OSCAR WILDE AND MARQUIS OF QUEENSBERRY.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 10294, 29 April 1895, Page 2

OSCAR WILDE AND MARQUIS OF QUEENSBERRY.

■- ■ ■<»■ *■ '" MARQUIS COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. By our late files of English papers, we hz-\e fullor particulars respecting this extraordinary libel case. There was a great demand for admission to Marlborough-atreet Police Court, London, on Saturday, March 9th, it being known that the caso between the Marquis of Queensberry and Mr Oscar "Wilde would come before the presiding magistrate. The accommodation afforded by the little court is extremely limited. All applications for seats in the oourb were unheeded, the public being Informed that the doors -would not be opened till 11.30, and then only to a limited number. The charge againßt the Marquis of Queensberry, which first came before the Court a week previous, -was that of having unlawfully and wilfully published a certain defamatory libel of and concerning one, Oscar Wilde, of Albemarle-street, on the 28th February, 1895, at the parish of St. George's. Mr Humphreys, solicitor, prosecuted ; Mr E. H. Carson, Q C, M.P., and Mr C. F. Gill (instructed by Mr Charles Rus- ! sell, of Messrs Day and Russell) appeared for the Marquis of Queensbsrry. The parties immediately concerned came into i court about half-pa3t eleven. The MarI guis of Quoensberry on entering the court at once stopped into the dock. On noticing this the magistrate said, " Give Lord Queensberry a chair." A chair was theftupon placed near the solicitor's table, and leaVirig the dock Lord Queensberry Bat down. Mr Oscar Wilde, with Lord Alfred Douglas, the Marquis of Queensberry's son, a young man of delicate appearance, came into court about the same time. Mr Oscar Wilde was provided with a seat, but as soon as the case was called Lord Alfred Douglas loft the court by the direction of the magistrate. Mr Oscar Wilde was then called. Examined by Mf Humphreys, he said he was a dramatist and author, and took a great interest in mattere of art. He was acquainted with defendant and many members of his family. He first became acquainted with defendant in 1893. He remembered on one occasion lunching at the Lafo Royal with Lord Alfred Douglas, Lord Queensberry's son. That was in November, 1892. Tho defendant came into the room at the time, and was invited up to the table by Lord Alfred Douglas. The defendant shook hands with them both, and took luncheon at tho same table. Witness next saw Lord Queonsberry in March, 1894, also on an occasion when witness and Lord Alfred Douglas were lunching at the Cafe Royal. They invited Lord Quoensberry to join them at lunch. That was just after Lord Alfred had returned from Egypt. Shortly after that Lord Alfred Douglas handed him a letter. Mr Carson said he hoped the letter would be put in in fairness to Lord Queensberry. Mr Humphreys. — You don't know the letter contains advice. Mr Carson. — Oh ! yes I do. I have a copy of it. Mr Humphreys. — I never intended to read the letter in public. With reference to that particular letter, the names of exalted persons are usud, and I do not think it would be right for th6ir names to be called into question in matters of this description. Mr Humphreys said he would adopt the magistrate's suggestion and would not put the letter in. Witness, continuing, said that on this day, the 28th of last March, about five o'clock in tho af ternoon^he drove up to the Albemarle Club. He had recently returned from Algiers, and thii was his first visit to the club since his return. On entering the club he spoke to the hall porter who handed him an envelope. Witness's name was written on the back of it. In handing him the envelope the hall porter said something to him. What he said was — " Lord Queensberry desired mo, sir, to hand thi3 to you when you come to the club?' There was a card inside the envelope. Witness thereupon opened the envelope, and found the card produced. On the back of the card was — " 4.30. 13-2-65. ' Witness) read what was on tho card as well as he could, and immepiately communicated with his solicitor, and had an interview with him the following day. On the same day he applied, through his solicitor, for a warrant for Lord Queensberry 'a apprehension. Mr Newton (the magistrate). —Mr Humphreys, I would suggest that you and Mr Carson should come into my room and we should have a word together. The magistrate then retiied, and was followed by Mr Carson and Mr Humphreys. There immediately arose a buzz of conversation in tbe court. Mr Oscar Wildo, remaining in the witness box, lolled back in a chair, at the same time resting his hand upon a silver-headed cane. The Marquis of Queensberry had by this time taken a seat at the back of the court, and faced the witness. On tho magistrate and the log.il representatives returning into court in about ten minutes, Mr Humphreys simply said — " I have no further questions to ask Mr Wilde." Mr Carson was then proceeding to crossexamine Mr Wilde, but was overruled by the magistrate. Mr Carson said he did not mean to ask any questions on the plea of justification. That was a plea which Lord Queensberry, with full responsibility of its effect, would raise if this matter was sent for trial. He did not propose to ask certain questions to show how Lord Queensberry came to write this card. His object in writing it was connected with his previous letters to Mr Wilde, Lord Queensberry's view being that he was entitled, if he thought it in the interests of the morality of his own son, to do everything in his power to put a stop to the conucction of his son with Mr Wilde. Ho professed to ask the question solely in that view. It would go much beyond the case of tho Queen v. Carden. The magistrate directed that Mr Carson's question was directed to this, that Lord Queensberry was justified in writing this card, ho having told his son not to make the acquaintance o£ Mr Wilde, and that if he d d so ho must take the consequences. Therefore, ha (the magistrate) objected to the question. The evidence of Mr Oscar Wilde was then read over. He then said that what the porter said to him was that he had been desired to hand " this card ' (not letter) to him. With regard to the date when he first met Lord Queensberry it was in 1892, not 1893. These corrections in the depositions were duly made. Mr Humphreys (to the magistrate) : That is the case, upon which I ask you to commit for trial. Tho magistrate : Lot defendant stand up. Lord Queensberry, who had divested himself of his fur-lnsed coat, then rose at the back of his counsel. The magistrate then asked ilcfendantif he had anything to say, at tho same time administering the usiul caution. Lord Quoensberry : Your Worship, I simply wish to say tins. I wrote the curd himply with tho intention of bringing nmrurs to a head, having been uuablo to meet Mr Wildo otherwise, and to save \ my son, and I abido by what I said. Lord Queensberry then resumed his seat. Tho Magistrate : " Abido by what I said?" Lord Qucenhbcrry : By what I wroto. Tho Magistrate :* You have no witnesses ? Mr C.n-jon : No. Tlio Magistrate (to Lord Queensberry) : You are committed to t.iko your trial at the next sessions of the Central Cihninal Court. Bail was then entered of one surety of i'SOU and liis own recognisance of £1000. Mr Wm. Tysor, a merchant of Glouces-ter-square, London, was accepted as surety, and tho Marquis of Quuensberry loft the court with his friends. [The caso was dismissed in the highor

Court, and Oscar Wilde was wrested on a erimiual charge. — Ed. T.H.]