The Dublin Evening Mail - Thursday, April 4, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
THE OSCAR WILDE LIBEL CASE.
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION.
London, Thursday.
The hearing of the libel action brought by Mr Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry was resumed to-day
at the Old Bailey. Sir E Clarke, Q C; Mr C Mathews, and Mr Travers Humphreys appeared to prosecute. Mr Carson, Q C; Mr C F Gill, and Mr A Gill (instructed
by Mr Charles Russell), represented the Marquis of Queensberry : Mr Besley, Q C, with Mr Monckton, watching the proceedings on behalf of Lord Douglas of
Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis. The indictment was to the effect that the Marquis "did unlawfully and maliciously write and publish a false,
malicious, and defamatory libel" concerning Mr Oscar Wilde, in the form of a card directed to him.
London, Friday.The hearing of the libel action brought by Mr Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry was resumed to-day at the Old Bailey. Sir E Clarke, Q C; Mr C Mathews, and Mr Travers Humphreys attended to prosecute. Mr Carson, Q C; Mr C F Gill, and Mr A Gill (instructed by Mr Charles Russell), represented the Marquis of Queensberry, : Mr Besley, Q C, with Mr Monckton, watching the proceedings on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis.
All the appearances of a sensational trial were presented at the Old Bailey to-day when the Marquis of Queensberry entered the dock to answer the charge of criminally libelling Mr Oscar Wilde. By the time Mr Justice Collins took his seat on the Bench the court was crammed. Sir E Clarke, Q C; Mr C Mathews, and Mr Travers Humphreys appeared to prosecute; while Mr Carson, Q C ; Mr C F Gill, and Mr A Gill (instructed by Mr Charles Russell) represented the Marquis of Queensberry, Mr Besley, Q C, with Mr Monckton watching the proceedings on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis. The Clerk read out the indictment to the effect that the Marquis "did unlawfully and maliciously write and publish a false, malicious, and defamatory libel" concerning Mr O Wilde in the form of a card directed to him. The Marquis said he pleaded not guilty, and that the libel was true, and that it was for the public benefit that it should be published.
Mr Carson, Q C, resumed the cross-examination of Mr Wilde, who said he used to go to the upper part of a house 13 Little College street, occupied by a man named Taylor. The rooms were artistically furnished, and perfumes were burnt. He never saw Taylor attired in a woman’s costume, or knew that he had one. He used to attend tea parties at Taylor’s rooms. He did not know that one of the men frequenting Taylor’s house had disappeared within the past week. He did not know that Taylor and a companion named Parker were arrested in a raid on a house in Fitzroy square last year. Taylor introduced witness to five young men, to all of whom he gave money. He invited a party to dinner at Kettner’s Restaurant. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a coachman.
Mr Carson, Q C, resumed the cross-examination of Mr Wilde, who said he used to go to the upper part of a house, 13 Little College street, occupied by a man named Taylor. The rooms were artistically furnished, and perfumes were burnt. He never saw Taylor attired in a woman’s costume, or knew that he had one. He used to attend tea parties at Taylor’s rooms. Did not know that one of the men frequenting Taylor’s house had disappeared within the past week. He did not know that Taylor and a companion named Parker were arrested in a raid on a house in Fitzroy square last year. Taylor introduced witness to five young men, to all of whom he gave money. He invited a party to dinner at Kettner’s Restaurant. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a coachman.
Mr. CARSON, Q.C., resumed the cross-examination of Mr. Wilde, who said he used to go to the upper part of a house, 13 Little College Street, occupied by a man named Taylor. The rooms were artistically furnished and perfumes were burnt. He used to attend tea parties at Taylor’s rooms, but did not know that one of the men frequenting Taylor’s house had disappeared within the past week. He did not know that Taylor and a companion named Parker were arrested in a raid on a house in Fitzroy Square last year. Taylor introduced witness to five young men, to all of whom he gave money. He invited a party to dinner at Kettner’s Restaurant, but was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a coachman.
Mr Carson—Was there plenty of champagne?
Witness—What gentleman would stint the valet? (Much laughter.)
Further cross-examined, Mr Wilde denied driving one of these men to his own private room at the Savoy Hotel. He never paid visits to Parker at a house in Camera square. He did not know that certain men who were arrested in the Fitzroy square raid were connected with the Cleveland street scandal. The Fitzroy square arrest made no difference in his friendship with Taylor. He was introduced to a young man named Freddy Atkins and took him to Paris, being joined there by a gentleman whose name was written yesterday and passed to counsel. Atkins was addressed as "Freddy," and was plaintiff’s guest. He gave Freddy money to go to the Moulin Rouge. They stayed at the same hotel. Freddy suggested he should have his hair curled.
Further cross-examined, Mr Wilde denied driving one of these men to his own private room at the Savoy Hotel, and there committing indecency. He never paid visits to Parker at a house in Camera square. He did not know that certain men who were arrested in the Fitzroy square raid were connected with the Cleveland street scandals. The Fitzroy square arrest made no difference in his friendship with Taylor. He was introduced to a young man named Freddy Atkins, and took him to Paris, being joined there by a gentleman whose name was written yesterday and passed to counsel. Atkins was addressed as Freddy, and was plaintiff’s guest. He gave Freddy money to go to the Moulin Rouge. They stayed at the same hotel, but no impropriety ever took place. Freddy suggested he should have his hair curled.
Further cross-examined, Mr. Wilde denied driving with one of these men to the Savoy Hotel. He never saw Parker at a house in Camera Square. He did not know that certain men who were arrested in the Fitzroy Square raid were connected with the Cleveland Street scandals. The Fitzroy Square arrest made no difference in his friendship with Taylor. He was introduced to a young man named Freddy Atkins, and took him to Paris, being joined there by a gentleman whose name was written yesterday, and passed to counsel. Atkins was addressed as Freddy, and was plaintiff’s guest. He gave Freddy money to go to the Moulin Rouge. They stayed at the same hotel, but no unseemly conduct ever took place. Freddy suggested he should have his hair curled.
Mr Carson—Did he have it curled?
Witness—No, I should have been very angry if he had (laughter). The gentleman (whose name had been written) also introduced him to two young men named Scarp and Mabor. The latter met him on his return from Scotland in October, and they stayed at the same hotel in town. He gave Mabor a cigarette case. At the rooms occupied by Lord Alfred Douglas, in High-street, Oxford, he met a youth named Granger, a servant, but denied counsel’s suggestions with regard to him, Granger was ugly.
Witness—No; I should have been very angry if he had (laughter). The gentleman whose name had been written also introduced him to two young men named Scarp and Mabor. The latter met him on his return from Scotland in October, and they stayed at the same hotel in town. He gave Mabor a cigarette case at the rooms occupied by Lord Alfred Douglas in High street, Oxford. He met a youth named Granger, a servant, but denied counsel’s suggestion with regard to him (Granger) was ugly.
Witness—No; I should have been very angry if he had. (Laughter.) The gentleman whose name had been written also introduced him to two young men named Scarp and Mabor. The latter met him on his return from Scotland in October, and they stayed at the same hotel in town. He gave Mabor a cigarette case at the rooms occupied by Lord Alfred Douglas. Further examined—he knew a masseur at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that the masseur made any unusual discovery on entering his bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to a visit on one occasion to Paris.
Counsel—Why do you give that as a reason?
Plaintiff—Because you stung me with an insolent question.
Further cross-examined, he said he knew a masseur at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that the masseur made any incriminating discovery. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to certain occasions in Paris.
Further cross-examined--He knew a masseur at the Savoy hotel, but denied that the masseur made any incriminating discovery on entering his bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to misconduct on certain occasions in Paris.
Further cross-examined--He knew a masseur at the Savoy hotel, but denied that the masseur made any incriminating discovery on entering his bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to misconduct on certain occasions in Paris.
Further cross-examined—He knew a masseur at the Savoy hotel, but denied that the masseur made any incriminating discovery on entering his bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to misconduct on certain occasions in Paris.
Further cross-examined—He knew a masseur at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that the mas- made any incriminating discovery on entering his bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to misconduct on certain occasions in Paris.
At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Sir E Clarke began the re-examination by putting in certain letters of Lord Queensberry. In part of these, written from Carter’s Hotel to Lord A Douglas, the defendant called upon his son to cease his intimacy with the man Wilde. His blood had turned cold at the sight of their faces. The writer continued—"I hear on good authority that his (Wilde’s) wife is petitioning for a divorce on the grounds of crimes. The horror has crossed my mind you may be brought into this. If I thought the actual thing true, I should feel justified in shooting him at sight." Lord Alfred replied by wire—"Queensberry—What a funny little man you are." Plaintiff denied the suggestion of the divorce petition. Lord Queensbury in a further letter called Lord Alfred an impertinent jackanapes, and threatened to cut off supplies. In another letter addressed by the defendant to the father of his former wife he repeated the accusations against Wilde, to whom he referred in the following terms :—"He (plaintiff) showed the white feather. He is a d—cur and a coward of the Rosebery type." Then alluding to his former wife, Lord Queensberry said. "I am convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone Royal insult that came to me through my soc—it shall be known some day that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen (which makes her as bad as him) and to Gladstone, but also had made a life-long quarrel between my son and me." Lord Queensberry in August addressed Lord Alfred in an offensive way. The letter continued—"How right I was to face misery rather than bring others into the world : that was the reason I broke off with your mother."
At the conclusion of the cross-examination Sir E. Clarke began the re-examination by putting in certain letters of Lord Queensberry. In part of these, written from Carter's Hotel to Lord A. Douglas, the defendant called upon his son to cease his infamous intimacy with the man Wilde; his blood had turned cold at the sight of their horrible faces. The writer continued: "I hear on good authority that his (Wilde's) wife is petitioning for a divorce on the ground of unnatarual crimes. The horror has crossed my mind you may be brought into this. If I thought the actual thing true I should feel justified in shooting him at sight." Lord Alfred replied by wire, "Queensberry, what a funny little man you are." Plaintiff denied the suggestion of the divorce petition. Lord Queensberry, in a further letter, called Lord Alfred "an impertinent jacksnapes," and threatened to cut off supplies. In another letter, addressed by the defendant to the father of his former wife, he repeated the accusations against Wilde, to whom he referred in the followng terms:—"He plainly showed the white feather. He is a s— cur and a coward of the Rosebery type." Then, alluding to his former wife, Lord Queensberry said: "I am convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone Royal insult that came to me through my other son—she worked that. I saw Drumlanrig on the river last night, and it rather upset me. It shall be known some day that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen (which makes her as bad as him), and to Gladstone, but also has made a life long quarrel between my son and me." Lord Queensberry in August addressed Lord Alfred as an abortion. The letter continued, "How right I was to face misery rather than bring others into the world. That was the reason I broke off with your mother."
At the conclusion of the cross-examination Sir E. Clarke began the re-examination by putting in certain letters of Lord Queensberry. In part of these, written from Carter's Hotel to Lord. A. Douglas, the defendant called upon his son to cease his infamous intimacy with the man Wilde; his blood had turned cold at the sight of their horrible faces. The writer continued: "I hear on good authority that his (Wilde's) wife is petitioning for a divorce on the ground of unnatural crimes. The horror has crossed my mind you may be brought into this. If I thought the actual thing true I should feel justified in shooting him at sight." Lord Alfred replied by wire, "Queensberry, what a funny little man you are." Plaintiff denied the suggestion of the divorce petitions. Lord Queensberry, in a further letter, called Lord Alfred "an impertinent jacksnapes," and threatened to cut off supplies. In another letter, addressed by defendant, to the father of his former wife, he repeated the accusations against Wilde, to whom he referred in the following terms:--"He plainly showed the white feather. He is a s------- cur and a corward of the Rosebery type." Then, alluding to his former wife, Lord Queensberry said: "I am convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone Royal insult that came to me through my other son-she worked that. I saw Dsumlanrig on the river last night, and it rather upset me. It shall be known some day that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen (which makes her as bad as him), and to Gladstone, but also has made a life-long quarrel between my son and me." Lord Queensberry in August addressed Lord Alfred as an abortion. The latter continued, "How right I was to face misery rather than bring others into the world." That was the reason I broke off with your mother."
At the conclusion of the cross-examination Sir E. Clarke began the re-examination by putting in certain letters of Lord Queensberry. In part of these, written from Carter's Hotel to Lord A. Douglas, the defendant called upon his son to cease his infamous intimacy with the man Wilde, his blood had turned cold at the sight of their horrible faces. The writer continued "I hear on good authority that his (Wilde's) wife is petitioning for a divorce on the ground of unnatural crimes. The horror has crossed my mind you may be brought into this. If I thought that the actual thing true I should feel justified in shooting him at sight." Lord Alfred replied by wire, "Queensberry, what a funny little man you are." Plaintiff denied the suggestion of the divorce petitions. Lord Queensberry, in a further letter, called Lord Alfred "an impertinent jacksnapes," and threatened to cut off supplies. In another letter, addressed by defendant to the father of his former wife, he repeated the accusations against Wilde, to whom he referred in the following terms:--"He plainly showed the white feather. He s a s------- cur and a corward of the Rosebery type." Then, alluding to his former wife, Lord Queensberry said: "I am convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone Royal insult that came to me through my other son--she worked that I saw Dsumlanrig on the river last night, and it rather upset me. It shall be known some day that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen (which makes her as bad as him), and to Gladtstone, but also has made a life-long quarrel between my son and me." Lord Queensberry in August addressed Lord Alfred as an abortion. The letter continued, "How right I was to face misery rather than bring others into the world. That was the reason I broke off with your mother."
At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Sir E. CLARKE began the re-examination by putting in certain letters of Lord Queensberry. In part of these, written from Chater’s Hotel to Lord A. Douglas, the defendant called upon his son to have nothing more to do with the man Wilde, whose wife he (defendant) had heard on good authority was petitioning for a divorce. Lord Alfred replied by wire:—"Queensberry, what a funny little man you are." The plaintiff denied the suggestion of a divorce petition. Lord Queensberry, in a further letter, called Lord Alfred an impertinent jackanapes, and threatened to cut off supplies. In another letter addressed to the father of his former wife he repeated the accusations against Wilde, to whom he referred in the following terms—"He plainly showed the white feather; he is a cur and a coward of the Rosebery type." Then alluding to his former wife Lord Queensberry also said, "I am convinced that the Rosebery-Gladstone Royal insult came to me through my other son, Drumlanrig, whom I saw on the river last night, and it rather upset me. It shall be known some day that Rosebery not only insulted me by lying to the Queen and to Gladstone, but also has made a life-long quarrel between my son and me." Other letters having been read, the case for the plaintiff closed, and Mr. Carson began his address for the defence.
The case for the plaintiff closed, and Mr Carson began his address for the defence.
The case for the plaintiff closed, and Mr Carson began his address for the defence.
The case for the plaintiff closed, and Mr. Carson, Q C, began his address for the defence.