Editing 4 Apr 1895 - The Globe (London)

<b>[[Case File: Oscar Wilde]]</b>

No 31147, Page 4, Column 5, [https://www.findmypast.com/image-viewer?issue=BL%2F0001652%2F18950404&page=4&article=042&stringtohighlight=oscar+wilde Link]

<b><center>MR. OSCAR WILDE AND LORD QUEENSBERRY</center></b>
<center>PROCEEDINGS TO-DAY</center>

The Central Criminal Court was again filled to its utmost capacity this morning, when the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry for libelling Mr. Oscar Wilde was resumed. All the windows in the court were wide open, but even this did not suffice to clear away the stuffy atmosphere which always seems to prevade the building. The public galleries were filled with persons having privilege passes, and these, it was understood, consisted almost entirely of friends of the parties in the case.

Mr. Wilde entered the court at a quarter-past ten, and, taking his seat at the end of the solicitors' table, engaged in an animated conversation with Mr. Charles Mathews, one of his counsel. Some few minutes later Mr. Carson and Mr. Gill, who appear for the defendant, made thier way to the counsels' seat. They were soon afterwards followed by the Marquis of Queensberry, who walked into the dock and took his stand with the same air of self-composure as marked his conduct yesterday. He was again attired in a dark blue overcoat, and carried in his hand his small felt hat. Mr. Justice Henn Collins, the Judge, took his seat at 10.30. He was accompanied by Mr. Sheriff Samuel and several Alderman.

Sir E. Clarke, Q.C., Mr. C. Matthews, and Mr. Travers Humphreys appeared to prosecute; while Mr. Carson, Q.C., Mr. C.F. Gill, and Mr. A. Gill (instructed by Mr. Charles Russell) represented the Marquis of Queensberry; Mr. Besley, Q.C., with Mr. Monckton, watching the proceedings on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, the eldest son of the Marquis.

==Mr. Wilde Further Cross-Examined==
Mr. Oscar Wilde again went into the witness box, and his cross-examination by Mr. Carson was continued. Replying to questions, witness aid he had continued on intimate terms with Taylor down to the present time, and it was he who arranged the interview with Wood relating to the letters. He used to visit witness at his house, his chambers, and at the Savoy. Witness used to go to tea-parties at Taylor's lodgings. He did not know whether he did his own cooking, but there would be nothing wrong in that.

Mr. Carson: Have I suggested anything wrong? - No, but cooking is an art.

Another art? - Yes

Were the rooms luxurious? - The place was furnished with more than usual taste.

Was it not luxurious? - No, I said in good taste. I thought them most pretty rooms. Witness denied that day and night the rooms were lighted with candles and gas, and that heavy double curtains were always drawn over the windows.

Were the rooms strongly perfumed? - Yes; I have known him to burn perfurmes in his rooms - a charming idea. I burn perfumes in my rooms.

Did you see Wood there at tea? - No, except on the occasion referred to. I have seen Sydney Mavor there. He was a friend of mine, but I have not the remotest idea where he is now.

Have you had any communication with him? - Yes, last Sunday I got Taylor to go to his mother's hosue to say I wanted to see him. He was not there, and I don't know where he is.

Were you told he has disappeared within the last week? - No; I heard he was away.

Have you found him since? - What do you mean by finding him? I object to the phrase. I have not seen him since. Answering further questions, witness said he ahd never seen Taylor wearing a lady's fancy costume. He had sent telegrams to Taylor. He had no business with him.

Was he a literary man? - He was a young man of great taste and intelligence, educated at a very good public school.

Did you dicuss literary matter with him? - He used to listen on the subject.

And get an intellectual treat also? - Certainly. Witness said he never got him to arrange dinners for him. He had never seen Fred Atkins at Taylor's, and did not know that Taylor was being watched by the police at his rooms. He knew that Taylor and Parker, whom he also knew, were last year arrested at a house in Fitzroy-square. He had seen Parker in Taylor's rooms subsequently occupied in Chapel-street. Taylor had introduced to witness about five young men, with whom he had become friendly. He liked the society of young men.

Had any of them any occupation? - That I can hardly say.

Did you give money to each? - Yes, I should think to all five - money or presents.

Did they give you anything? - Me? No.

Among the five was Charles Parker? - Oh, yes.

Was he a gentleman's servant out of employment? - I never heard that, nor should I have minded.

How old was Parker? - I don't keep a census. He was young, and that was one of his attractions. I have never asked him his age. I think it is rather vulgar ot do so (laughter).

Was he an educated man? - Culture was not his strong point (laughter).

Did you ask what his previous occupation was? - I never inquire about people's pasts (laughter)

Nor their future? - Oh, that is a public matter (laughter)

Did you become friendly with Parker's brothers? - They were my guests at table.

Did you know that one was a gentleman's valet and hte other a gentleman's groom? - I did not know it, nor should I have cared. I do not care "tuppence" for social position.

What inducement was there for you to enterain them? - The pleasure of beig with those who are young, bright, happy, careless, and original. I do not like the sensible, and I do not like the old.

Was it a good dinner? - I forget the menu at the present moment. It was certainly Kettner at his best. It was in honour of Mr. Alfred Taylor's birthday.

In the course of further cross-examination, the witness said: The dinner at Kettner's was given by me in March, 1893. It was one of the best they could provide. "Charley" Parker did not accompany me to the Savoy Hotel that night; and I strongly deny that there has been any misconduct between us. From October, 1893, to April, 1894, I had rooms in St. James's-place. Taylor wrote to me while i was staying there, telling me that Parker was in town, and I asked him to come and have "afternoon tea" with me. He came to see me five or six times. I liked his society. I gave him a silver cigarette case and about ₤3 or ₤4 in money.

Mr Carson: What was there in common between you and these young man? - Well, I will tell you. I like the society of people much younger than myself. I recognise no social distinctions at all. The mere effect of youth is so wonderful that I would sooner talk with a young man for half an hour than even be cross-examined in court (laughter).

Cross-examination continued: A common boy I met in the street might be a pleasing companion. I took Parker to lunch with me at various places.

Witness went on to say that Parker had written a 

<b>Contined on Page 5, Column 1</b>

letter to him asking whether he might have hte pleasure of dining with him that evening; and he (Mr. Wilde) was to send an answer by the messenger. The writer hoped it would be convenient "that we should spend the evening together."

Cross-examination continued: I did not visit Parker at Park-walk at half-past 12 at night. I have not seen him since February of last year. At Christmas, 1893, I took him to the Crystal Palace. I have heard that he enlisted int he Army as a private.

Mr. Carson: I think you told me that you heard that he and Taylor were arrested together? - I read it in a newspaper. That was in August of last year.

Did you read that at the time they were arrested they were in company wiht several man in women's clothes? - My recollection is that two young men in women's clothes drove up to a house of music-hall singers, and that they were arrested outside the house.

Did you ask Taylor about it? - Yes.

Did you not think it was a serious thing that Taylor, your great friend, and Charles Parker, another great friend, should be arrested in a police raid at this house? - When I read it I was very much distressed; but the magistrate seems to have taken a very differen tview of the case, for he dismissed it.

They were charged with felonious practices? - I do not know.

The magistrate fined some of them? - I don't know.

I ask you when you saw that Taylor was arrested in the company of these varied people, did you make any difference in your friendship towards him? - When I read it, I was greatly distressed, and wrote to him telling him about it; but I did not see him again until this year.

You wrote saying it made no difference to you? - Yes.

Did he write back to you when you sent that letter? - Yes.

Have you got the letter? - No

And I think you told me that this same Taylor came to luncheon with you on Tuesday? - I did not lunch with him; he came to my house.

Cross-examination continued: I became acquainted with a young man named Fred Atkins in October, 1892. He was employed by a firm of bookmakers. At the time I became acquainted with him he was about 19 or 20 years of age.

Questioned with regard to "Freddy" Atkins, witness said he first met him at the rooms of a gentleman in a house off Regent-street. He had the charm of idleness about him, with the ambition to go on the music hall stage.

Did he discuss literature with you? - Oh, I wouldn't allow him (laughter). The art of the music hall was as far as he had got. Answer further, witness said he took Atkins over to Paris a fortnight after they met. They stayed at 29, Boulevard des Capucines, and Atkins was over there practically as his guest. He gave him good dinners.

And plenty of wine? - If you suggest I ply my guests with wine, it is monstrous, and I won't have it (laughter). Witness denied that subsequently he asked Atkins not to mention his visit to Paris. He told him he thought it was the great event of his life, which it was. Witness had since sent him tickets for the theatre, and had taken tea with him at his apartments in Osnaburgh-street. He had given Atkins ₤3 15s. to buy him his first song on the music hall stage. He told him that the poets of the music hall stage never took less (laughter). Witness absolutely denied anything wrong in regard to him.

Did you consider him a moral, respectable young man? - I don't know what you mean. I thought him a very pleasant, good-natured fellow, who was going on the music hall stage. Further, witness said a young man named Ernest Scarfe was introduced to him by Taylor. He did not know he was a valet nor that his father was also a valet. Witness had never met him in society, but "he has been in my society, which is of more importance." He had asked Scarfe to dinner, becasue he (Mr. Wilde) was good natured, and one of the best ways of pleasing anyone not of one's own social position was to ask him to dine. He ahd not given him any money, but had presented him with a cigarette case. "It is my custom to present cigarette cases" (laughter). He did not remember giving Mavor a cigarette case, but if counsel said that he insturcted a shopkeeper to send him one valued ₤4 11s. 6d., no doubt that was the form his present took. Mavor had stayed with him a night at a hotel in Albemarle-street. Witness knew Walter Grainer, a servant at some rooms in Oxford, rented by Lord Alfred Douglas. He was a pecularily plain boy, unfortunately ugly, and he pitied him for it.

Mr. Carson considered that Mr. Wilde had introduced the boy's uglinness without being asked.

Witness was asked why he referred to the ugliness and Mr. Wilde, more angry than at any time since he has been under cross-examination, said, "Because of an intense insult on your part, such as I have been suffering all the morning. You sting me, and then one says things flippantly when perhaps one should speak more seriously.

==Re-Examination - Remarkable Letters==
In reply to Sir E. Clarke, witness said letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry were communicated to hiim by the persons to whom they were addressed. These were read by counsel. The first, addressed to Lord Alfred Douglas, ran: - 

"Alfred, - It is extremely painful to me to have to write to you in the strain I must, but please understand I decline to receive any answers from you in writing in return. After your previous hysterical impertinent ones, I refuse to be annoyed with such, and must ask you, if you have anything to say, to come here and say it in person. First, am I to understand that having left Oxford, as you did, with discredit to yourself, the reasons of which were fully explained to me by your tutor, you now intend to loaf and loll about and do nothing? All the time you were wasting at Oxford I was put off with the assurance that you were eventually to go into the Civil Service or to the Foreign Office, and then I was put off by an assurance of your going to the Bar. It appears to me you intend to do nothing.... I utterly decline, however, just to supply you with sufficient funds to loaf about. YOu are preparing a wretched future for yourself... Secondly, I come to a more painful part of this letter, your infamous intimacy with the man Wilde. It must either cease or I will disown you, and stop all money supply. I am not going to try and analyse this intimacy, and make no accusations.... No wonder people are talking as they are if you are seen as I saw you. Also, I now hear on good authority - but this may be false - that his wife is petitioning to divorce him... Is this true, or do you not know of it? The horror has come to my mind that it was possible you may perhaps be brought into this. If I thought the actual thing was true, and it becomes public property, I should be quite justified in shooting him at sight... - Your disgusted, so-called father, QUEENSBERRY"

Replying to a question, Mr. Wilde said there was not the slightest foundation for the remark as to divorce proceedings.

To the letter a telegram was sent in reply, "What a funny little man you are - ALFRED DOUGLAS". The next letter began, "You impertinent young Jackanapes," and went on: - 

"If you come to me with any of your impertinence, I shall give you the thrashing you richly deserve. The only excuse for you ist hat you must be crazy. All I can say is that if I catch you with that man again, I will make a public scandal in a way you little dream of. It is already a supressed one. I prefer an open one."

A letter from the Marquis to Mr. Alfred Montgomery, his father-in-law, was next read: "Sir, - ... Your daughter is the person who is supporting my son to defy me... Last night I received a very quibbling sort of message from her, saying the boy denied having been at the Savoy for the last year.... As a matter of fact, he did so, and there has been a scandal every since... I saw Drumlanrig here (Maidenhead) on the river last night, which rather upset me..."

Another letter was read, and then, 

Sir E. Clarke asked: Having regard to the contents of those lettes did you or did you not think it right to disregard the wishes referred to in them? - I thought it right to entirely disregard them.

And I think that your friendship with Lady Queensberry and her sons has continued up to the present time? - Yes.

In further re-examination the witness said that several of the young men whose names had been mentiond in the course of the case, were introduced to him by Taylor. He was introduced to Taylor in 1892 by a gentleman of high position and repute. At the itme of the introduction Taylor was living in Little College-street. He ahd lost a great deal of money he had inherited, but he (witness) believed he had still a share in an important businss. Taylor was educated at Marlborough, and was very accomplished. Witness had never any reason to believe that he was either immoral or disreputable. Witness was introduced to the young man Shelley by his publisher as a person who had literary tastes. He was the assistant to witness's publisher, and in the course of business witness naturally came in contact with him. They became intimate, and he presented Shelley with a copy of his works.

The report will be continued in our next edition.