely and entirely true evidence?
Sir Edward—In cross-examination in Wilde v Queensberry you denied all the charges against you. Was the evidence then given by you absolutely and entirely true evidence?
Sir Edward Clarke—In cross-examination in the Wilde v Queensberry case you denied all the charges against you. Was that evidence absolutely and entirely true?
Sir Edward Clarke—In cross-examination in the Wilde v Queensberry case you denied all the charges against you. Was that evidence absolutely and entirely true?
Sir E Clarke—In cross-examination in Wilde v Queensberry you denied all the charges against you, Was that evidence absolutely and entirely true?
Sir Edward: Is there any truth in any one of the allegations of indecency which have been brought against you in this case?—Witness: There is no truth whatever in any one of the allegations.
Is there any truth in any one of the allegations of indecency brought against you in this case? There is no truth, whatever in any one of those allegations.
Is there any truth in any one of the allegations brought against you in this case? There is no truth whatever in any one of those allegations.
Is there any truth in any one of the allegations brought against you in this […]? There is no truth whatever in any one of those allegations.
Sir Edward — Is there any truth in any one of the allegations of indecency which has been brought against you in this case?
Sir Edward—Is there any truth in any one of the allegations of indecency which has been brought against you in this case?
Mr. Gill began his cross-examination much on the lines adopted by Mr. Carson in the former trial. The learned counsel quoted from a sonnet of Lord Alfred Douglas, in which occurred the line, "I am that love, that dare not speak its name." What was the nature of the love represented in that poem?
Mr Gill began his cross-examination much on the lines adopted by Mr Carson in the former trial. The learned counsel quoted from a sonnet of Lord Alfred Douglas, in which occurred the line—"I am that love, but dare not speak its name." What was the nature of the love represented in that poem?
Mr Gill began in cross-examination much on the lines adopted by Mr Carson in the former trial. The learned counsel quoted from a sonnet of Lord Alfred Douglas, to which occurred the line — "I am that love, but dare not speak its name." What was the nature of the love represented in that poem?
C. F. Gill, on behalf of the prosecution, began a cross-examination on the same lines as that of Edward M. Carson, Q. C., who defended the Marquis of Queensberry against the charge of libel. He quoted from a sonnet to Lord Alfred Douglas, in which occured the line: "I am that love, but dare not speak its name." Gill asked what was the nature of the love represented in that poem.
Wilde now gave with marked deliberation and emphasis the following answer: It is a love which is not understood in this century. It is the love of David for Jonathan—such love as Plato described in his philosophy—the beginning of wisdom. It is a deep spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect, and has dictated the greatest works of art. It is in this century much misunderstood. It is an intellectual affection between an older and a younger man. The elder man has had knowledge of the world, the younger has the joy, the hope, the glamour of life. It is something which this age does not understand. It mocks at it, and it sometimes puts one in the pillory for it. (Cheers in the gallery.)
Wilde now gave with marked deliberation and emphasisis the following answer:—It is a love which is not understood in this century. It is the love of David for Jonathan, such love as Plato described in his philosophy as the beginning of wisdom. It is a deep spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect, and has dictated the greatest works of art. It is in this century much misunderstood. It is an intellectual affection between an older and a younger man. The elder man has the knowledge of the world, the younger has the joy, the hope, the glamour of life. It is something which this age does not understand. It mocks at it, and it sometimes puts one in the pillory for it (cheers in the gallery).
Wilde now gave with marked deliberation and emphasizes the following answer: — It is a love which is not understood in this century. It is the love of David for Jonathan, such love as Plato described in his philosophy as the beginning of wisdom. It is a deep spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect, and has dictated the greatest words of art. It is in this century much misunderstood. It is an intellectual affection between an older and a younger man. The elder man has the knowledge of the world, the younger has the joy, the hope, the glamour of life. It is something which this age does not understand. It knocks at it, and it sometimes puts one in the pillory for it (cheers in the gallery).
His Lordship: I shall have the court cleared if there is again the slightest manifestation of feeling.
His Lordship — I shall have the court cleared if there is again the slightest manifestation of feeling.
His Lordship—I shall have the court cleared if there is again the slightest manifestation of feeling.
The judge: I shall have this court cleared if there is the slightest manifestation of feeling.
Mr. Gill took the witness through the evidence of the staff from the Savoy Hotel and the masseur, Mr. Bigge. He denied there was a word of truth in it.
Mr Gill took the witness through the evidence of the staff from the Savoy Hotel and the masseur, Mr Biggs. He denied there was a word of truth in it.
Mr Gill took the witness through the evidence of the staff from the Savoy Hotel and the masseur.
Wilde also gave the same general denials to the evidence of Charles Parker and Shelley. The latter, he said, used to write him morbid, religious letters. The witness Atkins had also given a wrong account of the circumstances under which they met. It was true Atkins and Schwabe went with him to Paris, but the account given of what took place there was untrue. It was grotesque and monstrous. Taylor's rooms in Little College Street, near the Houses of Parliament, were Bohemian. Taylor burnt pastilles there. He (Wilde) went there to smoke, chat, and amuse himself. Actors came there. Taylor was an accomplished pianist. Mayor was a pleasant, agreeable young man, and was his guest at the Albemarle Hotel in an ordinary way. Taylor was a young man of private means. He took the boy Alphonso Conway, whom he met at Worthing, a trip to Brighton. Conway slept in a room off his, divided by baize doors.
Wilde also gave the same general denials to the evidence of Charles Parker and Shelley. The latter, he said, used to write him morbid religious letters. The witness Atkins had also given a wrong account of the circumstances under which they met. It was true that Atkins and Schwabe went with him to Paris, but the account given of what took place there was untrue; it was grotesque and monstrous. Taylor’s rooms in Little College street, near the Houses of Parliament, were Bohemian. Taylor burnt pastiles there. He (Wilde) went there to smoke, chat, and amuse himself. Actors came there. Taylor was an accomplished pianist. Mavor was a pleasant, agreeable young man and was his guest at Albemarle Hotel in an ordinary way. Taylor was a young man of private means. He took the boy, Alphonso Conway, whom he met at Worthing, a trip to Brighton. Conway slept in a room off his, divided by baize doors.
Wilde also gave the same general denials to the evidence of Charles Parker and Shelley. The latter, he said, used to write him morbid religious letters. The witness Atkins had also given a wrong account of the circumstances under which they met. It was true that Atkins and Schwabe went with him to Paris, but the account given of what took place there was untrue; it was grotesque and monstrous. Taylor’s rooms in Little College street, near the Houses of Parliament, were Bohemian. Taylor burnt pastilles there. He (Wilde) went there to smoke, chat, and amuse himself. Actors came there. Taylor was an accomplished pianist. Mavor was a pleasant, agreeable young man and was his guest at Albemarle Hotel in an ordinary way. Taylor was a young man of private means. He took the boy, Alphonse Conway, whom he met at Worthing, a trip to Brighton. Conway slept in a room off his, divided by two doors.
Did you feel the affection you have described for these youths?—Oh, certainly not.
Did you feel the affection you have described for these youths? Oh, certainly not.
Did you feel the affection you have described for these youths? Oh, certainly no.
Further cross-examined: He knew that men dressed in women's clothes went to certain rooms in Fitzroy Street, and that Taylor was once arrested there. He (Wilde) knowing the men sometimes dressed as women on the stage, could not imagine what the police were at Fitzroy Street for.
Further examined — He knew that men dressed in women’s clothes went to certain rooms in Fitzroy street, and that Taylor was once arrested there. He (Wilde), knowing that men sometimes dressed as women on the stage, could not imagine what the police were at Fitzroy street for.
Further examined—He knew that men dressed in women’s clothes went to certain rooms in Fitzroy street, and that Taylor was once arrested there. He (Wilde), knowing that men sometimes dressed as women on the stage, could not imagine what the police were at Fitzroy street for.
Mr. Gill: And you saw no reason why the police should keep observations on Taylor's rooms in Little College Street?—Witness: I saw none.
Mr Gill—And you saw no reason why the police should keep observations on Taylor’s rooms in Little College street?
Mr Gill — And you saw no reason why the police should see observations on Taylor’s rooms in Little College street?
Sir Edward Clarke elicited in cross-examination that Atkins desired to go on the music-hall stage. He communicated that wish to Wilde, and obtained an engagement, the defendant purchasing for him his first song. The Allen letters he did not regard as of any importance.
Sir Edward Clarke elicited in re-examination that Atkins desired to go on the music hall stage. He communicated that wish to Wilde and obtained an engagement, the defendant purchasing for him his first song. The Allen letters he did not regard as of any importance.
Sir Edward Clarke elicited in re-examination that Atkins desired to go on the music hall stage. He communicated that wish to Wilde and obtained an engagement, the defendant purchasing for him his first song. The Allen letters he did not regard as of any importance.
Sir Edward: They were not prose poems?—Witness (smiling): Oh, no. They contained some slighting allusions to other people which I should have been sorry to see published. I know nothing of the Chameleon except that I was told it was to be a literary and artistic magazine.
Witness (smiling) — Oh, no; they contained some slighting allusions to other people which I should have been sorry to see published. I know nothing of the "Chameleon," except that I was told it was to be a literary and artistic magazine.
Witness (smiling)—Oh, no; they contained some slighting allusions to other people which I should have been sorry to see published. I know nothing of the "Chameleon," except that I was told it was to be a literary and artistic magazine.
Wilde returned to the dock. The prisoner Alfred Taylor was then called and examined by Mr. Grain. He said his age was 33, and his father formerly conducted a wholesale business which had now been turned into a limited liability company. He was educated at Marlborough, and was for some time in the militia, intending to pass on to the army, but after one training he resigned his commission. In 1883 he came into possession of £45,000, and had since lived a life of pleasure about town. The statements of Charles Parker alleged against witness were absolutely untrue.
The prisoner, Alfred Taylor, was then called and examined by Mr Grain. He said his age was 33, and his father formerly conducted a wholesale business which had now been turned into a limited liability company. He was educated at Marlborough, and was for some time in the militia intending to pass on to the army, but after one training he resigned his commission. In 1883 he came into possession of £45,000, and had since lived a life of pleasure about town. The statements of Charles Parker alleging against witness an attempted abominable crime were absolutely untrue.
The prisoner, Alfred Taylor, was then called and examined by Mr Grain. He said his age was 33, and his father formerly conducted a wholesale business which had now been turned into a limited liability company. He was educated at Marlborough, and was for some time in the militia intending to pass on to the army, but after one training he resigned his commission. In 1883 he came into possession £45,000, and had since lived a life of pleasure about town. The statements of Charles Parker alleging against witness an attempted abominable crime were absolutely untrue.
Cross-examined by Mr. Gill: He never went through a sham form of marriage with a man named Charles Mason. He had never accosted men at the Empire and at the Alhambra. He denied the statements of the brothers Parker as to what took place at his rooms.
Cross-examined by Mr Gill—He never went through a sham form of marriage with a man named Charlie Mason. He had never accosted men at the Empire and at the Alhambra. He denied the statements of the Brothers Parker as to what took place at his rooms.
Cross-examined by Mr Gill — He never went through a sham form of marriage with a man named Charlie Mason. He had never accosted men at the Empire and at the Alhambra. He denied the statements of the Brothers Parker as to what took place in his rooms.
Mr. Gill next questioned Taylor as to the incidents of the police raid in Fitzroy Street.
Mr Gill next questioned Taylor as to the incidents of the police raid in Fitzroy street. You were of one the men arrested? I was.
Mr Gill next questioned Taylor as to the incidents of the police raid in Fitzroy street. You were one of the men arrested? I was.
You were one of the men arrested?—I was.
And you had with you Charles Parker?—Yes.
How was Parker getting his living?—I understood he was receiving money from his father.
How was Parker, getting his living? I understand he was receiving money from his father.
How was Parker getting his living? I understand he was receiving money from his father.
You and Parker were discharged. Some were fined and some were bound over?—Yes.
You and Parker were discharged, some were fined and some were bound over? Yes.
You and Parker were discharged, some were fined and some were bound over? Yes.
Questioned as to the appointments of his apartments at Little College Street, Taylor said he had a censer there in which he burnt pastilles.
Questioned as to the appointments of his apartments at Little College street Taylor said he had a censer there in which he burnt pastilles.
Questioned as to the appointments of his apartments at Little College street, Taylor said he had a censer there in which he burnt pastilles.
Re-examined: The garment taken from the rooms by the police was an Oriental costume which had come from Constantinople, and had been obtained by him for a fancy dress ball at Covent Garden.
Re-examined — The garment taken from the rooms by the police was an Oriental costume which had come from Constantinople, and had been obtained by him for a fancy dress ball at Covent Garden.
Re-examined—The garment taken from the rooms by the police was an Oriental costume which had come from Constantinople, and had been obtained by him for a fancy dress ball at Covent Garden.
On the conclusion of Taylor's examination, the Court adjourned for luncheon.
This concluded the cross-examination, and the Court adjourned for lunch.
This concluded the cross-examination, and the court adjourned for lunch.
This concluded the cross-examination and the court adjourned for lunch.
This concluded the cross-examination, and the Court adjourned for lunch.
This concluded the cross-examination, and the court adjourned for lunch.
This concluded the cross-examination, and the Court adjourned for lunch.
This concluded the cross-examination and the court adjourned for lunch.