The Brooklyn Citizen - Thursday, April 4, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
IT MADE OSCAR ANGRY.
He Denied the Charge that He
Kissed Young Grainger.
PROSECUTION’S CASE CLOSED.
Letters of the Marquis of Queensberry
Reviling Lord Rosebery, Gladstone
and the Queen as Well as Oscar Wilde
Were put in
Evidence–-The
Defendant’s Counsel Accused of Insolence.
LONDON, April 4.– The trial of the section of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel, was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4. - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4 - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4 - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4 - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr Carson cross-examining.
London, April 4.—The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
London, Apr. 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complaintant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON. April 4. 1895. The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
London, April 4. - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining him.
LONDON, April 4.-- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant in the witness box, Mr. Carson examining.
London. April 4.- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis Of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant in the witness box, Mr. Carson examinning.
The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
London. April 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box.
London, April 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensbury for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor’s house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in his room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor’s house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor's house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor's house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession, or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor’s house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor’s house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession, or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor’s house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles and gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor’s house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested. Taylor had introduced him to five young men, none of whom had any trade, profession or employment, so far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently been to Taylor's house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visits at Taylor's house, he had met a youth named Mavorla, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware Taylor had been arrested but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones.
Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor's house be had met a youth named Mavorl, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr Wilde, an answer to a question, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor’s house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor’s house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared. Mr Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious.
Mr Wilde, an answer to a question, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor’s house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor’s house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared. Mr Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both out of work. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter’s private rooms in St. James street. His behaviour was not improper. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women’s clothes. They were charged with felonious practices.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter’s private rooms in St. James street. His behavior was in no way improper. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women’s clothes. They were charged with felonious practices.
Wilde was questioned in regard to this acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom. Both of them were out of employment. He had given one of them some money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St. James street. His behavior was in no way improper. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women's clothes. They were chargd with felonious practice.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers names Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St. James's street. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women's clothes. They were charged with felonious practices.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St. James street. His behaviour was in no way improper.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintance with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them, and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St. James st. His behaviour was in no way improper.
Mr. Carson––When you read of Taylor’s arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him.
Mr. Wilde––I was greatly
distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Mr. Carson: When you read of Taylor’s arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?Mr. Wilde: I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Q. - When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him? A. - I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintanceship with a man named Atkins, who was employed by a bookmaker. He first met Atkins at the rooms of a gentleman whose name he declined to give, but which he handed up to the Judge. Wilde said he had called Atkins by his Christian name. Atkins went to Paris with him and they stopped together there. Wilde paid the fares, but he declared that it would be an infamous lie to say that they had been guilty of misconduct. He knew also a youth named Grainger, who was a servant to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis of Queensberry.
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintanceship with a man named Atkins, who was employed by a bookmaker. He first met Atkins at the rooms of a gentleman whose name he declined to give, but which he handed up to the judge. The name was not made known by the court. Wilde said he had called Atkins by his Christian name. Atkins went to Paris with him and they stopped together there. Wilde paid the fare, but he declared that it would be an infamous lie to say that they had been guilty of any misconduct. He had given Atkins £3 upon one occasion and £15 on another. Besides he had given him presents of various articles.
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintanceship with a man named Atkins, who was employed by a bookmaker. He first met Atkins at the rooms of a gentleman whose name he declined to give, but which he handed up to the Judge. Wilde said he called Atkins by his Christian name. Atkins went to Paris with him, and they stopped together there. Wilde paid the fares, but he declared that it would be an infamous lie to say that they were guilty of misconduct. He had given Atkins £3 upon one occasion and £15 on another. Besides he had given him presents of various articles. A youth named Maber had stopped with him in a hotel in London. Wilde said he was a nice, charming young fellow. He gave Maber a cigarette case worth £4. He knew also a youth named Grainger, who was a servant to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis of Queensberry.
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintance with a man named Atkins, who was employed by a bookmaker. He first met Atkins at the rooms of a man whose name he declined to give, but handed it up to the Judge. The name was not made known by the Court. Atkins went to Paris with him. Wilde paid the fares. He had given Atkins £3 upon one occasion and £15 on another, besides presents of various articles. A youth named Maber had been with him in a hotel in London. Wilde gave Maber a cigarette case worth £4. He knew also a youth named Grainger, who was a servant to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis of Queensberry.
Wilde, who had succeeded hitherto in main-taining his composure, began to loose his tem-per. He declared that he never kissed Graingers and denounced the insolence of Mr. Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed. Mr. Carson, he said, had insulted him throughout the cross-examination.
Wilde, who had succeeded remarkably hitherto in maintaining his composure, began to lose his temper. He declared he had never kissed Grainger, and denounced the insolence of Mr. Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed. Mr. Carson, he said, had insulted him throughout the cross-examination.
Mr. Wilde, who had succeeded remarkably hitherto in maintaining his composure, began to lose his temper. He declared that he had never kissed Grainger, and denounced the insolence of Mr. Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed. Mr. Carson, he said, had insulted him throughout the cross-examination.
Wilde, who had succeeded remarkably hitherto in maintaining his composure, began to lose his temper. He declared that he had never kissed Grainger, and announced the insolence of Mr Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed.
Wilde, who had succeeded remarkably hitherto in maintaining his composure, began to lose his temper. He declared that he had never kissed Grainger, and announced the insolence of Mr Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed.
In answer to a new line of questioning, Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but he denied that that person had ever seen him in compromising situations.
In answer to a new line of questioning Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that person had ever seen him in compromising situations. All of the young men who visited him at his rooms did so as his guests.
In answer to a new line of questioning, Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that that person had ever seen him in compromising situations. All of the young men who visited him at his rooms did so as his guests. This ended the cross-examination.
In answer to a new line of questioning, Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that any person had ever seen him in compromising situations. All of the young men who visited him at his rooms did so as his guests. This ended the cross-examination.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in direct examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alred Douglass, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter, written by the Marquis, reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen, because of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alref Douglass was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis revilling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone, and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in re-direct examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son. Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone, and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlaneig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the marquis of Queensbury to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Rosebury, Mr. Gladstone and the queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Albert [sic] Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlaurig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in re-direct examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son. Lord Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Mr. Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the Peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke questioned the witness in re-direct examination . He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis, reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred was not his son.
Sir Edward Clark then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig.
Sir Edward Clarke in re-direct examination began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensbery to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Sir Edward Clarke questioned Mr. Wilde in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis, reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone, and the Queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters, the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case for the prosecution closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s re-direct examination, the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s re-direct examination, the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination, the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's direct examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Wilde’s redirect examination, the prosecution closed.
London, April 4— At the conclusion of Wilde's re-direct examination the prosecution closed.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defense, declared that all the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde, who, according to his own admissions, was a friend of a person who was known to be a procurer of boys for vicious purposes. Mr. Carson referred to the letter from Wilde to Lord Alfred Douglass as showing that Wilde had conceived for him an abominable passion.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defense, declared that the marquis of Queensbury had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde, who, according to his own admissions, was a friend of a person who was known to be a procurer of boys for vicious purposes.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defence, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde, who, according to his own admissions, was a friend of a person who was known to be a procurer of boys for vicious purposes.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defence, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had said and done he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde. The man Woods had now returned to England, and would give the true version of the negotiations carried on between himself and Wilde for the return to the latter of a letter written by him. Mr. Carson referred to the letter from Wilde to Lord Alfred Douglas as showing that Wilde had conceived for him an abominable passion. The court here adjourned.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defence, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde, who, according to his own admissions, was a friend of an infamous person. Wood had now returned to England, and would give the true version of the negotiations carried on between himself and Wilde for the return to the latter of a letter written by him. Mr. Carson referred to the letter from Wilde to Lord Alfred Douglas.
The court adjourned.
- The Washington Post - Friday, April 5, 1895 - 73.3%
Compare - New York Herald - Friday, April 5, 1895 - 71.6%
Compare - Quebec Morning Chronicle - Friday, April 5, 1895 - 71.1%
Compare - The Sun - Friday, April 5, 1895 - 66.8%
Compare - The Boston Globe - Friday, April 5, 1895 - 66.4%
Compare - The Boston Globe - Thursday, April 4, 1895 - 61.3%
Compare