THE WILDE-QUEENSBERRY CASE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2800, 9 April 1895, Page 4

THE WILDE-QUEENSBERRY CASE.

London, April 4. In cross-examination, Oscar Wilde admitted that he was acquainted with young meu named Taylor, Parker, and Atkins. Taylor had introduced , him to five young, men on separate occasions, to whom witness had given money, but he was not aware that any of them were gentlemen’s servants. He said he de rived pleasure from being in the company of bright, happy people. Witness had frequently been in Taylor’s room. Was aware that both Taylor and Parker had once been arrested, bat he continued their friendship. Once he took Atkins and a youth named Price to Paris, and introduced them to another yeuth named Ernest Scarf, who became acquainted with Lord Douglas when makiug a voyage to Australia. Wilde said he had made presents to Scarp aud Mayby because he liked them. Letters read in Court proved tha; the Marquis of Queensberry was endeavoring to stop his #op visiting Wilde. The son wired back to hU father that Wildo was n fanny little man. The Marquis subsequently called at Wiidc’* bouse, where a furious scene took place. The latter denied the charges levelled against him, aud showed the Marquis the door. Witness wrote to the Marquis, complaining that his wife encouraged his sou’s visits. Wilde’s friendship with Lady Queensberry and her sons remained unbroken, Certain letters from the youths already named showed that the writers were povertystricken, some imploring assistance or employment. Wilde admitted close in timacy with a number of young men, but denied that there was anything improper in it. He poid no regard to social inferiority if his friend', were amusing. Lord Douglas’s letters showed that ho had threatened to shoot bis father if he attempted to thrash him. The Marquis’s letters referred to an eminent statesman, but the reference was political. Wilde’s case is closed. Mr Carson, in opening the defence, declared tb»i plaintiff’s proteges were among the moat ipjmornJ persons in London. Wilde’s intimacies were absolutely irreconcilable with his claims aa an exponent of cultnr*. His literature alone justified the charge* ag inst him. In conclusion Mr Carson claimed that defendant’s witnesses, among whom was Wood, the chief blackmailer, would the case to the hilt.

The Mai quis of Queensberry wrote to his sou ssying that he believed that he tr.as crazy, and suggesting that he should )«»?# the country. April 6.

The ebarge of lioel against the Marquis of Queensberry was finished to-day, a verdict of not guilty being returned, '■’he jury considered that the charges made by the Marquis of Queensberry. were of public benefit. Wilde’s counsel withdrew from the case, and Wilde himself left the Court while bis counsel was explaining that plaintiff’s literature and letters justified the plea of the defence that Wilde posed as au immoral person., lie explained that the reason for which he withdrew from the case was to avoid Iho appalling evidence which would be i.dducoJL The verdict was received with loud cheers.

Oscar Wilde publishes a letter stating that he abandoned the case in order to (,yo : d placing i .ord Douglas in the witness box. After the warrant had been issued for Wilde’s arrest, the police detained three essential witnesses. Lord Douglas and two men remained in conference with Wilde at the Viaduct Hotel for severei hours after the trial, and lunched together in a private room. Subsequently they drove to a bank, where Wilde withdrew a large sum of money. He was then lost sight of until arrested in the evening at A hotel in Sloane street. Cord Douglas was much distressed when he found that he was unable to bail him out. After tha trial the Marquis of Queousborry sent Wilds a message stating that he woul < iiluot him if he took his son abroad. Taylor has also been arrested, and ivill be charged in conjunction with Wilde. The matter’s name has been withdrawn from ,ha play-bills of the London and American theatres.