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
The Cork Examiner - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
The Cork Examiner - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
Difference
London, Tuesday. The Press Association says—Shortly after the termination of the trial of Taylor at the Old Bailey, this afternoon, an
exciting fracas [...]carried in the Piccadilly Circus, the principal persons concerned being the Marquis of Queensberry and one of his sons, reported to
be Alfred Douglas, but upon this point the police decline to give any information at present. The nature of the offence alleged against the father and son
has not yet transpired, but they 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 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 the police intervention might have had more serious results. Considerable violence must have been used by 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 to-morrow morning, but as far as the action is concerned, they were both seen in a 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 to the Vine street station, which is a short distance from the
scene of the disorder. A crowd followed and awaited events outside the station. Three gentlemen, friends of the accused, were permitted to accompany their
lordships into the station. 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 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 into Regent-street, whence 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 the 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 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 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.