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 - Friday, May 24, 1895
The Morning Post - Friday, May 24, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Bristol Mercury - Saturday, May 25, 1895
Bristol Mercury - Saturday, May 25, 1895
Difference
At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Wills, the trial was resumed of Oscar Wilde, 40, author, on an indictment
charging him with certain misdemeanours.
At the Central Criminal Court, London, yesterday, before Mr Justice Wills, Oscar Wilde, 40, author, and Alfred Taylor, 33, of no
occupation, were indicted a second time for certain misdemeanours.
The Solicitor-General (Sir Frank Lockwood, Q.C.), Mr. C. F. Gill, and Mr. Horace Avory prosecuted on behalf of the Treasury; Sir Edward
Clarke and Mr. Charles Mathews defended.
In continuation of the case for the Crown, William Parker gave evidence relative to his association with Wilde. Several witnesses were
called, employed at the Savoy Hotel, to speak to alleged incidents which occurred with persons unknown in March, 1893: and a considerable portion of the
rest of the time of the Court was engaged in the reading of the transcript of the shorthand note taken of the evidence of Wilde at the trial of the
Marquis of Queensberry for alleged libel. The evidence of the arrest of Wilde at the Cadogan Hotel after the trial of the Marquis of Queensberry was given
by Detective-inspector Richards and Detective-sergeant Brockwell, of Scotland- yard, and the case for the prosecution closed.
Sir Edward Clarke submitted that there was no evidence to go to the Jury on the count relative to the alleged incidents at the Savoy
Hotel.
His Lordship admitted that the question was very near the line, and said that, should occasion arise, he would feel justified in
reserving the point for the consideration of the Court of Appeal. He felt, however, that it was a matter the responsibility of determining which ought to
rest with the Jury.
Sir Edward Clarke submitted next that there was no evidence as required by law to corroborate Shelley, and that, therefore, the count
affecting him ought to be withdrawn from the Jury, it being the long-established practice of the Courts in criminal cases to decline to invite juries to
act on the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice.
His Lordship expressed an opinion that the necessary corroboration required within the meaning of the wording of the rules laid down by
the Judges, and in accordance with the general practice of Criminal Courts respecting accomplices, was not present in regard to Shelley, the count in
respect of whom he should withdraw from the consideration of the Jury.
Sir Edward Clarke moved next to get the count affecting Wood withdrawn on similar grounds.
The Solicitor-General protested against any decision being given other than by the Jury on these issues, the matters being, in his
opinion, purely questions for them to determine.
After some discussion, his Lordship ruled that the case of Wood should go to the Jury.
At this stage the trial was adjourned until to-day, when the defence will be opened. Wilde was released on bail.