Editing 23 Apr 1895 - The Globe (London)

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

Page 2, Column 5, Link

<b><center>CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT</center></b>
<center>THE OSCAR WILDE CASE</center>

The April Sessions were opened yesterday by the Lord Mayor, who was accompanied on the bench by the Recorder (Sir Charles Hall), the Common Serjeant (Sir Forrest Fulton), Sir David Evans, Sir Stuart Knill, Sir John Moore, Sir J. C. Dimsdale, Mr. Alderman Ritchie, Mr. Alderman Vaughan Morgan, Mr. Alderman Bell, Mr. Alderman and Sheriff Samuel, Mr. Alderman and Sheriff Hand, the Under-Sheriffs (Messrs. Beard and Philips), and Sir Simeon Stuart (the City Marshal). The calendar of the business contains the names of 115 prisoners, one of whom is indicted for arson, 3 for bigamy, 16 for burglary, 1 for uttering counterfeit coin, 14 for conspiracy, 12 for forgery, 6 for housebreaking, 11 for larceny, 5 for letter stealing, 5 for libel, 3 for manslaughter, 16 for misdemeanour, 1 for attempted murder, 2 for perjury, 1 for receiving stolen goods, 13 for robbery with violence, and 3 for wounding.

The Recorder, in his charge to the Grand Jury, said that, although the number of prisoners was slightly above the average, he was happy to find that there was an absence from the calendar of the charge of murder, but there were three cases of manslaughter. In respect of them, however, although they were technically cases of manslaughter, the facts seemed to point to the inference that death was the result of accident. His Lordship referred briefly to the circumstances of the manslaughter cases, and to the case of the man Barnet Cohen, accused of perjury in connection with the Waterloo-road tragedy. The charge, he said, was a very serious one, and required careful consideration. In addition to the charge of committing perjury himself, Cohen was charged with inciting other persons to commit perjury. Under all the circumstances, having regard to the evidence that would be laid before them, the Grand Jury would probably feel it their duty to return a true bill. There was a very serious charged against two men, Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor. He did not think that it was necessary to allude to the facts of the case. The Grand Jury would see what the charges against the men were. It was only necessary to say that, after the Grand Jury had heard the evidence of the witnesses called before the magistrates, no doubt they would feel it their duty to return a true bill against each of the defendants. There was another case to which he would refer, which was that of a man named Slater, who was accused of libeling Baron Henry de Worms. The prisoner appeared to have written a number of letters alleging that Baron Henry de Worms was his father, notwithstanding the fact that he had been cautioned about his conduct. It was pointed out to him that his story was absolutely ridiculous, and the Grand Jury would probably regard it as ridiculous when they heard that at the time that the prisoner was born Baron Henry de Worms was four years of age. The Grand Jury would see the letters, said they would have no difficulty in finding a true bill. His Lordship mentioned other cases, and gave the Grand Jury directions in respect to them.