The Philadelphia Inquirer - Sunday, April 14, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
There is good authority for the statement that the witnesses against Oscar Wilde also tendered evidence against many other notable persons. But, as in the Cleveland street case a few years ago, the police and the prosecuting authorities desire to confine the scandal within the smallest possible limit. Probably Wilde would never have been prosecuted except for his almost incredible folly in bringing suit against Lord Queensberry.
There is good authority for the statement that the witnesses against Oscar Wilde also tendered evidence against many other notable people. But, as in the Cleveland street case a few years ago, the police and the prosecuting authorities desire to confine the scandal within the smallest possible limit. Probably Wilde would never have been prosecuted except for his almost incredible folly in bringing suit against Lord Queensberry.
The police know the extent and the nature of these offenses in the West End of London, but the Home Secretary, it is understood, takes the ground that the cause of public morality would not be served by exposing them in this prosecution.
The police know the extent and the nature of these offenses in the West End of London, but the Home Secretary, it is understood, takes the ground that the cause of public morality would not be served by exposing them in this prosecution. Notices have been quietly given to some of the offenders to leave the country. The United States has already received some of these exiles.
Notices have been quietly given to some of the offenders to leave the country. The United States has already received some of these exiles.
A curious result of the Wilde trial is the libel suit brought in Paris yesterday by Robert Sherrard, an English journalist there, who has recently published a life of Zola, against Mr. Macarthy, of the English Consulate. The latter, it is alleged, on sundry public occasions accused the plaintiff of being not only an associate of Wilde’s but guilty of the offenses with which Oscar stands charged.
A curious result of the Wilde trial is the libel suit brought in Paris yesterday by Robert Sherrard, an English journalist there who has recently published a life of Zola, against Mr. Macarthy of the English Consulate. The latter, it is alleged, on sundry public occasions accused the plaintiff of being not only an associate of Wilde, but guilty of the offenses with which Oscar stands charged. Maitre Barzelay, counsel for plaintiff, asked that the case might be heard immediately, but it was postponed until after Easter.
A curious result of the Wilde trial is the libel suit brought in Paris yesterday by Robert Sherard, an English journalist there who recently published a life of Zola, against Mr. McCarthy of the English consulate. The latter, it is alleged, on sundry public occasions accused the plaintiff of being not only an associate of Wilde, but guilty of the offenses with which Oscar stands charged. Maitre Barzelay, counsel for the plaintiff, asked that the case might be heard immediately, but it was postponed until after Easter.
A result of the Wilde trial is the libel suit brought in Paris yesterday by Robert Sherrard, an English journalist there, who has recently published a life of Zola, against Mr. McCarthy, of the English consulate. The latter, it is alleged, on sundry public occasions accused the plaintiff of being not only an associate of Wilde but guilty of the offenses with which Wilde stands charged. Maitre Barzelay, counsel for the plaintiff, asked that the case might be heard immediately, but it was postponed until after Easter.
Maitre Barzelay, counsel for the plaintiff, asked that the case might be heard immediately, but it was postponed until after Easter.