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 Pall Mall Gazette - Friday, May 24, 1895
The Pall Mall Gazette - Friday, May 24, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Belfast News-Letter - Saturday, May 25, 1895
Belfast News-Letter - Saturday, May 25, 1895
Difference
The re-trial of Oscar Wilde was resumed this morning before Mr. Justice Wills at the Old Bailey. The Solicitor-General (Sir F.
Lockwood) called his lordship's attention again to the matter of the case of Shelley, which his lordship had decided overnight to withdraw from the jury.
He (the Solicitor-General) was not aware last night that as recently as June last there was a judicial pronouncement bearing upon the matter. In the case
of in re Meunier, an extradition case, Mr. Justice Cave had stated that no doubt it was the practice to warn the jury they ought not to convict unless
they thought the evidence of an accomplice was corroborated, but he (Mr. Justice Cave) knew of no power to withdraw a case from the jury for want of
corroborative evidence. Mr. Justice Collins had concurred. He (the Solicitor-General) did not presume to re-argue the point upon which his lordship had
given his decision, but he thought it his duty to call attention to that recent judgment. His lordship said he preferred to adhere to the course he had
taken, which was the result of very deliberate consideration. Sir Edward Clarke then rose to address the jury upon what he called the remnants of the
case. The area of the case now before them was a limited one. He was painfully conscious of the exceptional, unusual, and unjustified way in which this
case had been conducted on the part of the Crown. He (Sir Edward Clarke) had held the office of Solicitor-General longer than any man in the country
during the past hundred years, and it was not likely that he would speak lightly of the responsibilities of that great office. He had always regarded the
responsibilities of a law officer of the Crown as public rather than personal. The Solicitor-General should be a minister of justice with the
responsibilities of a judge rather than those of a counsel retained for a particular combatant in the forensic fray. Perhaps Sir Frank Lockwood would
recognize that while he was speaking without the least unfriendliness, yet he hoped he might be doing something to
SUSTAIN THE TRADITIONS OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION,
and to induce Sir Frank Lockwood to remember what he seemed for a moment yesterday to forget--that he was not here to try to get a
verdict of guilty by any means he could get it ; but that he was here to get at the real facts of the case, in order that the jury might judge of them.
When this case was first brought against the accused there were twenty-five counts in the indictment. The evidence of the Crown was heard, and then the
whole of the conspiracy counts were withdrawn. He must say he never for a moment had to remonstrate with Mr. Gill for the tone in which he conducted the
prosecution. Then came down a law officer. Perhaps they did not know what that meant. It meant that, although when he was Solicitor-General he declared he
never would exercise so questionable a right, yet it meant that the Crown could thereby get the last word to the jury, even if no witnesses were called
for the defence. Broken as his client was by being kept in prison without bail--which was contrary to practice, and, he believed, contrary to law--broken
as his client was, with the anxiety of these successive trials, he (Sir Edward) might well have spared him the indignity and pain of having again to go
into the witness-box; but the Solicitor- General was here, and if Wilde were not again put into the box he could imagine what would be said in the
Solicitor-General's last words to the jury. Therefore, he should again call Mr. Wilde and submit him to the cross-examination of yet a third assailant.
The prisoner was then called, and was allowed to be seated while Sir Edward Clarke examined him. He repeated his former denials of the charges.
LORD ALFRED DOUGLAS AND THE PARIS "FIGARO."
PARIS, Friday. - The Figaro to-day publishes a telegram from Lord Alfred Douglas, dated Rouen, asking for an apology for the falsehoods
he alleges that paper printed about the Queensberry affair. At the same time he expresses great regret that it was his brother and not he himself who had
" corrected" his father. - Central News.
Paris, Friday.—The "Figaro" to-day publishes a telegram from Lord Alfred Douglas, dated Rouen asking for an apology for the falsehoods
he alleges that paper printed about the Queensberry affair. At the same time, expressing great regret that it was his brother and not himself who had
"corrected" his father.