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 Morning Post - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
The Morning Post - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Bristol Mercury - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
Bristol Mercury - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
Difference
At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Charles, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred
Taylor, 33, of no occupation, on an indictment charging them with certain misdemeanours.
At the Old Bailey, London, yesterday, before Mr Justice Charles, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, 38,
of no occupation, on an indictment charging them with certain misdemeanours.
Sir. C. F. Gill and Mr. H. Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C, Mr. Charles Mathews, and Mr. Travers
Humphreys defended Oscar Wilde; Mr. J. P. Grain and Mr. Paul Taylor defended Alfred Taylor.
Mr. C. F. Gill intimated that he intended to withdraw from the Jury the counts of the indictment for conspiracy. This course would
enable his learned friend, Sir Edward Clarke, to put Oscar Wilde in the witness-box.
Mr. Justice Charles said that after the evidence that had been given, he thought that there was not anything to support the counts for
the alleged conspiracy.
Sir Edward Clarke said that had he known that the Crown intended to withdraw the conspiracy counts, he should have applied for the trial
of his client to be taken separately.
Sir Edward Clarke, in his address to the Jury, on behalf of Oscar Wilde, commented in strong terms on the adverse criticism of a certain
portion of the Press on the case affecting his client. It was grossly unfair to an accused person, calculated to imperil the administration of justice,
and in the highest degree prejudicial to the case of his client, and disgraceful. In some respects the importing into the case of matters for which Mr.
Wilde was not in the least responsible was an unfair proceeding on the part of the prosecution. He invited the Jury to discard every element of prejudice,
and to judge the conduct of his client in a fair and impartial manner. Could they believe that, if he were a guilty man, Mr. Wilde would have faced such
accusations in a Court, and have invited, as he had done, the fullest inquiry into his relations with the different persons brought forward for the
purposes of this prosecution? It was impossible that the Jury could believe the testimony adduced, it being in the highest degree improbable that Mr.
Wilde misconducted himself. He gave an unqualified denial to the whole of the accusations. After hearing Mr. Wilde's denial on oath he ventured to think
that if any doubt existed in the minds of the Jury as to the guilt or the innocence of Mr. Wilde, it would be at once removed.
Oscar Wilde gave a denial on oath to all the allegations made against him.
Alfred Taylor, called by Mr. Grain, gave also an entire denial to the charges against him. He was, he said, educated at Marlborough, his
late father being connected with a very large business. When he came of age he received a legacy of £45,000.
Sir Edward Clarke, continuing his speech, commented on the literature branch of the case, and said that the importance put upon it by
the Crown was unwarranted, for Mr. Wilde was not the author, or in any way responsible for its production. The courage that he had shown in facing the
charges from the first was in favour of the theory of his innocence. He dealt at some length with the various points in the evidence against his client,
and urged the Jury to disregard altogether, as unworthy of belief, the testimony of the tainted witnesses. Did the Jury believe that such evidence was
honest and entitled to be regarded as true? They were dealing with matters which happened a long time ago, and in respect of which it was impossible to
produce evidence beyond Mr. Wilde's positive denial. He asked the Jury to allow their judgment to be affected only with regard to testimony that was
reliable, to guard themselves from the prejudice which floated about the case, but which he trusted had to some extent been dissipated, and to apply their
minds to the test to be put upon the evidence. If they did this, he trusted that the the result would be to gratify a thousand hopes, and to release one
of the most renowned and accomplished men of letters of to-day from a most grave charge and to clear society of a stain.
Mr. Grain, in defence of Taylor, argued that the evidence of the principal witnesses was tainted and wholly uncorroborated, and that
under all the circumstances, as the testimony of these persons was unreliable, it was impossible for the Jury to convict; and, therefore, he asked for an
acquittal of Taylor. The case against him rested solely on the statements of a set of blackmailers and on prejudice.
Mr. Gill replied on behalf of the Crown. The trial was adjourned until to-day, when the learned Judge will sum up.