Compare Paragraphs
This page compares two reports at the paragraph level. The column on the left shows the first report in its entirety, and the column in the middle identifies paragraphs from the second report with significant matching content. The column on the right highlights any differences between the two matching paragraphs: pink shows differences in the first report and purple in the second report. The Match percentage underneath each comparison row in this column shows the percentage of similarity between the two paragraphs.
Original paragraph in
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Freeman’s Journal - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
The Freeman’s Journal - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
Difference
The Press Association says—Shortly after the termination of the trial of Taylor at the Old Bailey yesterday an exciting fracas occurred
in Piccadilly Circus, the principal persons concerned being the Marquis of Queensberry and one of his sons.
The Press Association says—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. A considerable crowd of well-dressed persons had surrounded
the principals of this exceptional episode in a 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, the crowd followed and awaited events outside the station. The gentlemen
friends of the accused were permitted to accompany their lordships into the station, where the proceedings were exceptionally brief. The father, we
understand, 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, where an available hansom 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 byeway 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.
The Press Association says—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 Bend street. What passed between them in language will possibly be made
known at Marlborough street Police Court to-morrow 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 of well-dressed persons had surrounded the principals of this
exceptional episode in a 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, the crowd followed and awaited events outside the station. The gentlemen friends of the accused were
permitted to accompany their lordships into the station, where the proceedings were exceptionally brief. The father, we understand, 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 Rail to Regent street, where an
available hansom 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 byeway 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.
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 signs of yesterday’s fight, but there was a slight discoloration under Lord Douglas’s left eye. The Marquis was
undefended. Mr Stoneham defended Lord Douglas.
The 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 ten thousand pounds. Lord Douglas said his father had written obscene letters to
him and his wife, and 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 behalf of Lord Douglas, 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 obscene and
filthy letters to his wife, and the Marquis hit him in the face. A fight resulted.
Mr Charles Thomas Sherriff, Holloway, and Mr Charles Ernest Tyler, of Lavender Hill, were called to prove that Lord Douglas as 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 that 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 recognisances in £500 to keep the peace for six months.