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 St. James's Gazette - Tuesday, April 23, 1895
The St. James's Gazette - Tuesday, April 23, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Times - Tuesday, April 23, 1895
The Times - Tuesday, April 23, 1895
Difference
The April Sessions of the Central Criminal Court commenced yesterday at the Old Bailey in the presence of the Lord Mayor, the
Recorder, and a number of Aldermen. In the calendar were the names of 118 prisoners—there being 3 charges of manslaughter, 1 of attempted murder, 13 of
robbery with violence, 3 of wounding, 16 of burglary, 6 of housebreaking, 12 of forgery, and 14 of conspiracy.
The Recorder, in charging the grand jury, said that although the number of prisoners for trial was slightly in excess of the average
number of prisoners they had to deal with at the monthly sessions of the court, he was happy to see that there was an absence of the more serious charges
involving the loss of human life. A most serious case was that against Bernard Cohen, charged with perjury and incitement to perjury in connection with
what was called the Waterloo road tragedy. The grand jury were probably aware of the circumstances of the case, and would come to the conclusion that the
prisoner was very properly indicted for the perjury.
As to the case against Oscar Wilde and Arthur Taylor it was not necessary for him to allude to the facts. They would see what the
charges were, and it was only necessary for him to say that after they had heard the evidence of the witnesses called before the magistrate they would no
doubt consider it their duty to return a true bill in respect of all the offences with which the prisoners were charged.
The Recorder, in charging the Grand Jury, said that there were very serious charges against two men named Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor.
The Grand Jury would see what the charges were, and it was only necessary for him to say that, after they had heard the evidence of the witnesses called
before the police magistrate, they would no doubt consider it their duty to return a true bill as to all the charges. The Grand Jury then retired to their
duties.
A man named James Slater was indicted for publishing a series of scandalous libels of and concerning Baron Henry de Worms. The
prisoner had been repeatedly cautioned against writing the letters, which accused the Baron of being his (the prisoner’s) father, but, inasmuch as the
Baron was only four years of age at the time the prisoner was born the grand jury would see the absurdity of the charge. The prisoner all along said,
"Well, I did not ask you for any money, did I?" but the grand jury would see by the tenour of the letters whether this was not his object. The grand jury
would probably come to the conclusion that the letters constituted a series of scandalous libels.
Mr. Horace Avory said he was desired by the Attorney General to apply that the indictment against Brock and others might be postponed
until next sessions. The reasons for that course would probably be obvious to his lordship, and as the accused had had notice of the application and did
not object, he asked that the recognizances should be enlarged until the next sessions and that the bill of indictment might be presented at those
sessions. The application was granted by the recorder.
Mr. C.F. Gill said he had to apply for a day to be fixed for this case. He understood that it w.is not likely that the case would
occupy any length of time. The accused were admitted to bail last sessions, and the police lad received information that possibly the defendants would not
be present for trial. It was, however, desirable to fix the date for the trial, so that the defendants might have a definite time to surrender. The
Recorder said the case would be fixed for Wednesday.