4 Apr 1895 - The Globe (London)
Page 4, Column 5, Link
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.