TO-DAY'S LATE NEWS.
THE TRIAL OF WILDE.
SPEECHES AND SUMMING UP.
PERTINENT QUESTIONS BY THE JURY.

The final stage with the second trial of Oscar Wilde was entered upon at the Old Bailey, to-day, before Mr. Justice Wills. The public gallery was again packed with interested spectators. It was half-past ten when the Solicitor-General entered the court and at this hour neither the prisoner nor Sir Edward Clarke had arrived. His lordship took his seat a few moments after the half hour, and Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., put in an appearance at the same time. The resumption of proceedings was delayed by another case, which was disposed of in a few minutes.

Oscar Wilde, who had in the meantime entered the court was then called upon to surrender to his bail. He at once stepped into the dock, and resumed his seat, facing the jury, with his elbow resting on the ledge before him. His appearance had not materially changed since yesterday, and he betrayed signs of considerable anxiety.

The Solicitor-General then rose and took up the threads of his speech in reply on behalf of the prosecution. He asked what was the relationship of the prisoner with Lord Alfred Douglas, and said though Lord Queensberry resented the intimacy between the prisoner and Lord Alfred the prisoner continued the intimacy, and flaunted Lord Alfred at hotels in London and the country. His learned friend had urged that after this lapse of time all the witnesses that might have been called for the defence had been scattered, and yet he had intimate associations with Taylor.

The Solicitor-General resumed his speech in reply for the prosecution. He asked what was the relationship of the prisoner with Lord Alfred Douglas, and said though Lord Queensberry resented the intimacy between the prisoner and Lord Alfred, the prisoner continued the intimacy, and flaunted Lord Alfred at hotels in London and the country. He contended that it had been shown the prisoner was closely intimate with Taylor.

Sir Edward Clarke: That is an oratorical expression which has never been proved in the evidence.

The Solicitor-General asked what were the badges of an intimate friendship. Taylor called the prisoner "Oscar," and he called Taylor "Alfred," and he entertained him on his birthday. What more proof of intimacy did he want than that? It was a plain statement of fact that Taylor was the prisoner's intimate friend. It appeared as if counsel for the defence desired now that one man should go down and the other be saved because of a false glamour upon art.

Sir E. Clarke: I protest. I must distinctly protest against this sort of appeal to tbe jury -this suggestion to the jury that it is my desire now that one man should go down and the other be saved because of a false glamour upon art.

His Lordship pointed out that up to the present time there had been no allusion to the result of the other trial.

The Solicitor-General maintained that he had a right to reply to his learned friend's final appeal to the jury as to the literary position of his client. He was dealing with the prisoner's connection with the man Taylor, and he said that these men must be judged equally.

Sir Edward Clarke: They must be fairly tried in their proper order.

The Solicitor-General hoped that these interruptions would avail his learned friend nothing. He now came back to the point from which he started, and that was that there was one witness at least whom the prisoner could have relied upon, and that was Taylor. There was another person he could have relied upon, and that was Lord Alfred Douglas. With regard to the letters which the prisoner obtained from Wood, and which he said were of no importance, he would call the attention of the jury to one of the letters which had been produced -a letter which if found in the possession of a woman from a man would be the clearest possible evidence of some guilty passion. The letter spoke of "Rose-leaf lips, framed not only for the music of song but the madness of kissing," and contained a reference to the love of Apollo and Hyacinthus. It was in these terms that he addressed this young man, and then the jury, men of sense and reason and honour, were tried to he put off with this story of a prose poem, a sonnet which he supposed they were too low to appreciate. They must thank God that it was so. They did not appreciate a thing of this sort save at its proper level, and that was somewhat lower than a beast's.

At this point there was slight laughter from the gallery. His lordship said he hoped that throughout the rest of this trial there would be no more interruptions of this kind. It was very offensive to him to be pestered with applause or expression of feeling by people who had no business there except the gratification of a morbid curiosity. If there was anything of the kind he should have the Court cleared.

The Solicitor-General, resuming, said with regard to Parker and Wood, that his learned friend said they were blackmailers, and warned the jury lest they gave a verdict in this case which would enable this detestable trade to rear its head unblushingly in this country. He (the Solicitor General) would, however, ask the jury to take care lest they enabled another vice as detestable and as abominable to raise its head unblushingly in this country. It was true that these men participated in a blackmailing enterprise, but the genesis of a blackmailer was a man who had committed these acts of indecency, and the genesis of the man who had committed these foul acts was the man who was so debased as to be willing to pay for their commission, and were it not that there must be some men so debased as to purchase vice in this hideous and detestable form there would be no market for such crime, and there would be no market in which these blackmailers could be found. It was a strange thing that they should find Oscar Wilde in close intimacy with both Parker and Wood. No motive could be alleged for these men telling that which was untrue, and it was not suggested that their evidence had been purchased or improperly influenced. Having reviewed the evidence given by Wood, he asked the jury to say that he told the truth, that he had no motive to deceive them, and that they must irresistibly come to the conclusion that there was only conflict of testimony at the point where admission stopped and actual confession commenced. With regard to Parker also, they had admission after admission until they came on the heel of confession. In conclusion, he said he had pointed out the strength of the case, and he now had to ask the jury to do their duty in the case.

His Lordship, in summing up, said this was a painful and shocking case, which necessitated a cold and calm administration of justice, in order that due protection would be afforded to the defendant. For himself he would rather try a most shocking murder case than be engaged in trying one of these cases. He could not, however, say that his sense of difficulty was increased in this case by any consideration of the education or culture of the person accused, because having regard to the result of the Queensberry libel case they need not distress themselves by ordinary considerations, which would add to their distress in the case of persons of education and culture. In this case he could not give a simple, colourless summing up which was no good to anybody. It was very unfortunate that in dealing with Wood's case he must deal with a good deal that affected Lord Alfred Douglas, who was not a party to these proceedings and could not give evidence.

A Juror: He could be here.'

His lordship said: He could not volunteer himself. He was anxious in the case of a young man like this to say nothing that might help to blast his career in life, but that did not in the least relieve him from the necessity of investigating the facts of this case. With regard to these charges the defendant was entitled to the full benefit of the observation that these matters were alleged to have taken place two or three years ago, but they must not forget that these charges had grown out of the writing of these letters to this young man. It was a matter for the grave consideration of the jury as to whether the letter referring to the madness of kissing pointed to unclean relations and appetites on both sides. It was Lord Alfred Douglas who sent Wood to the defendant. The case as to Wood seemed to him to depend upon what they thought was the character of the original introduction, whether it was stamped with charity, kindness, and good will, or whether it was for a wicked purpose.

His Lordship said he could not volunteer himself. He was anxious, in the case of a young man like this, to say nothing that might help to blast his career in life, but that did not in the least relieve him from the necessity of investigating the facts of this case. With regard to these charges the defendant was entitled to the full benefit of the observation that these matters were alleged to have taken place two or three years ago. But they must not forget that these charges had grown out of the writing of these letters to this young man. It was a matter for the grave consideration of the jury as to whether the letter referring the madness of kissing pointed as unclean relations and appetites on both sides. He would not invite their attention to any particular expression in that letter. It was Lord Alfred Douglas who sent Wood to the defendant. They were not to believe anything simply because Wood said it. That would be absurd. Wood belonged to a vile class, and was at least acting with a gang of blackmailers and a gang of people addicted to certain practices, and it was probable that that sort of person would do the same thing himself. The case as to Wood seemed to him to depend upon what they thought was the character of the original introduction — whether it was stamped with charity, kindness, and goodwill, or whether it was for a wicked purpose.

The Foreman of the Jury: The jury are very anxious to know whether, in view of the intimacy between Lord Alfred Douglas and Wood, a warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas was ever issued.

The Foreman of the Jury — The jury are very anxious to know whether, in view of the intimacy between Lord Alfred Douglas and Wood, a warrant for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas was ever issued.

The foreman of the jury interposed with the question: "In view of the intimacy between Lord Alfred Douglas and Wood, was a warrant ever issued for the apprehension of Lord Alfred Douglas?"

The Foreman of the Jury interposed with the question: "In view of the intimacy between Lord Alfred Douglas and Would, was a warrant ever issued for the apprehension of Lord Alfred Douglas?"

His Lordship: I should think not.

The Foreman: Or was ever contemplated?

His Lordship: That I cannot say.

The jury wish to know whether, if they deduce guilt from these letters, it will affect Lord Alfred Douglas as well as the defendant?

The Foreman — The jury wish to know whether, if they deduce guilt from these letters, it will affect Lord Alfred Douglas as well as 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.

The Foreman: It seems to us that if we induce any guilt from these letters it applies as much to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the defendant.

The Foreman: It seems to us that if we adduce any guild from these letters if applies as much 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: If we are to deduce any guilt from these letters, it applies equally to Lord Alfred Douglas as to the defendant.

His Lordship said he thought the receipt of these letters and the continued intimacy was as damaging to the reputation of the recipient as of the sender, but that had nothing to do with the present inquiry. The question was whether guilt was brought home to the man in the dock.

His Lordship said he thought the receipt of these letters, and the continued intimacy was as damaging to the reputation of the recipient as of the sender, but that had nothing to do with the present inquiry. The question was whether guilt was brought home to the man in the dock.

In answer to another question by the foreman his lordship said the receipt of this letters and the continuance of the intimacy was as damaging to the reputation of the recipient as to the sender; but that had nothing to do with the case. The question was whether guilt had been brought home to the man in the dock.

In answer to another question by the foreman, his lordship said the receipt of this letter and the continuance of the intimacy was as damaging to the reputation of the recipient as to the sender, but that had nothing to do with this case. The question was whether guilt had been brought home to the man in the dock.

His Lordship said the warrant had not issued. In answer to another question by the foreman, his lordship said the receipt of this letter and the continuance of the intimacy was as damaging to the reputation of the recipient as to the sender,but that bad nothing to to do with this case. The question was whether guilt had been brought home to the man in the dock. The jury retired at 3.30.

At this point the court adjourned for luncheon.

WILDE'S TRIAL.
VERDICT AND SENTENCES.
(Continued from Page Three.)

On the Court resuming, his Lordship again referred to Lord Alfred Douglas, who, he said, if guilty, would not be spared because he was Lord Alfred Douglas. As to whether he would be tried he knew nothing. It be there was no evidence against him. The question before the jury was whether the man in the dock was guilty.

On the Court resuming, his lordship again referred to Lord Alfred Douglas, who, he said, if guilty would not be spared because he was Lord Alfred Douglas. As to whether he would be tried, he knew nothing. It might be there was no evidence against him. The question before the jury was whether the man in the dock had been guilty with certain persons, of whom Lord Alfred Douglas was not one.

His Lordship concluded summing-up at 3.30 and the jury retired.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty.

The Judge characterised the offence as the worst that had ever come under his notice, and sentenced both Taylor and Wilde to two years' hard labour each. (Crimes of "Shame.")

Wilde appeared stunned, and was hurried to the cells.

Document matches
None found