The Irish News and Belfast Morning News - Tuesday, May 21, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
THE OSCAR WILDE CASE.
LONDON, MONDAY.
At the Central Criminal Court this morning, before Mr. Justice Wills and a jury, Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and
Alfred Taylor, 33, of no occupation, were arraigned on an indictment charging them with various acts of impropriety. Wilde, who was accompanied by his two
sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and the Rev. Stewart Headlam, surrendered to his bail shortly after half-past ten. The court was densely crowded.
At the Central Criminal Court this morning, before Mr Justice Wills and a jury, Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, 33, of no occupation, were arraigned on an indictment charging them with various acts of impropriety. Wilde, who was accompanied by his two sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and the Rev Stewart Headlam, surrendered to his bail shortly after half-past ten. The court was densely crowded.
London, Monday.At the Central Criminal Court this morning, before Mr Justice Wills and a jury, Oscar Wilde, author, and Alfred Taylor, were arraigned on indictment charging them with various acts of impropriety. Wilde, who was accompanied by his two sureties, Lord Douglas, of Hawick, and Rev Stewart Headlam surrendered to his bail shortly after half-past ten o’clock. The Court was densely crowded.
At the Central Criminal Court this morning before Mr Justice Wills and a jury, Oscar Wilde, author, and Alfred Taylor were arraigned on an indictment charging them with various acts of impropriety. Wilde, who was accompanied by his two sureties, Lord Douglas of Hawick and Rev Stewart Headlam surrendered to his bail shortly after half-past ten o'clock. The court was densely crowded.
The Solicitor-General, Mr. Sutton, Mr. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted for the Crown, while Sir Edward Clarke and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended Wilde, and Mr. Grain appeared for Taylor.
The Solicitor-General, Mr Sutton, Mr Gill, and Mr Horace Avory prosecuted for the Crown, while Sir Edward Clarke and Mr Travers Humphreys defended Wilde, and Mr Grain appeared for Taylor.
The Solicitor-General, Mr Sutton, Mr Gill, and Mr Horace Avory prosecuted for the Crown; while Sir Edward Clarke, and Mr Travers Humphreys defended Wilde, and Mr Grain appeared for Taylor.
The Solicitor-General, Mr Sutton, Mr Gill, and Mr Horace Avory prosecuted for the Crown; while Sir Edward Clarke, and Mr Travers Humphreys defended Wilde, and Mr Grain appeared for Taylor.
Sir F. Lockwood, Q.C., M.P.; Mr. H. Sutton, Mr. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory will prosecute; Sir Edward Clarke, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys will defend Wilde; and Mr. Grain will defend Taylor.
Sir EDWARD CLARKE applied that the defendants should be tried separately on the ground that there was no single count standing in the indictment on which both Wilde and Taylor could be convicted.
Sir Edward Clarke applied that the defendants should be tried separately on the ground that there was no single count standing in the indictment on which both Wilde and Taylor could be convicted.
Sir E Clarke applied that the defendants should be tried separately, on the ground that there was no single count standing in the indictment on which both Wilde and Taylor could be convicted.
Sir E Clarke applied that the defendants should be tried separately, on the ground that there was no single count standing in the indictment on which both Wilde and Taylor could be convicted.
Sir E Clarke applied that the defendants should be tried separately, on the ground that there was no single count standing in the indictment on which both Wilde and Taylor could be convicted.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed.
His LORDSHIP said he had anticipated some such application, and he thought it would be fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.
His Lordship said he had anticipated some such application, and he thought it would be fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.
His Lordship said he had anticipated some such application, and he thought it would be fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.
His Lordship said he had anticipated some such application, and he thought it would be fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.
His Lordship said he had anticipated some such application, and he thought it would be fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.
Mr. Justice Wills said he had anticipated that this application would be made, and having in view what the evidence was he thought it would be much fairer that the defendants should be tried separately.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he proposed to try Taylor first.
Sir E. CLARKE submitted that as Wilde’s name stood first on the indictment, and the first count was directed against him, he should be tried before Taylor.
Sir E Clark submitted that as Wilde's name stood first on the indictment and the first count was directed against him, he should be tried before Taylor.
Mr Clarke submitted that as Wilde’s name stood first on the indictment, and the first count was directed against him, he should be tried before Taylor.
Sir E Clarke submitted that as Wilde’s name stood first on the indictment, and that the first count was directed against him, he should be tried before Taylor.
Sir E Clarke submitted that as Wilde's name stood first on the indictment, and that the first count was directed against him, he should be tried before Taylor.
His LORDSHIP said it was within the right of the prosecution to elect which defendant should first be tried.
His Lordship said it was within the right of the prosecution to elect which defendant should first be tried.
His Lordship said it was within the rights of the prosecution to elect which defendant should first be tried.
His Lordship said it was within the rights of the prosecution to elect which defendant should first be tried.
His Lordship said it was within the rights of the prosecution to elect which defendant should be tried.
In reply to Sir E. CLARKE, the JUDGE said he was willing to renew Wilde’s bail.
In reply to Sir E Clarke, the judge said he was willing to renew Wilde’s bail.
In reply to Sir E Clarke, the judge said he was willing to renew Wilde’s bail.
In reply to Sir E Clarke, the judge said he was willing to renew Wilde's bail.
In reply to Sir E Clark, The Judge said he was willing to renew Wilde's bail.
The charges against Taylor were then proceeded with.
Sir FRANK LOCKWOOD opened at length the case against Taylor, and called Chas. Parker. Witness repeated the well-known history of the meeting of himself and brother with Taylor, and of their visit to Taylor’s house, Little College Street. He also spoke to their visit with Wilde to the Savoy Hotel. Witness was cross-examined as to his relations with certain gentlemen, but denied that he had ever threatened them with exposure if they did not give him money. He, however, admitted receiving money.
Sir Frank Lockwood opened at length the case against Taylor, and called Charles Parker. Witness repeated the well-known history of the meeting of himself and brother with Taylor, and of their visit to Taylor’s house, Little College street. He also spoke to their visit with Wilde to the Savoy Hotel. Witness was cross-examined as to his relations with certain gentlemen, but denied that he had ever threatened them with exposure if they did not give him money. He, however, admitted receiving money. William Parker, the elder brother, corroborated the witness as to the introduction to Wilde, and his alleged selection of "Charle as the boy for me." Alfred Wood was next called, He stated he received money from Wilde to go to America.
William Parker, the elder brother, corroborated the witness as to the introduction to Wilde, and his alleged selection of "Charlie as the boy for me."
Alfred Wood was next called. He stated he received money from Wilde to go to America.
Other witnesses followed, and the case for the Crown closed.
Mr. GRAIN submitted that certain counts should be withdrawn.
The case was adjourned.