The Freeman’s Journal - Saturday, May 25, 1895

LONDON CORRESPONDENCE.
(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)
(BY SPECIAL WIRE.)

London, Saturday Morning.

[...]In the trial of the Wilde case yesterday, Sir Edward Clarke took occasion to condemn with something more than the conventional court indignation the action of the Solicitor-General in undertaking the conduct of the prosecution. The motive, he said, was to press the case to the utmost point against the prisoner, as the Solicitor-General had the privilege not possessed by the ordinary Q C of saying the last word to the Jury. He also complained that this was degrading the position of the Crown Counsel, who should be regarded more as a "minister of justice" than an ordinary lawyer desirous of getting a conviction at all hazards. This is all very refreshing reading. It is a pity, however, that when Sir Edward Clarke was Solicitor-General he did not take occasion to give expression to these high-toned views of the duties of that position when Sir Peter O'Brien or Mr Carson filled the same office in Ireland under the same administration. A pretty "minister of justice" Sir Peter O'Brien was when he was prosecuting in a political case in Ireland, and a nice conception of the honourable distinction between an officer of the Crown and an ordinary counsel Mr. Carson had when he was performing in the Coercion Courts. By the way, as to the Wilde case, the opinion was expressed at the conclusion of last night's proceedings by those who were present that the case would eventuate either in a disagreement or an acquittal.