The Sun.
London, England, 1864-12-16 00:00:00

did not do half before. I will keep your nose to the grind-
ing stone while your wife is away, and when she returns I
will see her—so you had better not make a fool of me this
time• I will give you a further trial for the few days lam
wain ing."

When did you write that ?—ln August or July, 1863,
After you were injured 2—YLs.
What is the meaning of it—you will give him another
trial P—The meaning is, that I wished him to understand
that I would see his wife. He had asked me to go there
not at business hours, and that he had not time at bu;i•
noes hours to operate on my coin.

Then he was operating on your corn after you were
violoted, as you sny you were ?—Yee.
You ticked for money P—Yes.
And you threatened him if you did not get it P—As I
said before.

Did you ask him to go to your father's house after Oct•,
18(32 P—Yes.

Did you accompany that by asking for money ?—Yes.
You swore tin' you never asked him for money when ho
was knighted P—l

Is that your handwriting would not swear whether
it is or not. It is very like it.

Did you admit before the magistrate at Bray that you
wrote it F—l was in such confusion that I did not know the
words I used.

If you swore it was your handwriting, would it be true
or falee P—l do not know. EI do not think I would phrase
a letter asking for ..-C3 in the way that is phrased. [A. letter
was here put in, in which the witness wrote for money, say-
ing, " u will seo what will happen if you are not prompt
as usual."]

When did you write that f—ln February, 1864.
Was he prompt in giving you money?—He was.

Under threats ?—No.

What did you mean by " Bring it or send it ?"—lf he
chose to give me money, I wanted it for the "sinews of
war," as he phrased it, to carry on the publication,

And he was prompt in lending money before your alleged
outrage, as well as after it P
Did you write to him saying for him to bring out £2O on
the following Wednesday, at four o'clock, and not to send a
messenger I)—Yes ; I intended to receive him, and keep
our servant outside of the door while I spoke of the disputes
and annoyances which took place in his house.
Did you want the money P--I did, for my own wants.
You wanted him to lend it to you P—l did not care
whether he did or not.

Did he reply to that letters'—He did.
[Sergeant Sullivan read the reply, in which Sir William
Wilde declined the proposed meeting, and said that if she
showed she did not want to injure herself by any further
publication she should have the money. The witness sent
a reply saying that her object was to take up the I 0 U
which he held for money advanced to her.]
In reply to Sergeant Sullivan, the witness stated that,
when the wrote for £2O, Sir William wanted to enter into
stipulations with her as to the terms on which she would
take it.

The cross-ex .mination then comes to tho affair of 14th
October, 1862.

Sergeant Sullivan—This one transaction you described
occurred between you and Sir W. Wilde in October, 1862 ?
—Yes.

.And nothing of thA sort occurred before or after F—Not
before.

Did it after ?—I consider it was attempted.
D.d you know what happened to you the day you were
in the study in October ?—yes.

You know perfectly well that day you were outraged
—Y€s.

And th© same thing was attempted after F—Yia.

When P—ln July, 1863,
Was that before you published the pamphlet ?—Yes.

There is not a word in the pamphlet about it P—There
are a groat many eircurastlnees not mentioned in the
pamphlet.

There is not a word in the pamphlet about the second
attempt ?—That is for you to judge.
___ .

Was there a third P—Not atter that.
Was there in the interval P.--I don't know.

Is that your answer P—lt is ; for Ido not know what
motives actuate people in certain acts; or whether they in-
tend one thing or another thing, or whether they intend
real rudeness or worse.

You had been abused in October, and you knew it th©
day it happened; and after that you cannot tell whether the
man attempted to do the same thing or not ?—No.
Nor form an opinion 2—l formed opinions. You did not
ask my opinion. You asked for matters of fact; and I
cannot state the matters of fact.

It is whether an attempt was made to repeat the offence
on you again. Yuu don't know whether there was or not ?
—There was rudeness and roughness, leading to it.

How often ?—Two or three times.
Did you believe it was for the purpose of securing your
person F—l thought it.
And you went time after time to the study where this
treatment had been offered you?—Yes.
And you took his money ?--Yes.
The plaintiff was cross-examined as to the statement in
the pamphlet, that chloroform had been employed.
Did ho attempt to take advangage of you under the influ-
ence of chloroform, es de.cribed in the pamphlet P—As de.
scribed in that p run phlc t it i, not true.

Then you published a falsehood to the world pub-
;idled a sory.
Had yen eny intention of itjuring Sir William Wilde
when you published that had an intention to justify
myself.
You had no intention to injure him in charging him with
chloroforming his patientf, and then al.tempting to outrage
them ?—lt did not matter to me whether it injured him
,or
not. I had as Hide commiseration for him as he had for
mo,

but
l nnh dootst te oho
money ek
d
es
You state in the introduction to your pamphlet that it
contain au altered and curtailed, but by no means exagge-
rated account ef Sir William Wilde's conduct P—l say still
it is not exaggerated, but it is altered.
It is not exaggerated ?--Yes, I cling to that.
It is not an exaggeration to say you had been chloro-
formed ?—lt was as bad as chloroform, but too gross for
publication.
But still you went back to the study and took the money,
and wrote for tickets to the ball p—yes.
A
got money for the dress,
Did you buy the dress with his money ?---1 did.
And wore it ?—Yes.
v
bought it ?—liis,
drreessss. from
The man who outraged you ?-1-yes.
Who suggested this wicked notion of the chloroform to
you F—No one : I required to think of something that was
treacherous.
.
Wasn't it to injure Sir William wild, you concocted this
false story P—To prevent him doing me further injury, and
to ti y and extract from him, as I said before, some inter-
ference, legal or otherwise, that I might, in the presence of
others, say all I had to say.
As to the day the alleged offence took place, you cannot
fix the date of it?--Not answered,
You know it he.
1,19`-''utd that daYP—I did at the time.
Do you mean while in his house?--Yes.
Thetime."
Sergeant Chief Justice—l don't
qaite understand "at the
Sergeant Sullivan—That the knew she was abused before—
The Chief Justice—She says before she lett the house she
knew she was violated, but
,I dont know that she rays that
at the time she was violated she knew it.
y that you di I not know it
at Stheregteimanet?S—uYllievsa.n—You imply
Did yr,u see the servants theret—l did.
Ihe people in the hall you poled when you were going
upstairs or going out 2—When T
• ?Vas going upstairs.
You passed people iu the hall PSI did.
people collect to go into
the roomnot t?h,a-tythese h:11 where the
--Yes.
Dees not the door cf the loom open from the hall ?
Yes.
Does rot the hall porter stand in the hall to open the
door ?—Yes.
And it was in that room you were outraged on a day you
cannot tell ?—Yes.
Nor within four hours of the time : you say between ono
and Ik/ur F—l cannot tell what day it was ; I think it was
the 16th of October,
Did you not say yesterday
it was the 14th ?—I don't
know what date it was precisely,
You a woman, representing yourself as a virgin thus
aggrieved, cannot tell the day on which it happened—is that
your atoty ?—lt is.
Sergeant Sullivan cross-examined the witness to show that
the thought of the distracted language and passionate ges-
tures alleged to have been used and displayed by Sir William
Wilde immediately after the alleged act had got into her
mind from reading a book in which a similar steno was
described. After some other questions, Sergeant Sullivan
said he had nothing more to ask the witness.
Sergeant Armstrong, the leading counsel for the plaintiff,
put a few additional questions; he askol : Did you hear me
se ate that the circumstance of there not being future illicit
intercourse between
you and Sir Willim Wilde was no
fault of his, and that he made approaches for the purpose P 1
—Y,s,

The Chiq Justice—What leads you to say that, except
on one occasion, there was no intercourse, but on subse•
quent occasions it was attempted ?—Miss Travers—What
I considered approaches to it—attempts.
Sergeant Armstrong—It is an unpleasant matter, but it
must be inquired into. State; anything he did or said from
which you inferred an improper intercourse on his pat t.
Miss Travers— lle insisted on my leaving
a certain place
in the room, end ha was rude in his manner---he tried to
compel me to go to the other part et the room.
Sergeant Armstrong—Was there any gesture? It is very
hard to convey it, I am Bute.
Sergeant Sullivan—Was there any gesture ? Let her state
what occurred. With great respect, her statement about
gestures won't do ; let her state what took place.
The Chief Justice—This is really a very distressing sub-
ject, but people who come into court must leave considera-
tions of that sort outside. LA this lady state the details of
what occurred on these occasions.
Sergeant Armstrong—There can be no mock modesty.
There is no room for it in this case—( re Miss Travers)—
State what it was.
The. Chief Justice—State what you say occurred on the
sasequent occasions as nearly as you, can after this viola- j