Galignani Messenger - Thursday, May 2, 1895

THE SOCIETY SCANDAL
JUDGE'S SUMMING UP.
SCENE IN COURT.
DISAGREEMENT OF THE JURY
NEW TRIAL ORDERED.
APPLICATION FOR BAIL.

LONDON, May 1.

There was a crowded court at the Old Bailey to-day when the trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor for offences under the Criminal Law Amendment Act entered upon its final stage, after having occupied four days, before Mr. Justice Charles and a jury.

Mr. C. F. Gill and Mr. H. Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., Mr. Charles Mathews and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Oscar Wilde; Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Paul Taylor defended Alfred Taylor.

Simultaneously with the three loud raps upon the door which announced the approach of the judge the prisoners were brought into the dock. Wilde is grown positively grey in the face, and can no longer keep out of his eyes the haggard consciousness of his terrible position. Taylor has changed less. He still wore a weakly amiable smile.

His lordship embarked at once upon his summing-up, which occupied three hours. He described the charges against the prisoners, of committing acts of indecency, and as against Taylor of procuring the commission of such acts, and expressed satisfaction that the counts charging them with conspiracy had been withdrawn. He was sure he did not know why those counts were ever inserted at all. It was a highly inconvenient course to join counts with regard to one of which the prisoners could give evidence, while with regard to the other they could not, and he should direct an acquittal upon the charges of conspiracy against both the prisoners, as well as upon one count of the indictment against Taylor, to which ho need not now further allude, but as to which there was no evidence proper for the jury's consideration. He asked the jury to apply their minds only to the evidence. For weeks it had been impossible to open a newspaper without reading some reference to the case, and especially to the prisoner Wilde, but his lordship earnestly hoped that the jury would not allow any preconceived opinions to weigh with them in trying two persons, both of good education, and one of high intellectual gifts. As to the witnesses, where acts of indecency were alleged to have been committed with the consent of the witnesses, those persons were accomplices in the wicked act, and by a wholesome practice of the courts for certainly 200 years no defendant could be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice in his crimes. Otherwise innocent people might be exposed to terrible dangers by designing or spiteful persons. In this case, therefore, had there been no corroboration of the evidence of the young men to whom the jury had listened it would have been at once his lordship's duty to direct an acquittal. But he was clearly of opinion that there was corroboration of the kind the law requires in all the cases. His lordship did not propose to deal at any length with the incidents of the Queensberry trial, but it must be remembered that the evidence which Wilde gave at that trial was given upon oath, and must not be lost sight of in considering that he gave yesterday in his own defence. They all knew how the case arose. Lord Queensberry published a card which undoubtedly libelled Wilde, who at once initiated proceedings for criminal libel, which led to the trial on which they were now embarked. The libel referred to occurrences in 1892, but was not published till 1893. After Wilde had been examined and cross-examined, but before any evidence had been called for the plea of justification, Wilde by his counsel agreed to a verdict that Lord Queensberry was not guilty of criminal libel, and that the publication of the card was for the public benefit. That verdict, it was necessary to remember, was in no way binding on the present jury. His lordship referred to the nature of the plea of justification, and to the reason why such offences as it alleged in connection with the lads Conway and Crainger were not included in the present indictment, having occurred out of the jurisdiction of the court. On the conclusion of the Queensberry trial Wilde and Taylor were arrested to answer the charges for which they now awaited the jury's verdict. A very large portion of the evidence of Wilde at the Queensberry trial was devoted to what Sir Edward Clarke had called the literary part of the case. It was attempted to show by cross-examination of Wilde as to works he had published, especially in regard to the book called "Dorian Gray," that he was a man of most unprincipled character with regard to the relation of men to boys; and, secondly, with regard to a magazine called the Chameleon, published in the autumn of last year, and in which it was alleged that Wilde had given the sanction of his name to the most abominable doctrines. His lordship had not read ``Dorian Gray," and assumed that the jury had not, but they had been told that it was the story of a youth of vicious character whose face did not reveal the abysses of wretchedness into which he had fallen, but whose picture painted by an artist friend revealed all the consequences of his passion. In the end he stabs the picture, whereupon he himself falls dead, and on his vicious face appear all the signs which before had been upon the picture. His lordship did not think that in a criminal case the jury should place any unfavourable inference upon the fact that Wilde was the author of "Dorian Gray." Sir Edward Clarke had quoted from Coleridge, "Judge no man by his books," but his lordship would prefer to say "Confound no man with the characters of the persons he creates." Because a novelist put into the mouth of his villain the most abominable sentiments itmust not be assumed that he shared them. As to the Chameleon, the only connection proved between that magazine and Wilde was that it was prefaced by two pages of "Phrases and Philosophies to the Use of the Young" by the prisoner, of which it was sufficient to say that some were amusing, some cynical, some, if his lordship might be allowed to criticise, silly--but wicked, no. The learned counsel who represented Lord Queensberry called attention to a story, a filthy narrative of the most disgusting character, called "The Priest and the Acolyte," of which the author, who signed himself "X.," should be thoroughly ashamed. With that story Wilde had nothing whatever to do, and to impute to him anything in it was quite absurd. To judge him by another man's works, which he had never seen, would be highly unjust. So much for the literary part of the case. His lordship would pass to another phase which had more relevance to the issue the jury were trying. In the same Chameleon were two sonnets by Lord Alfred Douglas, one called "In Praise of Shame" and the other "The Two Loves." It was alleged that these sonnets had an immoral and unnatural tendency, and that Wilde had approved of them. What was it he had said with reference to them? His lordship, with an admirable elocutionary art, read the sonnet in praise of shame. Of the other he only quoted some lines. Wilde looked up with a fresh interest at this judicial appreciation of the literary form, if not of the sentiments of the poems. His lordship proceeded to make a big mistake. He quoted the Wilde letter beginning "Your sonnet is quite lovely, and it is a marvel that your red rose-leaf lips should be made as much for the music of song as for the madness of kissing." He imagined this applied to the sonnet in the Chameleon, but Sir Edward Clarke rose at once to point out that the letter bore a date long antecedent to the publication of the Chameleon, and clearly referred to some other matter.

His lordship recognised the error, but went on to read the letter, as veil as that other from the Savoy Hotel, written in 1893, in which Wilde began, "Dearest of all boys,-- Your letter was delightful red and yellow wine to me," and concluded, "I fear I must leave. I have no money, no credit, and a heart of lead." Abandoning the sonnets and dealing with these letters, his lordship asked if Mr. Carson was right in regarding them as of a horrible and indecent character. Turning next to the charges made against the defendants, his Lordship called the jury's attention to that made in reference to Shelley. Although there was in the letters written by Shelley evidence of excitability, the prosecution denied the argument of Sir E. Clarke that his evidence ought not to be received on account of his mind having become disordered. The decision of this matter must rest entirely with the jury, and their responsibility was very great. His lordship next dealt with the evidence given by Atkins, and expressed the opinion that this witness was most reckless; and the jury would probably be of opinion that if Atkins was the only person who spoke on these matters it would be totally unsafe to rely upon his statements at all. The judge remarked on the impudence of the witness in trying to deceive the jury. There was no doubt that he was a most unscrupulous and untruthful man, and the jury, who were the judges as to the credibility of witnesses, must decide whether or not they would accept his evidence. As to what was alleged to have taken place at an hotel in the Strand, the evidence given by the servants and the masseur was of vast importance. If their story was true, there was evidence which could be acted upon with regard to certain of the charges. The learned judge next referred to the introduction of the two Parkers to Taylor, and to the extraordinary condition of the rooms in Little College-street. He pointed out that at length the attention of the police was directed to this house, but it must be remembered, in favour of Taylor, that although an entrance was effected by means of an artifice, no step was taken with regard to the house, and Taylor continued to live there. Three of the men on whom the greatest reliance was placed with reference to the charges against the prisoners were all affected, in the same way, by the wicked crime of extorting money from persons to whom they were introduced, and whom they had got into compromising positions. In conclusion, his lordship expressed the hope that they would do justice to the public on the one hand and to the defendants on the other. They must deal fairly with the evidence. If they thought they ought not to act on the evidence, then they would acquit prisoners; on the other hand, if they believed the evidence, then they must do their duty.

The jury retired at 1.35.

At three o'clock a communication was brought from the jury, and conveyed by the Clerk of Arraigns to the judge, and shortly afterwards the jury had luncheon taken to them.

The jury, after a deliberation of three hours and three-quarters, returned into court, when the foreman, who had caused a communication to be sent to tho judge, in reply to his lordship, said that they were unable to agree as to a verdict. There was no chance, in his opinion, of the jury agreeing to a verdict.

Sir Edward Clarke asked that a verdict of acquittal on the conspiracy counts, upon which no evidence was offered, be returned by the jury.

The judge said that he would direct that an acquittal be entered on the record in regard to the conspiracy counts, and with respect of the counts referring to Wood and Atkins.

The jury were accordingly discharged.

Sir Edward Clarke applied for bail for Oscar Wilde. Application was made for bail on behalf of Taylor.

The judge: I do not feel able to accede to the application. In reply to Sir Edward Clarke, his lordship said that if another application for bail was to be made, it would be in the usual course, made before a Judge in Chambers.

It is stated that the prisoners, Wilde and Taylor, will be tried again at the next Sessions of the Central Criminal Court.