Compare Documents

London, May 22.

The little court at Markborough-street has never been so crowded as it was this morning since Oscar Wilde initiated the famous libel proceedings against the Marquis of Queensberry. As then, so now, the Marquis figures in the role of defendant, but on this occasion he has a companion in adversity in the person of his own son, Lord Douglas of Harwick. Both of the principals of the Piccadilly rumpus were early upon the scene, the Marquis being the first to arrive. For a few minutes he loitered outside the court, the central figure of a gathering crowd, but after he had been joined by his solicitor he proceeded to push his way through the group which barred the entrance to the court. In his buttonhole he wore three Marcebal Niel roses. Lord Douglas entered the building soon afterwards, and it was at once observed that both of his eyes were black. As soon as Mr. Hannay had taken his seat both were put into the dock and charged with disorderly conduct and fighting in Piccadilly.

The first witness was Constable C C 32, who found the Marquis and his son fighting. The constable separated them, after which they again closed, and witness parted them again. Both father and son then crossed Bond-street. They met again, and recommenced fighting. Witness thereupon arrested the Marquis, and his son was taken in charge by another constable. At Vine-street the Marquis, in reply to the charge, said, "It is quite correct."

The Marquis, who defended himself, only asked one question, which suggested that Lord Douglas began the attack, and continued it while the Marquis was walking to the hotel.

Mr. S.T. Stoneham (for Lord Douglas): At the station did you hear the Marquis say anything? Witness: I heard the Marquis say he was willing to fight his son for £10,000. You did not hear Lord Queensberry call his son an opprobrious name? No.

Constable C R 6, who was also on the spot, was asked who struck the first blow, and the witness fancied that it was Lord Douglas.

Mr. Stoneham: Didn't Lord Douglas say that he had spoken to his father, and asked him to discontinue those letters and that they were the cause of the row? Witness: Yes; similar words to those.

The inspector who received the distinguished defendant at Vine-street was the next witness. After the charge had been read over to them the Marquis exclaimed, "That is my son, who has bailed Oscar Wilde to-day. He has been following me about and struck me in Piccadilly." Lord Douglas added, "Yes; that occurred through my father writing letters to my wife of a most disgusting character."

This was the case for the police, and the Marquis then proceeded to make his statement. He had driven up, he said, from the Old Bailey at the bottom of St. James's-street. As he was crossing the road to go up to Albemarle-street he saw his son walking down Piccadilly. As soon as the latter recognized him Lord Douglas "came straight at me, almost at a run, and pushed me up against a shop window, at the same time speaking at the top of his voice. I struck him certainly," added the Marquis, "but it was done in self-defence."

Mr. Stoneham, in giving Lord Douglas's version of the affray, said he and a friend walking in Piccadilly saw Lord Queensberry crossing the street. The Marquis had evidently just come out of a post-office, where he had sent the following telegram to Lord Douglas's wife:-

"Must congratulate on verdict. Cannot on Percy's appearance; looked like a dug-up corpse. Fear too much madness of kissing. Taylor guilty. Wilde's turn tomorrow. -Queensberry.

"That," said Mr. Stoneham, "is a sample of the letters Lord Queensberry has been writing not only to Lord Douglas's wife, but other members of the family. He has been requested time after time to stop these letters, but he still persists in continuing the annoyance.''

Lord Queensberry here broke in with the remark that, as his son refused to receive any letters from himself, he was obliged to write to his wife.

Mr. Hannay thought these family affairs had nothing to do with the case, and suggested that the Marquis should call his witnesses.

Accordingly Mr. Charles T. Sheriff, who was an eye-witness of the occurrence, was called to say that Lord Douglas began the attack. Both defendants admitted fighting, the only question being the issue of who struck the first blow.

Lord Queensberry's second witness, Mr. Charles Taylor, swore that he saw the son begin the fight by knocking his father against the painters' trestles outside the shop.

The magistrate bound each over to his own recognisances in the sum of £500, to keep the peace for six months.

London, Tuesday Evening.Shortly after the termination of the trial of Taylor this afternoon an exciting fracas occurred in Piccadilly Circus, the principal persons concerned being the Marquis of Queensberry and Lord Alfred Douglas. Father and son were both escorted by the police to Vine street Police Station, where after the charge had been preferred against them they were liberated on bail.

The fashionable afternoon promenade in Piccadilly was fairly well filled with a select crowd of pedestrians when the fracas between the Marquis of Queensberry and his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, disturbed the peace of the thoroughfare. The affray appears to have been short and determined, and but for police intervention might have had more serious results. Considerable violence must have been used by both father and son. The Marquis appears to have met his son accidentally in Piccadilly, near Bond street. What passed between them in language will possibly be made known at Marlborough street Police-court tomorrow morning, but as far as action is concerned they were both seen in violent conflict when a police constable came upon the scene and separated the combatants. A considerable crowd or well dressed persons had surrounded the principals of this exceptional episode in the fashionable highway. When the police officers escorted the Marquis and his son Lord Alfred to Vine street Police Station, which is a short distance from the scene of the disorder, a crowd followed, and awaited events outside the station. Three gentleman friends of the accused were permitted to accompany their lordships into the station, where the proceedings were exceptionally brief. The father preferred no charge against his son, neither did the son make any charge against his parent, the prosecution being that of disorderly conduct, preferred by the police. In less than half an hour the accused had been released on bail, guaranteed by those friends present, and they were set at liberty. On leaving the station Lord Alfred, who it was noticed had suffered discoloration of one eye proceeded through the passage at the back of St James’s Hall to Regent street, whence an available hadsom cab speedily separated him from an inquisitive but undemonstrative crowd. His father, the Marquis of Queensberry, appeared to have suffered no facial disfigurement, but his silk hat showed signs of rather rough usage. As he left the main entrance of Vine street Police Station he walked through the crowd into Swallow street, a by-way directly connecting Regent street and Piccadilly. As he walked into Swallow street and Piccadilly the crowd for the first time became very demonstrative, clapped their hands and cheered his lordship, who took a conveyance from the scene, and the crowd dispersed.

CHARGE AT THE POLICE COURT.

London, Wednesday.The Marquis of Queensberry and Lord Douglas of Hawick were charged before Mr Hannay, at Marlborough street Police Court to-day with disorderly conduct in Piccadilly yesterday. The prisoners were placed in the dock. Both were fashionably dressed, and the Marquis wore a rose in his buttonhole. He showed no sign of yesterday’s fight, but there was a slight discolouration under Lord Douglas’s left eye. The Marquis was undefended. Mr Stoneham defended Lord Douglas.

Police evidence was first given as to the defendants fighting at the corner of Piccadilly and Bond street, surrounded by a large crowd. They were arrested and taken to Vine street. On being charged with disorderly conduct the Marquis said that was right so far as the police were concerned, and offered to fight his son in any part of the country for £10,000. Lord Douglas said his father had written obscene letters to him and his wife, and he had requested him to cease doing so.

Lord Queensberry, in defence, said that when in Piccadilly yesterday afternoon, his son, Lord Douglas, came running at him and pushed him up against a shop window, meanwhile speaking at the top of his voice. He struck Lord Douglas in self-defence.

Mr Stoneham, on Lord Douglas’s behalf, said the latter and a friend were walking along Piccadilly without thinking of the Marquis. The Marquis had apparently just sent a telegram which had been received by Lord Douglas congratulating him on the verdict, and adding, "Taylor guilty—Wilde’s turn to-morrow." The marquis had written letters to the wife of Lord Douglas, containing false charges against Lord Douglas and members of his family, and though he had promised to stop writing those letters he had not done so. Yesterday Lord Douglas asked the Marquis to cease writing these letters to his wife, and the Marquis hit him in the face. A fight resulted.

Mr Charles Thomas Sheriff, Holloway, and Mr Charles Ernest Taylor, of Lavender Hill, were called to prove that Lord Douglas was the aggressor.

The Marquis of Queensberry desired to make a statement as to the letters, which he denied were obscene. He wished the last letter to be read. It related to a visit he paid to Lord Douglas’s house. He heard Mr Oscar Wilde was there, and wished to know if his other son was there.

The Magistrate said the Marquis had better not touch that matter.

Mr Frederick Wisdom, of South Hampstead, said he was walking with Lord Douglas yesterday when the latter asked the Marquis to cease writing. Blows were then struck.

Both defendants were bound over in their own recognizances in £500 to keep the peace for six months.