Auckland Star - Saturday, June 15, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
THE WILDE TRIAL VERDICT
In important criminal trials it occasionally happens that the views of the public–formed on necessarily superficial newspaper reports–and the views of the jury and those in court–formed on evidence and the demeanour of the witnesses–differ materially. This was so in the Wilde trial concluded on Wednesday. Whilst the public anticipated with confidence a conviction, all who had heard the case through looked hopefully for an acquittal. In the end, as you know, the jury disagreed. I append a brief resume of the hearing, and have only to add that in summing-up the judge took the line which you will see I expected, viz., he dismissed the tainted testimony of the blackmailers and directed the jury to consider chiefly young Shelley's evidence and other independent witnesses, especially the hotel servants. The demeanour of Shelley in the witness-box was impressively dwelt on, also his letters which it seems contradict some statements he made. Mr Justice Charles evidently doubted whether he might not be subject to delusions. Nor did the other evidence appear irresistible to his lordship. Altogether, he summed up strongly in favour of both the accused.
The jury were seven to five. Mr Gill promptly stated the case would be re-tried next session.
THE TRIAL OF OSCAR WILDE.
The trial of Oscar Wilde and Taylor was merely a repetition in its earlier stages of what occurred at the Police Court, with edifying additions in the shape of cross-examinations. Mere lads stood forth self-confessed blackmailers or 'bouncers,' creatures for whom Michael Davitt in his prison reminiscences says even hardened gaol-birds feel and express ineffable contempt. Yet they themselves seemed to be incapable of understanding the vileness of their own conduct. The detective who had them in charge says they were as ingenuously excited with regard to playing a part in the Wilde tragedy as boys are in hunting down a burglar. 'Shall I be called again? Will he ask me any more? Who was the old buffer in the wig beside the judge?' Wood astounded the Court by boldly confessing that his share of the blackmailing incident referred to by Parker was £175. On Saturday night at the clubs one heard but a single opinion. Unless the case were proved outside such evidence, there must be an acquittal. Edward Shelly, the publisher's clerk, was, however, a harder nut than the 'bouncers' for Sir Edward Clarke to crack, and this he evidently felt. The lad is vain and weak, but far from coarse or naturally immoral. The story told of Mr Wilde's first noticing him, of his subtle flattery, of the dinner at the Albemarle, of the brilliant talk of books and men, and of his horror at what followed, rang painfully true. 'But,' said Sir Edward Clarke remorsefully, 'if you were to shocked why did you go back to the Albemarle next evening.' Shelley explained he thought Mr Wilde, like himself, had taken too much wine. Also, he believed he was sorry for what occurred. Pressed further, the lad, with scarlet cheeks and lowered eyelids, could only suppose he was 'a young fool.' The situation was summed up in the sentence, 'He was Oscar Wilde and I was a publisher's clerk.' Letters were produced addressed by Shelley to Wilde, in which the lad praised Oscar's poems and plays in ecstatic terms. Later came epistles written in extravagant language, accusing Wilde in one breath of being his ruin, and in another of being his dearest friend, in a third asking him for money, in a fourth apologising as was not quite right in his mind at times. On this last phrase counsel fastened, 'Was it true?' Shelle shot a glance at his former friend and hesitated. Should he sacrifice himself for the man in the dock? Wilde had ruined him in a way, but he had also been very kind to him. Few knew the many sides of this erring but talented creature better than he. 'Yes,' he said, 'I seem to lose my head at times.' In a fit of this kind he had assaulted his own father, to whom he was much attached. During the period following his discharge from Mathew's he was on many occasions hardly responsible. With this Sir Edward Clarke was content. Not, however, the Crown. Shelley had to confess in re-examination he was quite himself when visiting Wilde at Albemarle. Upon the lad leaving the box a general opinion was expressed that Shelley's was the most damaging evidence extant against the accused.
Edward Shelley, the publisher's clerk, was, however, a harder nut than the "bouncers" for Sir Edward Clarke to crack, and this he evidently felt. The lad is vain and weak, but far from coarse or natural immoral. The story he told of Mr Wilde's first noticing him, of his subtle flattery, of the dinner at the Albemarle, of the brilliant talk of books and men, and of his horror at what followed rang painfully true. "But," said Sir Edward Clarke remorselessly, "if you were so shocked, why did you go back to the Albemarle next evening?" Shelley explained that he thought Mr Wilde, like himself, had taken too much wine, and he believed he was sorry afterwards for what occurred. Pressed further, the lad, with scarlet cheeks and lowered eyelids, could only suppose he was "a young fool." The situation was summed up in the sentence: "He was Oscar Wilde and I was a publisher's clerk." Letters were produced addressed by Shelley to Wilde in which the lad praised Oscar's poems and plays in ecstatic terms. Later came epistles written in extravagant language, accusing Wilde in one breath of being his ruin, in another of being his dearest friend, in a third asking him for money, in a fourth apologising, as he was not quite right in his mind at times. On this last phrase counsel fastened. "Was it true?" Shelley shot a glance at his former friend and hesitated. Should he sacrifice himself for the man in the dock? Wilde had ruined him in a way, but he had also been very kind to him. Few knew the many sides of this erring but talented creature better than he. "Yes," he said, "I seem to lose my head at times." In a fit of this kind he had assaulted his own father, to whom he was much attached. During the period following his discharge from Matthew's he was on many occasions hardly responsible for his actions. With this avowal Sir Edward Clarke was content. Not so, however the Crown. Shelley had to confess in re-examination that he was quite himself when visiting Wilde at the Albemarle. Upon the lad leaving the box a general opinion was expressed that Shelley's was the most damaging evidence extant against the accused.
By this time the line of defence to be adopted was tolerably apparent. The witnesses all agreed there had never been the faintest secrecy in Oscar's relations with them. He greeted the lads in the street, received them at public resorts, made no secret of his dinner parties for them. Were the jury sure it wasn't all part of Oscar's Hellenism-run-mad pose?
By this time the line of defence to be adopted was tolerably apparent. The witnesses all agreed that there had never been the faintest secrecy in Oscar's relations with them. He greeted the lads in the street, received them at public resorts, made no secret of his dinner parties for them. Were the jury sure it wasn't all part of Oscar's Hellenism-run-mad pose?
Monday was taken up entirely with the reading over to the jury of Oscar's famous cross-examination in the Queensberry case.
Monday was taken up entirely with the reading over to the jury of Oscar's famous cross-examination in the Queensberry case.
THE DEFENCE.
On Tuesday to simplify matters and enable the prisoners if so disposed to give evidence on their own behalf, the Crown withdrew the charges of conspiracy. Sir Edward Clarke in opening his case did not think it quite fair of Mr Gill to have insisted upon reading Wilde's cross-examination upon his books and writings. It was not fair to judge a man even by his books, but the prosecution had gone further than that, and had sought to judge Wilde by books which he did not write, and by an article which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. He pointed out that the lasted date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was eighteen months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry that brought the matter before the public. He (Sir E. Clarke), with the counsel acting with him, was responsible for the advice given to Mr Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly owing to that fact that he was there again on Wilde's behalf to meet the accusation which could not properly be tried then. Men charged with offences alleged against Mr Wilde shrunk from investigation, and he submitted that the fact of Wilde's taking the initiative of a public trial was evidence of his innocence.
On Tuesday, to simplify matters and enable the prisoners, if so disposed, to give evidence on their own behalf, the Crown withdrew the charges of conspiracy. Sir Edward Clarke, in opening his case, remarked he did not think it quite fair of Mr Gill to have insisted upon reading Wilde's cross-examination upon his books and writings. It was not fair to judge a man even by his books, but the prosecution had gone further than that, and had sought to judge Wilde by books which he did not write and by an article which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. He pointed out that the latest date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was eighteen months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry that brough the matter before the public. He (Sir E. Clarke), with the counsel acting with him, was responsible for the advice given to Mr Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly owing to that fact that he was there again on Wilde's behalf to meet the accusation which could not properly be tried then. Men charged with offences alleged against Mr Wilde shrunk from investigation, and he submitted that the fact of Wilde's taking the initiative of a public trial was evidence of his innocence.
as some of the advocates who taught him his profession used to do. With regard to the literary part of this case, he was obliged to make some observations. Mr. Gill, in opening the case, urged upon the jury that it was their duty to dismiss from their minds all they had heard elsewhere. The case had been commented upon by a large section of the Press, which was disgraceful. Such comments were calculated to imperil the administration of justice, and was in the highest degree injurious to the interests of his client. He did not think it quite fair of Mr. Gill to have insisted upon reading Wilde's cross-examination upon his books and writings. It was not fair to judge a man even by his books, but the prosecution had gone further than that, and had sought to judge Wilde by books which he did not write, and by an article which he had repudiated as horrible and disgusting. He pointed out that the latest date at which misconduct was charged against Wilde was eighteen months ago, and that it was his own act in prosecuting Lord Queensberry that brought the matter before the public. He (Sir E. Clarke) with the counsel acting with him was responsible for the advice given to Mr. Wilde in the Queensberry case, and it was partly owing to that fact that he was there again on Mr. Wilde's behalf to meet the accusation which could not properly be tried then. Men charged with offences alleged against Mr. Wilde shrunk from investigation, and he submitted that the fact of Mr. Wilde's taking the initiative of a public trial was evidence of his innocence.
EXAMINATION OF OSCAR WILDE.
Mr Wilde was then called. He rose with alacrity from his seat in the dock, walked erectly to the witness-box, and, leaning across the rail in the same easy attitude that he assumed when he was examined by Mr Carson in the previous case, quietly answered the questions addressed to him by Sir Edward Clarke, which in the first place dealt with his earlier career. In 1884 he married Miss Lloyd, and from that time to the present he had lived with his wife at 16, Tite-street, Chelsea. He also occupied rooms in St. James's place, which he took for the purpose of his work, it being out of the question to get quietude at his own house when his two young sons were at home. He had heard the evidence in this case against himself, and asserted that there was no truth in any one of the allegations of indecent behaviour.
Wilde was then called. He rose with alacrity from his seat in the dock, walked erectly to the witness-box, and, leaning across the rail in the same easy attitude that he assumed when he was examined by Mr Carson in the previous case, quietly answered the questions addressed to him by Sir Edward Clarke, which in the first place dealt with his earlier career. In 1884 he married Miss Lloyd, and from that time to the present he had lived with his wife at 16 Tite street, Chelsea. He also occupied rooms in St. James's place, which he took for the purposes of his work, it being out of the question to get quietude at his own house when his two young sons were at home. He had heard the evidence in this case against himself, and asserted that there was no truth in any one of the allegations.
Sir E. Clarke having called out his name, the defendant Oscar Wilde stepped lightly from the dock, walking erectly to the witness-box, and, leaning across the rail in the same easy attitude that he assumed when he was examined by Mr. Carson in the previous case, quietly answered the questions addressed to him by Sir Edward Clarke, which in the first place dealt with his earlier career. In 1884 he married Miss Lloyd, and from that time to the present he lived with his wife at 16, Tite-street, Chelsea. He also occupied rooms in St. James's-place, which he took for the purposes of his work, it being out of the question to get quietude at his own house when his two young sons were at home. He had heard the evidence in this case against himself, and asserted that there was no truth in any one of the allegations of indecent behaviour.
THE CROSS EXAMINATION.
Mr Gill began his cross-examination with some questions relating to Lord Alfred Douglas's poems which appeared in the 'Chameleon,' which the witness at the former trial had described as beautiful poems. It was not, he said in explanation of the answers he then gave, for him to explain anyone else's work, but the explanation given him by the author was that the word 'shame' in one of the sonnets was used in the sense of modesty, to feel shame or not to feel shame. The meaning of the words in the other sonnet, 'I am the love that dare not speak its name,' was quite clear. It was said the great love between an elder and a younger man as between David and Jonathan, such as Plato made the basis of his philosophy, such as was to be found in the sonnets of Shakespeare and Michael Angelo, that deep spiritual affection that was as pure as it was perfect, and that pervaded great works of art like those of Michael Angelo and Shakespeare. It was beautiful, it was pure, it was noble, it was intellectual this love of an elder man with his experience of life and younger with all the joy and hope of life before him. (Applause and hisses in the gallery, which his lordship at once suppressed.) The witness was next examined as to the two famous letters from himself to Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the expressions, 'Your slim-gilt soul' and 'the rose-leaf lips' appeared. One of these, he said, was a sort of prose sonnet in answer to one he had received from Lord Alfred Douglas. There was nothing in either letter of which he was the least ashamed. In regard to the lads Charles Parker, Alf Wood, Atkins and Shelley, he said their evidence as to his association with them, the dinners and presents he gave them was mainly true, but there was not a syllable of truth in that part of their evidence which alleged improper behaviour. He did not think there was anything extraordinary about Taylor's rooms. They were Bohemian, that was all.
Mr Gill began his cross-examination with some questions relating to Lord Alfred Douglas's poems which appeared in the 'Chameleon,' which the witness at the former trial had described as beautiful poems. It was not, he said in explanation of the answers he then gave, for him to explain anyone else's work, but the explanation given him by the author was that the word "shame" in one of the sonnets was used in the sense of modesty, to feel shame or not to feel shame. The meaning of the words in the other sonnet, 'I am the love that dare not speak its name,' was quite clear. It was said the great love between an elder and a younger man as between David and Jonathan, such as Plato made the basis of his philosophy, such as was to be found in the sonnets of Shakespeare and Michael Angelo, that deep spiritual affection that was as pure as it was perfect, and that pervaded great works of art like those of Michael Angelo and Shakespeare. It was beautiful, it was pure, it was noble, it was intellectual this love of an elder man with his experience of life and a younger with all the joy and hope of life before him.—(Applause and hisses in the gallery.) Witness was next examined as to the two famous letters from himself to Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the expressions "your slim gilt soul" and "the rose leaf lips" appeared. One of these, he said, was a sort of prose sonnet in answer to one he had received from Lord Alfred Douglas. There was nothing in either letter of which he was the least ashamed. In regard to the lads Charles Parker, Alf Wood, Atkins, and Shelley, he said their evidence as to his association with them, the dinners and presents he gave them, was mainly true, but here was not a syllable of truth in that part of their evidence which alleged improper behaviour. He did not think there was anything extraordinary about Taylor's rooms. They were Bohemian, that was all.
EXAMINATION OF TAYLOR.
Alfred Taylor next went into the box. He said he was thirty-three years of age when he was educated at Marlborough. When he was twenty-one he came into £45,000. In a few years he ran through it, and at about the time he went to Chapel-street he was made a bankrupt. The charges against him for misconduct were entirely unfounded.
Alfred Taylor next went into the box. He said he was thirty-three years of age, and was educated at Marlborough. When he was twenty-one he came into £45,000. In a few years he ran through it, and at about the time he went to Chapel street he was made a bankrupt. The charges against him of misconduct were entirely unfounded.
SPEECH FOR THE DEFENCE..
After luncheon Sir E. Clarked addressed the jury in defence of Wilde. He carefully analysed the evidence, and submitted that they could not possibly find Wilde guilty on the statement of those tainted witnesses. He pointed out that Wilde had himself produced one of the letters which had been made so much of by the prosecution, and said that he had made no secret of his visiting Taylor's rooms and giving dinners to some of the witnesses. Wilde was an extraordinary man, and he had written letters which might seem high-flown, exaggerated, absurd if they liked, but he was not afraid or ashamed to produce those letters. Council dwelt forcibly upon the character of some of the testimony offered, especially upon that given by those witnesses who had been proved to have been guilty of blackmail. 'Fix your minds,' concluded Sir Edward Clarke, 'firmly on the tests that ought to be applied to the evidence before you can condemn a fellow man on a charge like this. Then I trust that the result of your deliberations will be to gratify those thousand hopes that are waiting upon your verdict. I trust that the verdict will clear from this fearful imputation one of the most accomplished and renowned men of letters to-day.'
Sir E. Clarke addressed the jury in defence of Wilde. He carefully analysed the evidence, and submitted that they could not possibly find Wilde guilty on the statement of those tainted witnesses. He pointed out that Wilde had himself produced one of the letters which had been made so much of by the prosecution, and said that he had made no secret of his visiting Taylor's rooms and giving dinners to some of the witnesses. Wilde was an extraordinary man, and he had written letters, which might seem high-flown, exaggerated, absurd if they liked, but he was not afraid or ashamed to produce those letters. The witnesses Charles Parker, Alfred Wood, and Atkins had been proved to have been guilty of blackmailing, and upon their uncorroborated evidence surely the jury would not convict the prisoner on such terrible charges. "Fix your minds," concluded Sir Edward Clarke, "firmly on the tests that ought to be applied to the evidence before you can condemn a fellow-man on a charge like this. Then I trust that the result of your deliberations will be to gratify those thousand hopes that are waiting on your verdict. I trust that verdict will clear from this fearful imputation one of the most accomplished and renowned men of letters of to-day.
At the conclusion of Sir Edward's earnest and eloquent address, Mr Wilde, who was visibly affected, wrote a brief note, which was handed down to the learned counsel.
Mr Grain then replied to the charges against Taylor. He said that all the resources of the crown had been unable to produce any corroboration of the charges made by the two Parkers. Taylor, he added, having run through his money, had been living on an allowance made by members of his late father's firm.
Mr Grain then replied to the charge against Taylor. He said that all the resources of the Crown had been unable to produce any corroboration of the charges made by the two Parkers. Taylor, he added, having run through his money, had been living on an allowance made by members of his late father's firm.
As already stated, the jury disagreed.