Galignani Messenger - Sunday, May 26, 1895

THE SOCIETY SCANDAL
END OF THE TRIAL.
SIR FRANK LOCKWOOD'S SPEECH FOR THE CROWN.
FIERCE WRANGLES BETWEEN COUNSEL.
SUMMING UP OF THE JUDGE.
VERDICT AND SENTENCE.

London, May 25.

The fourth, and last day of Wilde's second trial at the Old Bailey opened with cool breezes and a court less crowded and oppressive than it was yesterday, when the prisoners cross-examination attracted the sensation-hunters. The Solicitor-General, whose speech to the jury on behalf of conviction was cut short in the middle by the adjournment last night, was the first of the counsel in the case to reach the court, where he occupied himself in a hust hasty glance through the pages of his brief. It is interesting to recall that the present is the second case in which Sir Frank Lockwood has been brought into a cause célèbre to exert against a prisoner the enormous influence of "the last word." In November last, when all England was waiting with breathless interest for the issue of the trial of Read for the murder of Florrie Dennis, the newly appointed Solicitor-General went down to Chelmsford to prosecute, he had the last word with the jury, and Read was hanged. In that case, too, it was Mr. C. F. Gill who was superseded in the conduct of the Crown case.

At half-past 10 Mr. Justice Wills arrived. A second case, a charge of wilful murder against one Jane White, had been placed in the list for the day, and his lordship carried with his papers the black cap. But, as this prisoner, who was brought first into the dock, was committed only on the coroner's warrant, the Treasury had concluded to offer no evidence against her, and a verdict of not guilty was taken. So it happened that when Oscar Wilde, poet and dramatist was called upon to surrender he became involved in the door of the dock with the discharged.

The Solicitor-General proceeded at once with his address. From the first it was a morning of gusty temper, with frequent sharp exchanges between Sir F. Lockwood and Sir E. Clarke. The first was provoked by Sir Edward rising to object to what he called Mr. Solicitor's rhetorical descriptions of what had never been proved in evidence, in asserting that an intimate friendship existed between Wilde and Taylor.

"Gentlemen," Sir Frank Lockwood retorted, "it is not rhetoric; it is a plain statement of fact. What are the indications of an intimate friendship? They call one another by their Christian names. I do not inquire too closely whether they come from the stable or the kitchen. What greater proof of intimate friendship is there?" Again Mr. Solicitor protested against Sir Edward Clarke's differentiation of Taylor from Wilde by throwing round the latter "A glamour of art which is false and untrue."

Again Sir Edward was on his feet, exclaiming, "My lord, I must distinctly protest--" when he was interrupted by the Solicitor- General with a passionate and contemptuous exclamation, only half articulated, of "You may pr----oh!" and Mr. Solicitor's feelings became too much for him.

His Lordship, whom these exhibitions of feeling distressed unspeakably, tried to pour oil on the troubled waters, but Sir Edward Clarke continued, "All this is as far removed from the evidence as anything ever heard in this court."
Sir Frank Lookwood: I am alluding, my lord, and I maintain I am right in alluding, to my learned friend's last appeal to the jury as to the literary position of his client, and I am dealing in connection with that with his connection with the man Taylor, and I say these men must be judged equally.
Sir Edward Clarke: They are fairly tried in their proper order.
"Oh, my lord," cried Mr. Solicitor, with increasing passion, "these interruptions should avail my friend nothing."

His Lordship said Mr. Solicitor was perfectly within his right. The only objection was to allusions to the result of the trial of Taylor.

Passing on to allude to the "madness of kissing" letter, the Solicitor-General contended that such a letter found in the possession of a woman, from a man, would be open to but one interpretation. How much worre, he suggested, was the inference to be drawn when such a letter was written by one man to another! It had been attempted to show that this was "a prose poem, a sonnet, a lovely thing which I suppose we are too low to appreciate. Gentlemen," thundered Mr. Solicitor, "let us thank God, if it is so, that we do not appreciate things of this sort save at their proper-value, and that is somewhat lower than the beasts."

Again counsel came into collision, and a laugh followed. The Solicitor-General protested that he had no sympathy with the demonstrations, and his lordship almost tearfully admonished the crowd. "These interruptions," he said, "are offensive to and beyond anything that can be described. To have to try a case of this kind, to keep the scales even and do one's duty is hard enough, but to be pestered with the applause or expressions of feeling of senseless people who have no business to be here at all except for the gratification of morbid curiosity is too much. If there is anything of the kind again I shall clear the court."

The Solicitor-General presently alluded to witnesses Parker and Wood. His learned friend had said they were blackmailers, and had warned the jury against giving a verdict which should enable this detestable trade to rear its head unblushingly in this city. "Gentlemen," said Mr. Solicitor, "I should have as much right to ask you to take care lest by your verdict you should enable another vice, as detestable, as abominable, to rear its head with unblushing effrontery in this city The genesis of the blackmailer is the mar who has committed these acts of indecency with him. And the genesis of the man who commits these foul acts is the man who is willing to pay for their commission. Were it not that there are men willing to purchase vice in this most hideous and detestable form there would be no market for such crime, and no opening for these blackmailers to ply their calling." But where, he asked, was the motive? It was not suggested that either of these men had blackmailed Wilde. They had much to lose and nothing at all to gain by giving evidence here. It was not suggested that their evidence had been bought, or that they had been improperly influenced in any way.

Wilde listened impassively from his corner of the dock, but all through the morning he carried frequently to his nose a small vinaigrette of cut glass. The Marquis of Queensberry retained his place near the bench, and the Rev. Stewart Headlam still sat with his back to the witness-box, with Lord Douglas of Hawick vis-à-vis at the other side of the solicitors' table. Mr. Grain, who defended Taylor, was in and out of the court all the morning, without wig or gown.

Having weathered through the early scenes, the Solicitor-General settled down to a wordy and somewhat disconnected survey of the evidence, finding everywhere corroboration which he submitted to the jury as fatal to the prisoner. In regard to the Savoy Hotel charges, he asked why Lord Alfred Douglas, who slept in the next room to Wilde, had not been called to deny the statements of the chambermaid. "Now, gentlemen," he concluded, "I have been through the, whole of this case, I have pointed out to you its strength, and I have to ask you to do your duty in regard to it. I have already dealt with that, as I think, unfortunate appeal which my learned friend made as to the literary past or literary future of Oscar Wilde. With that we have in this case nothing whatever to do. He has a right to be acquitted if you believe him to be an innocent man, be his lot high or low. But if, gentlemen, in your consciences you believe that he is guilty of these charges--well, then you have only one consideration, and that is to follow closely the obligation of the oath which has been imposed upon you."

At half-past twelve Mr. Justice Wills began his summing up. Pointing out to the jury that their duty was "the cold, calm, resolute administration of justice," he said he would himself rather try the most shocking murder that it had ever fallen to his lot to try than be engaged in a case like this. It might be thought that the difficulty and distress of dealing with it would be increased by the position and education of the person accused. His lordship could only say that his own difficulty or sense of responsibility was increased by that consideration. Whatever might be the guilt or innocence of the accused, his conduct had been such, particularly with regard to Lord Alfred Douglas, that it would be impossible for 12 intelligent, impartial, and honest gentlemen to say there was no good ground for an indignant father to charge him with having posed, as the Marquis of Queensberry had suggested. He would have the jury bear in mind the good old custom of English law, that the prosecution must prove tho accusation made if they would have a conviction. This intimation he followed with a long dissertation upon the Criminal Law Amendment Act. He believed the law was a wise one, and his 10 years' experience of its effect was that many persons deserving of punishment would have escaped justice if that law had not been enacted. Coming down to the case before the court, he pointed out that there were in all four charges against Wilde for the jury to decide upon, viz., misconduct with Wood, misconduct with Parker, and the two incidents at the Savoy Hotel. In dealing with Wood's case, he regretted that he had to say much to the prejudice of Lord Alfred Douglas, but whatever he had to say the jury must regard as comment upon things as they seem, and remember that Lord Alfred was not there to defend himself. He was anxious in the case of a young man like that just on the threshold of manhood, to do all he could to prevent blasting his career. Still it was impossible to deal with the case without bringing Douglas into it. Wilde's letter to Douglas might be a prose poem, but they had to ask themselves whether the letter was not one which when it fell into the hands of his father did not give him reason for believing the letter meant something which should make him anxious for his son's welfare. The letters to Douglas were most damaging evidence, as they were communications in respect of which the friends of the young man, unless they were wanting in ordinary natural affection, were sure to take some steps to protect him. Wood's intimacy with Lord Alfred Douglas was peculiar. His lordship failed to see the attraction of a University town to a man of Wood's type. However, Douglas had Wood at Oxford, and at that time had this letter from Wilde. Whether a bad construction could be put upon the words of the letter or not, was that letter calculated to calm and control a young man's passion, to have it pointed out that his lips were made for the madness of kissing ? Was that a proper letter to write? The jury must satisfy themselves whether that letter was the prose poem, or whether it was not evidence of unclean appetite on the part of both the writer and the receiver.

Speaking of Wilde's own explanation of the letter, the judge said, "I confess I don't see the extreme beauty of the language. I must leave you to decide that." As to Wood's evidence, if Wood's story was true he must confess there should have been some corroborative evidence produced. Wood's description of Wilde's house in Tite-street was certainly a weak description, so weak as to throw doubt on the statement that he ever visited the house. This must be said in all fairness.

The letters Wilde obtained from Wood when the youth obtained the £15 were the subject of the following observation from the judge: "If those were letters of no importance, as the defendant says, then I cannot conceive a man of his intelligence, a man who writes plays and is supposed to know life, destroying those letters. If the letters were innocent in character one would have thought such a man would have had the sense to preserve them as the best of evidence that the scandal was untrue." The jury must not believe anything because Wood said it, for Wood belonged to perhaps the vilest class of life known. He was at least connected with a gang of blackmailers and the other matter was part of his trade. The tainted and horrible testimony such as given by Wood should not be believed in unless it was corroborated by evidence that was cogent, and left no reasonable doubt.

A juryman wanted to know if a warrant had been issued for the arrest of Lord Alfred Douglas, or ever intended. His lordship could not say.

After the adjournment the judge alluded to the jury's request for information about Lord Douglas. He wished them to disabuse their mind of any idea that Lord Alfred Douglas was not charged because he was Lord Alfred Douglas. Whether they thought him guilty or not they were not called upon to say. He might be--it might be there was not enough evidence against him to justify the issue of a warrant. But the jury must be certain there was no favouritism in the matter. They must simply keep their minds free to decide whether the prisoner Wilde was guilty or not.

Touching the case of Charles Parker, his lordship said the jury must bear in mind that the statement that Parker got introduced to Wilde with the hope of getting on the stage was a statement quite reasonable, and one which was borne out by Parker himself sufficiently for them to give it credence. The masseur's evidence was, he said, evidence upon which he would not hang a dog. Not that he meant that the masseur had committed perjury, but that the whole story was surrounded by so much uncertainty and want of consistency with the condition of affairs. At the same time there was a weighty fact they could not wisely overlook, a very suspicious circumstance. There were conditions of poverty which necessitated, or at least caused, men to sleep two and three in a bed, and men and women to sleep together promiscuously. But here they had a man who was spending between £40 and £50 a week on his hotel expenses. There was no such explanation as poverty given in a case like this. As to the chambermaid, he could not see how the woman could be mistaken. At the same time, he regretted counsel had not questioned the woman more closely, and ascertained from her if she saw the clothes of the youth alluded to. The evidence of the chambermaid on the other point was peculiar. He had, unhappily, had to try very many of these cases, and he never found such a possibility as that described by the chambermaid having once before being admitted.

Mr. Justice Wills, in concluding, said much stress had been laid upon the fact that neither Wood nor Parker, though both blackmailers, ever tried to levy blackmail on the defendant. This certainly would be of overwhelming influence, if there were no other facts to influence the decision. It certainly was remarkable that, if these men had knowledge which would have enabled them to blackmail a man successfully they did not do so. This consideration should have weight with the jury in coming to their decision.

His lordship's charge finished at 3.30 p.m., and the jury retired.

After a prolonged deliberation the jury returned into court with a verdict of guilty.

The judge sentenced the prisoner to two years hard labour.

Alfred Taylor, who, as already reported in the GALIGNANI MESSENGER, was found guilty of committing unnatural offences, was then brought up and also sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour.