The Washington Post - Friday, April 5, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
THE WILDE LIBEL CASE
Testimony for the Prosecution Concluded Yesterday.
WHAT THE DEFENSE WILL PROVE
The
Complainant Gives Evidence as to His Relations with Men and Boys, Denying Improper
Action—He Likes Youth Because Happy, Careless, and Original, and
Preferable to the Company of Sensible People—Opening of the Defense.
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 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 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. - 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.
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. 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 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.
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.
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 by Mr. Carson, 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. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession, or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, 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. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession, or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, 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 his 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. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, 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 and 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. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested. Taylor had introduced him to five young men, none of whom had any trade, profession or employment, so far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to a question by Mr. Carson, said he had been introduced to the man Wood by a man named Taylor. He had frequently been to 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 visits at Taylor's house, he had met a youth named Mavorla, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware Taylor had been arrested but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones.
Upon every occasion of his visiting Taylor's house be had met a youth named Mavorl, who had since disappeared. Mr. Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious by his practice of introducing young men to older ones. Taylor, he admitted, however, had introduced him to five young men. None of these young men had any trade, profession or employment, as far as he knew. He had made them presents of money for the reason that they were poor.
Mr Wilde, an 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 Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious.
Mr Wilde, an 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 Wilde said he was aware that Taylor had been arrested, but he did not know that Taylor had made himself notorious.
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 was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment. 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 street. His behavior was in no way improper. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women’s clothes. They were charged with felonious practices.
Wilde was questioned in regard to this 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 were out of employment. He had given one of them some money on the occasion of his taking tea with him (Wilde) in the latter's private rooms in St. James street. His behavior was in no way improper. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women's clothes. They were chargd with felonious practice.
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 was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both out of work. 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 street. His behaviour was not improper. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women’s clothes. They were charged with felonious practices.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintanceship with two brothers names 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. 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's street. When Taylor and one of the Parkers were arrested they were in women's clothes. They were charged with felonious practices.
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 was not aware that one of them was a valet and the other a groom, both of them out of employment. 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 street. His behaviour was in no way improper.
Mr. Wilde was questioned in regard to his acquaintance 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. 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. His behaviour was in no way improper.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to questions in regard to his acquaintance with two brothers named Parker, said 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. He had given one of them money on the occasion of his taking tea with the witness in the latter's 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. Wilde: I was greatly
distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
Mr. Carson––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.
Q. - When you read of Taylor's arrest did it make any difference in your friendship for him?
A. - I was greatly distressed and wrote to him. His arrest did not affect my friendship.
His Acquaintance with Atkins.
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 he handed up to the judge. The name was not made known by the court. Wilde said he had called Atkins by his Christian name. Atkins went to Paris with him and they stopped together there. Wilde paid the fare, but he declared that it would be an infamous lie to say that they had been guilty of any misconduct. He had given Atkins £3 upon one occasion and £15 on another. Besides he had given him presents of various articles.
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 he handed up to the Judge. Wilde said he had called Atkins by his Christian name. Atkins went to Paris with him and they stopped together there. Wilde paid the fares, but he declared that it would be an infamous lie to say that they had been guilty of misconduct. He knew also a youth named Grainger, who was a servant to Lord Alfred Douglas, son of the Marquis of Queensberry.
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 he handed up to the Judge. Wilde said he called Atkins by his Christian name. Atkins went to Paris with him, and they stopped together there. Wilde paid the fares, but he declared that it would be an infamous lie to say that they were guilty of misconduct. He had given Atkins £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.
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. Mr. Carson asked Wilde if he had ever kissed Grainger. Wilde, who had succeeded well in retaining his composure, began to lose his temper. He declared that he had never kissed Grainger, and denounced the insolence of Mr. Carson in pursuing the line of questioning he had followed. Mr. Carson, he said, had insulted him throughout the cross-examination.
In answer to a new line of questioning, Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that any person had ever seen him in compromising situations. All of the young men who visited him at his rooms did so as his guests. This ended the cross-examination.
In answer to a new line of questioning, Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that that person had ever seen him in compromising situations. All of the young men who visited him at his rooms did so as his guests. This ended the cross-examination.
In answer to a new line of questioning Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that person had ever seen him in compromising situations. All of the young men who visited him at his rooms did so as his guests.
In answer to a new line of questioning, Mr. Wilde said that a masseur had attended him at the Savoy Hotel, but he denied that that person had ever seen him in compromising situations.
It was noticed that during Mr. Carson’s questioning several names were written upon slips of paper and handed up to the court. These names were not made public.
It was noticed that during Mr. Carson's questioning several names were written upon slips of paper and handed up to the court. These names were not made public.
This ended the cross-examination. It was noticed that during Mr. Carson's questioning several names were written on slips of paper and handed up to the court. These names were not made public.
This ended the cross examination. It was noticed that during Mr. Carson’s questioning several names were written on slips of paper and handed up to the Court. Those names were not made public.
Mr. Carson's questions to Wilde were in the main pitiless and unprintable. It was noticed that during Mr. Carson's questioning several names were written upon slips of paper and handed up to the court. These names were not made public.
The Re-direct Examination.
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 Drumlanrig. In one of the letters, the marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
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 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 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 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.
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.
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.
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.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s re-direct examination, the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s re-direct examination, the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination, the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde's direct examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case of the prosecution was closed.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case for the prosecution closed.
At the conclusion of Wilde’s redirect examination, the prosecution closed.
London, April 4— At the conclusion of Wilde's re-direct examination the prosecution closed.
Before leaving the witness stand Wilde explained his fondness for the society of males in their youth by saying that he disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young, happy, careless, and original had a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amazing.
Before leaving the witness stand Wilde explained his fondness for the society of males in their youth by saying that be disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young, happy, careless and original has a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amazing.
Before leaving the witness stand, Wilde explained his fondness for the society of males in their youth by saying that he disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young, happy, careless and original youth had a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amazing.
Before leaving the witness stand, Mr. Wilde explained his fondness for the such type of males in their youth, by saying that he disliked the old and senile, while the company of the young, happy, careless and original had a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amazing.
Before leaving the stand Wilde explained his fondness for the society of youthful males by saying he disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young, happy, careless and original had a wonderful charm.
At the conclusion of Wilde's redirect examination, the case for the prosecution was closed. Before leaving the witness stand, Wilde explained his fondness for the society of males in their youth by saying he disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young-happy, careless and original-had a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amusing.
Before leaving the witness stand Wilde explained his liking for the society of young men by saying that he disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young, happy, careless and original had a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amazing. At the close of Mr. Wilde's re-direct examination, the case for the prosecution was closed.
Mr. Wilde said he disliked the old and sensible, while the company of the young, happy, careless, and original had a wonderful charm. The mere fact of their youth was amazing.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defense, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defense, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said, he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defence, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defence, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde, who, according to his own admissions, was a friend of a person who was known to be a procurer of boys for vicious purposes.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defense, declared that the marquis of Queensbury had done and said he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde, who, according to his own admissions, was a friend of a person who was known to be a procurer of boys for vicious purposes.
The court adjourned.
The St. James Gazette makes the announcement that owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit the management of that paper have decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.
The St. James Gazette makes the announcement that owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit, the management of that paper have decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.
The St. James Gazette makes the announcement that owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit the management of that paper has decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.
London, April 4. - The "St. James’ Gazette" makes the announcement that, owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit, the management of that paper have decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.
LONDON, April 4. - The St. James Gazette makes the announcement that owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit the management of that paper has decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.
The St. James's Gazette makes the announcement that, owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit, the management of the paper have decided not to report further the proceedings of the case.