Compare Documents
This page compares two reports at the document level. The column on the left shows the first report and the column in the middle shows the second. The column on the right highlights any differences between the two documents. Pink shows differences in the first report and purple in the second report. The Match percentage shows the percentage of similarity between the two documents.
The New York Times - Friday, April 5, 1895
London. April 4. -- The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed to-day in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness box.
Mr. Carson's cross-examination, which was intended to prove that Mr. Wilde is really as bad as he seems to affect to be, was followed by a re-direct examination, and the case for the prosecution was closed.
The Standard Union - Thursday, April 4, 1895
The trial of the action of Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was resumed today in the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, with the complainant again in the witness-box, Mr. Carson cross-examining.
Mr. Wilde, in answer to Mr. Carson's questions, made many admissions, but most of the testimony is utterly unfit for publication.
It was noticed that during Mr. Carson's questioning several names were written upon slips of paper and handed up to the court. These names were not made public.
Sir Edward Clarke then questioned the witness in redirect examination. He began by reading a number of letters written by the Marquis of Queensberry to his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, in which the Marquis condemned his son for his conduct with Wilde. He also read a letter written by the Marquis reviling Lord Rosebery, Mr. Gladstone and the Queen because of the appointment of his son to the peerage of Drumlanrig. In one of the letters the Marquis declared that Lord Alfred Douglas was not his son.
At the conclusion of Mr. Wilde’s redirect examination the case for the prosecution was closed.
Mr. Carson, in opening the case for the defense, declared that all that the Marquis of Queensberry had done and said, he stood by, withdrawing nothing. His sole object in all the steps he had taken was to save his son from the influence of Wilde.
At the conclusion of Mr. Carson’s speech the court adjourned.
London, April 4. - The "St. James’ Gazette" makes the announcement that, owing to the nature of the testimony being taken in the Wilde-Queensberry libel suit, the management of that paper have decided not to report the proceedings of the case any further.