The Boston Daily Advertiser - Friday, April 5, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
OSCAR WILDE'S TESTIMONY.
He Tells of a Man Who Burned Perfumes Instead of Gas.
London, Apr. 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complaintant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4. - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4 - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4 - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4 - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr Carson cross-examining.
London, April 4.—The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4.– The trial of the section of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel, was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON. April 4. 1895. The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
London, April 4. - The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining him.
The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
LONDON, April 4.-- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant in the witness box, Mr. Carson examining.
London. April 4.- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis Of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant in the witness box, Mr. Carson examinning.
The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
London. April 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box.
London, April 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensbury for libel was resumed today in the central criminal court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box.
Mr. Wilde in answer to a question said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor.
He had frequently visited Taylor's house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor he said, had a habit of burning perfumes in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor's house he had met a youth named Mavori who had since disappeared.
Mr. Carson cross-examining Wilde, in answer to a question by Carson had been introduced to the man Wood a man named Taylor. He had frequently visited Taylor's house to attend afternoon tea parties. Taylor, he said, had a havit of burning perfume in the room, but candles or gas were not lighted. Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor's house he had met a youth named Mavori, who had since disappeared.
Mr. Wildewas questoned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment.
Mr Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St James st.
Mr Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers named Parker. He replied that he knew them and had dined with them. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St James st.
Mr. Carson: "When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?"
Mr Carson - When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?
Mr Carson - When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?
Mr. Carson- "When you read of Taylor’s arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?"
Mr. Carson: "When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?"
Mr. Carson — "When you read of Taylor’s arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him ?"
Mr. Carson-When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?
Mr. Carson asked: "When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?"
Mr. Wilde: "I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship."
Mr Wilde - I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Mr Wilde - I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Mr. Wilde: "I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship?"
Mr. Wilde-I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Mr. Wilde- "I was greatly distressed, and wrtoe to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship."
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintanceship with a man named Atkins who was employed by a bookmalker. He first met Atkins at the rooms of a gentleman whose name he declined to give, but which he handed up to the judge.
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintanceship with a man named Atkins, who was employed by a book-maker. He first met Atkins in the rooms of a gentleman whose name he declined to give, but which he handed up to the judge. The name was not made known by the court.
Mr. Wilde admitted his acquaintanceship with a man named Atkins, who was employed by a bookmaker. He first met Atkins at the rooms of a gentleman whose name he declined to give, but which was handed up to the Judge. The name was not made known by the Court.
He had given Atklns £3 upon one occasion and £15 on another. Besides he had given him presents of various articles. A youth named Maber had stopped with him in a hotel in London. Wilde said he was a nice charming young fellow.
He gave Maber a cigarette case worth £4. He knew also a youth named Grainger who was a servant to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis of Queensberry.
Sir Edward Clarke in re-direct examination began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensbery to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in re-direct examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son. Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone, and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlaneig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the marquis of Queensbury to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Rosebury, Mr. Gladstone and the queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis revilling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone, and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke questioned the witness in re-direct examination . He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis, reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Albert [sic] Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlaurig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in re-direct examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son. Lord Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Mr. Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the Peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis, reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone, and the Queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters, the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Sir Edward Clarke questioned Mr. Wilde in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the marquis reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in direct examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alred Douglass, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter, written by the Marquis, reviling Lord Roseberry, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen, because of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alref Douglass was not his son.
Sir Edward Clark then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen, because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig.
In direct examination letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry were read. In them the marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde and reviled Rosebery, Gladstone and the Queen for the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one letter the marquis declared Lord Douglas was not his own son.