The Yorkshire Evening Post - Wednesday, May 22, 1895
This report was originally published in English. Machine translations may be available in other languages.
TO-DAY'S LATE NEWS.
UNDER QUEENSBERRY RULES?
A FIGHT IN PICCADILLY.
LORD QUEENSBERRY GIVES HIS SON A
"BLACK EYE."
FATHER AND SON BOUND OVER.
Considerable excitement was caused yesterday afternoon in Piccadilly by an animated encounter between the Marquess of Queensberry and his son. Lord Douglas of Hawick. It appears, from the reports of the affair, that the Marquess, who was walking up Piccadilly, met his son, quite accidentally, at the corner of Old Bond Street. Some very heated conversation instantly occurred, during which a large crowd assembled. Raising his voice to a loud pitch, the Marquess exclaimed, turning to the people around him, "I tell all these strangers that you have been a bad son from your birth up, and that I now publicly disown you." Lord Douglas's reply was lost in a loud cheer which was immediately raised by the crowd, several of whom were ladies. The numbers increased to such an extent as to stop all traffic.
The Marquess, it appears, continued for some minutes to address the crowd, pointing scornfully at his son, until the latter made some remark that so enraged his father that he struck his son a violent blow in the face. Lord Douglas immediately struck back, and a furious struggle continued till the arrival of the police. Both bore marks of the conflict. They were conducted by the constables to Vine Street Police Station, whither they were followed by a large crowd cheering and hooting. At the station both the Marquess of Queensberry and Lord Douglas of Hawick were desirous of charging each other with assault. The inspector on duty declined, however, to enter any charge but that of disorderly conduct, preferred against both by the police. They were subsequently released on bail.
On leaving the station Lord Douglas, who it was noticed had suffered the discolouration of one eye, proceeded through the court at the back of St. James's Hall into Regent Street, where an available hansom cab speedily separated him from an inquisitive but orderly throng. His father, the Marquess of Queensberry, appeared to have suffered no facial disfigurement, but his silk hat showed signs of rather rough usage Leaving the main entrance of Vine Street Police Station he walked through the crowd into Swallow Street, a bye-way directly connecting Regent Street with Piccadilly. As he passed from Vine Street into Swallow Street the people who had gathered for the first time became demonstrative, and cheered his lordship, who, proceeding into Piccadilly, immediately took a conveyance from the scene.
In less than half an hour the accused had been released on bail guaranteed by their friends present, and they were set at liberty. On leaving the station Lord Alfred, who, it was noticed, had suffered a discoloration of one eye, proceeded through the passage at the back of St James’s Hall to 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 Vine street Police Station, he walked through the crowd into Swallow street, a byway 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.
Accordiug to a News Agency, the Marquess 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. On leaving the station Lord Alfred, who, it was noticed, had suffered the discoloration of one eye, proceeded through the court at the back ot St. James's Hall into Regent-street, where a Hansom cab speedily separated him from an inquisitive crowd. His father, the Marquess 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 bye-way directly connecting Regent-street with Piccadilly. As he walked from Vine-street into Swallow-street the crowd clapped their hands and cheered the Marquess, who, proceeding into Piccadilly, immediately took a cab and drove away.
IN COURT TO-DAY.
At Marlborough Street Police Court to-day, before Mr. Hannay, the Marquess of Queensberry and his son Lord Douglas, of Hawick, were charged with having been guilty of disorderly conduct in Piccadilly. Although the case came on for hearing before the usual time for opening the court, there was a large number of people present, and a crowd collected in the streets to see the defendants. The Marquess came into court first and was quickly followed by his son, and both were placed in the dock.
At Marlborough street (London) Police Court, before Mr Hannay, the Marquess of Queensberry and his son Lord Douglas, of Hawick, were charged with having been guilty of disorderly conduct in Piccadilly. Although the case came on for hearing before the usual time for opening the court, there was a large number of people present, and a crowd collected in the streets to see the defendants. The Marquess came into count first and was quickly followed by his son, and both were placed in the dock.
The Marquess, who wore a rose in his button hole, showed no sign of yesterday's conflict, but Lord Douglas's left eye was discoloured.
The Marquess, who wore a rose in his button hole, showed no sign of yesterday’s conflict, but Lord Douglas’s left eye was discoloured.
Mr. Stoneham, solicitor, defended Lord Douglas of Hawick, but the Marquess was undefended.
Mr Stoneham, solicitor, defended Lord Douglas of Hawick, but the Marquess was undefended.
The first witness called was Police-constable 33, C.R., who said that yesterday afternoon he saw a crowd at the corner of Piccadilly and Bond Street. The two defendants were fighting. He separated them, but they closed again and again. They afterwards again met outside Steward's, the confectioners, and re-commenced fighting. Witness then arrested the Marquess of Queensberry; and Lord Douglas was arrested by another constable. They were taken to Vine Street Police Station and charged. The Marquess, in reply, said "That is quite correct." He also said that he would fight his son for £10,000. Witness did not hear the Marquess call his son an opprobrious name.
The first witness called was Police-constable 33 C R, who said that yesterday afternoon he saw a crowd at the corner of Piccadilly and Bond street. The two defendants were fighting. He separated them, but they closed again and again. They afterwards again met outside Steward’s, the confectioners, and re-commenced fighting. Witness then arrested the Marquess of Queensberry, and Lord Douglas was arrested by another constable. They were taken to Vine street Police Station and charged. The Marquess, in reply, said "That is quite correct." He also said that he would fight his son for £10,000. Witness did not hear the Marquess call his son an opprobrious name.
Police-constable 6 C.R. said he was in the company of the last witness, and saw the defendants engaged in fighting in Piccadilly. They were separated, and the Marquess crossed Bond Street, followed by Lord Douglas, and the fighting was renewed.
Police-constable 6 C R said he was in the company of the last witness, and saw the defendants engaged in fighting in Piccadilly. They were separated, and the Marquess crossed Bond street, followed by Lord Douglas, and the fighting was renewed.
Mr. Hannay: Can you say who was the aggressor?—I believe Lord Douglas struck the Marquess on the hat, but blows were exchanged. I took Lord Douglas to the station. He said his father had been writing letters to him and his wife—letters of an obscene nature. He had asked his father to cease writing, but the Marquess had refused, and he had taken the only remedy he had left—that was, to cause a row.
Mr Hannay—Can you say who was the aggressor? I believe Lord Douglas struck the Marquess on the hat, but blows were exchanged. I took Lord Douglas to the station. He said his father had been writing letters to him and his wife—letters of an obscene nature. He had asked his father to cease writing, but the Marquess had refused, and he had taken the only remedy he had left—that was, to cause a row.
Cross examined by Mr. Stoneham, witness said Lord Douglas might have said that he had taken that opportunity of making the request to the Marquess to cease writing, and that that caused the row. He heard the offer of the Marquess to fight his son in any part of the country for £10,000.
Cross-examined by Mr Stoneham, witness said Lord Douglas might have said that he had taken that opportunity of making the request to the Marquess to cease writing, and that that caused the row. He heard the offer of the Marquess to fight his son in any part of the country for £10,000.
The Police Inspector who took the charge next gave evidence. He said that in answer to the charge the Marquess of Queensberry said, "That is quite right so far as the police are concerned." Pointing to his son, he said, "That is my son, who has bailed Oscar Wilde. He has followed me about, and struck me in Piccadilly before I touched him." Lord Hawick said, "Yes; it is correct. My father has been writing letters to my wife of a most disgusting character."
The Police Inspector who took the charge next gave evidence. He said that in answer to the charge the Marquess of Queensberry said. "That is quite right so far as the police are concerned." Pointing to his son, he said, "That is my son, who has bailed Oscar Wilde. He has followed me about, and struck me in Piccadilly before I touched him." Lord Hawick said, "Yes; it is correct. My father has been writing letters to my wife of a most disgusting character."
Mr. Hannay (to the Marquess): Do you wish to ask any question?
The Marquees of Queensberry: I wish to make a statement. Yesterday, I came away from the court, where the trial of Taylor had been going on, and drove to St. James's Street. I then alighted and crossed the road to Albemarle Street, and I saw my son about 50 yards away. My son did not walk towards me as soon as he caught my sight. He came almost running at me, and pushed me up against a shop window—at the same time speaking at the top of his voice. I struck him in self-defence, and I have two witnesses here who will prove that is a fact.
The Marquess of Queensberry—I wish to make a statement. Yesterday, I came away from the court, where the trial of Taylor had been going on, and drove to St James’s street. I then alighted and crossed the road to Albemarle street, and I saw my son about 50 yards away. My son did not walk towards me as soon as he caught my sight. He came almost running at me, and pushed me up against a shop window—at the same time speaking at the top of his voice. I struck him in self-defence, and I have two witnesses here who will prove that is a fact.
Mr. Stoneham, on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, said Lord Douglas and a friend were walking in Piccadilly, and were not thinking in the slightest degree of Lord Queensberry when they saw him crossing from the top of St. James's Street. Apparently he had been there for the purpose of sending the following telegram:—
"Must congratulate you on verdict. Cannot congratulate you on Percy's appearance. He looks like a dug up corpse. Taylor guilty. Wilde's turn to-morrow." The Marquess had been writing letters to the wife of Lord Douglas containing vile charges against Lord Douglas and other members of his family. He had been requested time after time to stop these letters, and although he had continued the annoyance he had also been down to Lord Douglas's house with no earthly reason except to cause a disturbance. When Lord Douglas met the Marquess in Piccadilly he asked him whether he would cease writing these objectionable letters to his wife. The Marquess said nothing, but made grimaces. Lord Douglas repeated the question, and Lord Queensberry hit him in the face with his fist. Then there was a scramble, and they were separated by the friend of Lord Douglas. They met again, but here separated by the police. They afterwards met again, and Lord Douglas asked the same question once more, and again a rough and tumble fight resulted. They were then taken into custody by the police. The disturbance was due to the letters the Marquess had been in the habit of writing, and to the abusive language he used when he met his son. The only reason Lord Douglas had in speaking to him was to obtain from him once more an assurance that this sort of behaviour should cease. He had no desire at all to meet his father, and would much rather not meet him. If the Marquess had given an assurance that these letters would have ceased, nothing more would have been said. Lord Douglas thought it was his duty to his wife and himself to expostulate with his father.
Mr Stoneham, on behalf of Lord Douglas of Hawick, said Lord Douglas and a friend were walking in Piccadilly, and were not thinking in the slightest degree of Lord Queensberry when they saw him crossing from the top of St James’s street. Apparently he had been there for the purpose of sending the following telegram:—"Must congratulate you on verdict. Cannot congratulate you on Percy’s appearance. He looks like a dug up corpse. Taylor guilty. Wilde’s turn to-morrow." The Marquess had been writing letters to the wife of Lord Douglas and other members of his family. He had been requested time after time to stop these letters, and although he had continued the annoyance he had also been down to Lord Douglas’s house with no earthly reason except to cause a disturbance. When Lord Douglas met the Marquess in Piccadilly he asked him whether he would cease writing these objectionable letters to his wife. The Marquess said nothing, but made grimaces. Lord Douglas repeated the question, and Lord Queensberry hit him in the face with his fist. Then there was a scramble, and they were separated by the friend of Lord Douglas. They met again, but were separated by the police. They afterwards met again, and Lord Douglas asked the same question once more, and again a rough and tumble fight resulted. They were then taken into custody by the police. The disturbance was due to the letters the Marquess had been in the habit of writing, and to the abusive language he used when he met his son. The only reason Lord Douglas had in speaking to him was to obtain from him once more an assurance that this sort of behaviour should cease. He had no desire at all to meet his father, and would much rather not meet him. If the Marquess had given an assurance that these letters would have ceased, nothing more would have been said. Lord Douglas thought it was his duty to his wife and himself to expostulate with his father.
Mr. Charles Thomas Sheriff, of 36, Victoria Road, Holloway, was then called on behalf of the Marquess of Queensberry. He said that at about 5.30 p.m. yesterday he was standing in Piccadilly and saw Lord Douglas rush with great violence against the Marquess of Queensberry. They were both strangers to him at the time. Lord Douglas knocked the Marquess of Queensberry's hat off, and then he struck the Marquess with violence. Then there were blows on both sides. Two constables came up, and they were taken to the station.
Mr Charles Thomas Sheriff, of 36 Victoria road, Holloway, was then called on behalf of the Marquess of Queensberry. He said that at about 5 30 p m yesterday he was standing in Piccadilly and saw Lord Douglas rush with great violence against the Marquess of Queensberry. They were both strangers to him at the time. Lord Douglas knocked the Marquess of Queensberry’s hat off, and then he struck the Marquess with violence. THen there were blows on both sides. Two constables came up, and they were taken to the station.
The Marquess of Queensberry: Who do you consider was the aggressor?—I consider Lord Douglas was the aggressor.
The Marquess of Queensberry—Who do you consider was the aggressor? I consider Lord Douglas was the aggressor.
Mr. Charles Ernest Tyler, of 45, England Road, Lavender Hill, who also witnessed the encounter, gave similar evidence.
Mr Charles Ernest Tyler, of 45 England road, Lavender Hill, who also witnessed the encounter, gave similar evidence.
The Marquess of Queensberry said he wished to make a statement with reference to the letters. He denied that they were obscene. He should call for the last letters, which he wrote ten days ago. His son had refused to receive letters from him, and he was obliged to write to his son's wife. After the last trial of Mr. Oscar Wilde—
The Marquess of Queensberry said he wished to make a statement with reference to the letters. He denied that they were obscene. He should call for the last letters, which he wrote ten days ago. His son refused to receive letters from him, and he was obliged to write to his son’s wife. After the last trial of JMr Oscar Wilde—
The Magistrate (interrupting): You had better not go into that. It is very little relevant to the charge.
The Magistrate (interrupting)—You had better not go into that. It is very little relevant to the charge.
The Marquess of Queensberry: I have been accused of writing obscene letters. I wish to have the letters read.
The Marquess of Queensberry—I have been accused of writing obscene letters. I wish to have the letters read.
The Magistrate: My impression is that I have seen these letters, and was requested to act upon them. I declined to do so on the ground that there should be no more family quarrelling.
The Magistrate—My impression is that I have seen these letters, and was requested to act upon them. I declined to do so on the ground that there should be no more family quarrelling.
Mr. Frederick Wisdom, of Horley Road, South Hampstead, was then called on behalf of Lord Douglas. He said that yesterday afternoon he was walking in Piccadilly with Lord Douglas. When they had just passed the Burlington Arcade Lord Douglas said to witness, "There is my father crossing the road. I wish to speak to him." They walked on and met Lord Queensberry, and Lord Douglas asked the Marquess to cease from writing such letters to his wife. Lord Queensberry made no reply excepting by making a noise with his lips. Lord Douglas repeated his question, and then they commenced to fight.
Mr Frederick Wisdom, of Horley road, South Hampstead, was then called on behalf of Lord Douglas. He said that yesterday afternoon he was walking in Piccadilly with Lord Douglas. When they had just passed the Burlington Arcade Lord Douglas said to witness, "There is my father crossing the road. I wish to speak to him." They walked on and met Lord Queensberry, and Lord Douglas asked the Marquess to cease from writing such letters to his wife. Lord Queensberry made no reply, excepting by making a noise with his lips. Lord Douglas repeated his question, and then they commenced to fight.
Mr. Stoneham: Who struck the first blow—It was a very near thing, but I think the Marquess was the quicker. (Laughter.) Witness added that he parted the combatants, and they went on to the corner of Bond Street, quarrelling all the way about these letters. Then they commenced fighting again and a crowd assembled. A constable parted them and they went away. Lord Douglas afterwards went over to the Marquess and again asked him to cease writing obscene letters to his wife. They commenced fighting again, and. a constable took them into custody. That was the best thing he could do. (Laughter.)
Mr Stoneham—Who struck the first blow? It was a very near thing, but I think the Marquess was the quicker (laughter). Witness added that he parted the combatants, and they went on to the corner of Bond street, quarrelling all the way about these letters. Then they commenced fighting again, and a crowd assembled. A constable parted them and they went away. Lord Douglas afterwards went over to the Marquess and again asked him to cease writing obscene letters to his wife. They commenced fighting again, and a constable took them into custody. That was the best thing he could do (laughter).
The Marquess of Queensberry: I must object to the word "obscene" about these letters. I deny that they were obscene. I wish to explain the last letter. I was obliged to write to my daughter-in-law ten days ago. I heard Mr. Wilde was staying with my son, and I went down to his house to find whether my other son was there. They ordered me out. The lady came down, and I asked her to give me her word of honour that my son was not there. She did so, and I left the house. I was obliged to write and tell her that I believed Mr. Oscar Wilde was in the house. I should like the letter produced.
The Marquess of Queensberry—I must object to the word "obscene" about these letters. I deny that they were obscene. I wish to explain the last letter. I was obliged to write to my daughter-in-law ten days ago. I heard Mr Wilde was staying with my son, and I went down to his house to find whether my other son was there. They ordered me out. The lady came down, and I asked her to give me her word of honour that my son was not there. She did so, and I left the house. I was obliged to write and tell her that I believed Mr Oscar Wilde was in the house. I should like the letter produced.
The Magistrate, taking no notice of the application, said: I shall not say one word in this case beyond what is necessary in announcing the decision to which I have arrived. Both persons are charged with disorderly conduct and fighting in the public street in Piccadilly, and I think it is of very little importance who began the fight. Both were fighting, and both were close to a policeman, and neither invoked his assistance, therefore they were committing a breach of the peace wilfully. I think, under these circumstances, I ought to bind both parties over in a considerable amount to prevent a recurrence of this kind of thing. You, the Marquess of Queensberry, and you, Lord Percy Douglas, will be bound over in your own recognisances in £500 each to keep the peace for six months.
The magistrate, taking no notice of the application, said—I shall not say one word in this case beyond what is necessary in announcing the decision to which I have arrived. Both persons are charged with disorderly conduct and fighting in the public street in Piccadilly, and I think it is of very little importance who began the fight. Both were fighting, and both were close to a policeman, and neither invoked his assistance; therefore they were committing a breach of the peace wilfully. I think, under these circumstances, I ought to bind both parties over in a considerable amount to prevent a recurrence of this kind of thing. You, the Marquess of Queensberry, and you, Lord Percy Douglas, will be bound over in your own recognisances in £500 each to keep the peace for six months.