The New York Herald (European Edition) - Sunday, April 7, 1895

OSCAR WILDE AND HIS COMPANION.
APPEAR BEFORE THE MAGISTRATE AT BOW STREET-REMANDED TIL THURSDAY.
PRISONERS REFUSED BAIL.
CONGRATULATIONS SHOWERING UPON LORD QUEENSBERRY-RUMORS OF ANOTHER ARREST.
[BY THE HERALD'S SPECIAL WIRE]

LONDON, April 7.-Yesterday London spent another day of ferment in connection with the sickening case of Oscar Wilde. Never has a matter of this nature-and it is perhaps as well that it should have been so-taken so complete a hold upon the public mind and especially upon the mind of that portion of the public which occupies a higher social position.

The reason for this is not to be found alone in the personality of the accused, though, of course, the familiarity of his name and the popularity of his dramatic works have increased the sensation of shuddering disgust which has been universally felt. As I hinted yesterday, the real reason is ethical rather than personal. It is felt that a cankering sore has for long been eating into the body of London society, and that it is just as well that for a brief period, it should have been exposed in all its horrors to the public gaze, thus a service to morality has been rendered by the painful trial which on Friday concluded so shamefully at the Old Bailey.

It is now, however, the general feeling-so far as I have been able to fathom it in conversation with people of varying importance-that the proceedings taken by the country against this wretched man, who now lies in a prison cell, should be conducted with as little publicity as possible.

It is universally hoped, indeed, that when the prisoner is committed for trial at the Old Bailey, as he surely will be, the case will be heard in camera. It is in accordance with this view that the action of the conductors of the evening papers in monopolizing their columns with the painful and prurient details of yesterday's proceedings at Bow Street is so universally condemned.

ONLY SOME BRIEF FACTS

These are briefly such facts as may fittingly be recorded concerning the events of the day. It appears that Wilde spent Friday night, as regards the greater part of the time, pacing the narrow confines of his Bow Street cell and making but one request to his jailers, which he repeated at intervals; this was for a supply of cigarettes, but according to the prison rules it had to be refused.

About midnight he tried to eat a little cold chicken which, at his request, was sent in to him, but he could only make a pretence of doing so. In the morning, looking painfully haggard and worn, after swallowing a cup of coffee, he followed his jailer, at eleven o'clock, into the extradition court, which had been chosen by Sir John Bridge for the examination, chiefly on account of its smallness and consequent incapacity for holding more than a minimum of the curious public.

One or two well-known persons, including Sir Augustus Harris, were present, and when Wilde was placed in the dock, the jailer standing impassively at his side, he stood there with an air of apparent unconcern, leaning over the iron rail in front of him in much the same attitude as that adopted by him in the witness box earlier in the week.

Mr. C.F. Gill, instructed by Mr. Angus Lewis, of the Treasury, prosecuted, and Mr. Humphrey, the solicitor, appeared for the defence. Shortly after the proceedings began they were stopped for a brief period while Alfred Taylor, who was charged at the same time as Wilde, but who had only been arrested at ten o'clock that morning while stealing back to his house in Pimlico, entered the Court in custody, and was placed by the side of his better-known companion.

Taylor is a well-dressed, intelligent-looking man and seemed to take his position with the same nonchalant indifference as Wilde. It would serve no useful purpose were I to go into details o the cross-examination. It is sufficient for me to say that several of the youthful witnesses whose names were mentioned in the ghastly record so mercilessly set forward by Mr. Edward Carson in his cross-examination and address to the jury of the Old Bailey, gave nauseatingly detailed evidence as to the infamous conduct of both of the accused.

The first witness called was Charles Parker, who testified that he had formed an acquaintance with Taylor at the St. James's Restaurant, and was subsequently introduced by him to Wilde in the company of his brother William, who was a groom, Charles being a valet. His evidence as to his introduction to Wilde was corroborated by his brother William, who followed him on the stand.

Mrs. Grant, landlady of the house in Little College-street formerly occupied by Taylor, spoke of the number of young men who frequented the house and of their character. She also described the way the rooms were furnished and lighted.

Alfred Wood, a fair young man dressed in black, who described himself as a clerk, also testified after the same fashion, and also told how he received a sum of £20 from Wilde to purchase his passage to America after he had given him back the incriminating letters. The last witness was Sidney Arthur Mavor, who seemed to be of a different social position to the other youths, but whose evidence was similar in character.

Mr. Humphrey, on Wilde's behalf, reserved his right to cross-examine all or any of the witnesses.

Finally the case was adjourned until next Thursday, and though bail was applied for on behalf of Wilde, it was, of course, refused, and he and Taylor were led away in custody.

I may add that there is a well-defined rumor in circulation to the effect that a warrant has been issued for the arrest of another prominent figure in the case, but up to a late hour last night no action had been taken on the matter.

A RECTIFICATION

The Marquis of Queensberry asked me yesterday to mention particularly that in his message to Oscar Wilde, to which he referred in the interview which appeared in yesterday's Herald, he did not threaten to actually shoot Wilde, but merely said that he would be justified in doing so if he cared to take the trouble. Lord Queensberry further told me that letters and telegrams of congratulation continued to pour in upon him, and he referred with evident pleasure to two telegrams reading: "Well done, old chap," and signed by two of his old shipmates who are now post-captains in the Royal Navy.

He expressed himself as having a sort of pity for the probably fate of his late prosecutor. As to what this fate will be, should he be found guilty, I understand that the particular section of the Criminal Law Amendment Act under which he is charged allows of so short a term of imprisonment as two years. This is interesting in view of the general impression that prevails among the public that ten years' penal servitude is the least punishment that can be awarded.

I hear, by the way, that Sir Edward Clarke has offered to defend Wilde without a fee.

PHILOSOPHIC MORAL OF THE CASE

The Figaro this morning points a philosophic moral to the story of Oscar Wilde. Referring to his case our contemporary says:-

"It is the natural and regular physiological result of a literary and aesthetic effort and from that point of view it demands the reflections of all thinkers. It demonstrates the influence which the deviation of certain literary facilities in the direction of a refined sensualism can exercise over the intelligence and over the morals of men undoubtedly gifted.... Fatal degeneracy will ensue when intellectual effort is made the result and not the principle of the sensations.... We must beg our aesthetes to be moderate."