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 Australasian - Saturday, May 4, 1895
The Australasian - Saturday, May 4, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Argus - Thursday, May 2, 1895
The Argus - Thursday, May 2, 1895
Difference
The trial of Oscar Wilde, upon charges arising out of the recent Queensberry libel action, is proceeding at the Old Bailey.
The charge of conspiracy against Wilde and the man Taylor has been withdrawn, but the charge of misdemeanour against Wilde is being
proceeded with.
Oscar Wilde, who volunteered to give evidence on his own behalf, went into the witness-box and denied all the charges. He alleges that he
is innocent and has been made the victim of a system of blackmail
Taylor also went into the witness-box, and swore that he was absolutely innocent of the charges brought against him.
Taylor went into the witness-box and swore that he was absolutely innocent of the charges brought against him.
Sir Edward Clarke, Q,C., addressed the Court on behalf of the accused in an eloquent speech, claiming the acquittal of his clients on the
ground that the chief witnesses for the Crown were of bad character and altogether untrustworthy.
Evidence having been given by the accused, Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., addressed the Court on their behalf. He made an eloquent speech,
claiming the acquittal of his clients on the ground that the chief witnesses for the Crown were of bad character and altogether untrustworthy.
Mr. Justice Charles, in summing up on May 1, was on the whole favourable to the prisoners. He dwelt emphatically on the fact that several
of the witnesses for the prosecution were undoubted blackmailers.
The jury, after being locked up for some time, came into court and announced that they were unable to agree on a verdict. They were
accordingly discharged.
The accused were remanded in custody, an application for bail being refused by the judge. They are to be tried again.