edition the
word "in" is deleted.]
OSCAR WILDE: HIS LIFE AND CONFESSIONS
CHAPTER I
On the 12th of December, 1864, Dublin society was abuzz with
excitement. A tidbit of scandal which had long been rolled on the
tongue in semi-privacy was to be discussed in open court, and all
women and a good many men were agog with curiosity and expectation.
The story itself was highly spiced and all the actors in it well
known.
A famous doctor and oculist, recently knighted for his achievements,
was the real defendant. He was married to a woman with a great
literary reputation as a poet and writer who was idolized by the
populace for her passionate advocacy of Ireland's claim to
self-government; "Speranza" was regarded by the Irish people as a sort
of Irish Muse.
The young lady bringing the action was the daughter of the professor
of medical jurisprudence at Trinity College, who was also the chief at
Marsh's library.
It was said that this Miss Travers, a pretty girl just out of her
teens, had been seduced by Dr. Sir William Wilde while under his care
as a patient. Some went so far as to say that chloroform had been
used, and that the girl had been violated.
The doctor was represented as a sort of Minotaur: lustful stories were
invented and repeated with breathless delight; on all faces, the joy
of malicious curiosity and envious denigration.
The interest taken in the case was extraordinary: the excitement
beyond comparison; the first talents of the Bar were engaged on both
sides; Serjeant Armstrong led for the plaintiff, helped by the famous
Mr. Butt, Q.C., and Mr. Heron, Q.C., who were in turn backed by Mr.
Hamill and Mr. Quinn; while Serjeant Sullivan was for the defendant,
supported by Mr. Sidney, Q.C., and Mr. Morris, Q.C., and aided by Mr.
John Curran and Mr. Purcell.
The Court of Common Pleas was the stage; Chief Justice Monahan
presiding with a special jury. The trial was expected to last a week,
and not only the Court but the approaches to it were crowded.
To judge by the scandalous reports, the case should have been a
criminal case, should have been conducted by the Attorney-General
against Sir William Wilde; but that was not the way it presented
itself. The action was not even brought directly by Miss Travers or by
her father, Dr. Travers, against Sir William Wilde for rape or
criminal assault, or seduction. It was a civil action brought by Miss
Travers, who claimed L2,000 damages for
|