The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-03-10

The Marquis of ou.rnsbury stands by
Whl He vs..

Whi He vs..
LONDON, March 9.-The NJ ,rouis of
| Quee lsDury was to-day at the Bow Street
police court. having been committed for
trial by Mr.. Newton, the sitting magis-
trate, on a charge of having libeled Oscar
| Wilde, in leaving at the Marlborough
club on Feb. % a card upon which was
written dIsgraceful eplthet. The mar
gu S declared in court that he wroie the
card simply to bring matters to head
| and save his son. and that he abided by
what he wrote. Edward NJ. Carson, Q. c.
NJ. p, formerly solicitor general for Ire
| land, defended the marquis.
| The court was crowded. with well known
people. Oscar Wilde drove to the police
cour in great style, in a carr age and
| pair, with footmen and a coachmtn. Ac-
comp ,nying Mr.. Wilde was Lord Alfred
Doug ass, son of the Marquis of Queens
bury, but he was not allowed to remain in
court during the examination of Mr..
| Wide.
Mr. Wilde was placed on the stand and
| began his evidence with an air of languid
lofIiness. When he was asked # he was
Oscar Wilde, the author and dramalist,
the witness replied: Il think l am we'll
known"
This remark made Magistrate Newton
|
| question please" Thereupon the plaintiff
rep led: Yes"
Tue reproof of the magistrate caused
Mr.. Wide to assume less important air.
| Replying to the questions put to hlm 10y
| his own counsel. the plaintiff SAID that he
| first became acquainted with the marquis
| OF Qleensbury in 1898. He remembered
lunching with Lord Alfred Douglass, who
is the marquis second son, in the Cafe
| Royal, during the month of October, 1892,
when the defendant entered the room,
and by invitation of his son, sat down at
| the same table. Continuing. Wilde said
he did not see the marquis again until
1891, when he and Lord Alfred Douglass
were lunching in the same cafe. The de-
fendant upon that occasion shook hands
with both Wilde and his son, and the Wit
ness invited the IN Irquis to JOIN them.
AT this stage of the proceedings counsel
for Wilde, handed him letter and the
witness was asked if the attachment had
been placed in his hands by Lord Alfred
| Douglass shortly afterwards.
the magistrate here remarked that he
thought this document should be placed
! in evidence.
Carson, counsel for the marquis, inter-
| posed, saying he did not object to the
letter being put in evidence, on the con-
trary, he preferred that it should be
brought before the court, as he wished to
show that the marquis was acting in the
| interest of his son.
| Newton said that he could not then
enter into the question. Carson objected
to this and asked that the document be
put into evidence in order that the IN alter
might be investig lted in the fullest
manner possible. Counsel for Wilde SAID
In -. -
should be read in court as the names of
exalted persons were mentioned and he
not think il right that their names
should transpire. Counsel also explained
that the mysterious letter was introduced
with view of charging the Marquis of
| Queensbury with additional libels; but as
Newton insisted that IN that case the
| letter should be read In court, the counsel
for the plaintiff Withdrew the letter.
| Willie then continued his evidence, testi-
| fying that he was handed the card of the
Marquis OF Queensbury, upon which was
written the abusive words, by the porter
! at the Albermarle club. Carson then
cross ,xamined the witness in regard to
his acquaintance with Lord Alfred Doug
lass. saying that he wished to show that
the object of the marquis was to end the
acqaintanceship of his son with the
plaintiff. The magistrate said he con-
sldered this defense to be plea of justi
cation, and he did not allow Carson to
proceed. The Marquis OF Q ieensb Try
was then asked if he had anything to say,
| whereupon he arose and declared that he
wrote the carl, "SImpy to bring matters
TO a head and save my son." lie added !:
II ABIDE by what l wrote"
The marquis was then formally COM
mitted for trial, bail being allowed in
| 81 hn0