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 Evening Journal - Thursday, May 23, 1895
The Evening Journal - Thursday, May 23, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
New York Herald - Friday, May 24, 1895
New York Herald - Friday, May 24, 1895
Difference
London, May 23.- The trial of Oscar Wilde was resumed in the Old Bailey court this morning. Parker's servants and several servants of
the Savoy hotel were called to the stand, and repeated their former testimony. Nothing new was elicited.
LONDON, May 23, 1895. The trial of Oscar Wilde was resumed in the Old Bailey Court this morning. Parker's servants and several servants
of the Savoy Hotel were called to the stand and repeated their former testimony. Nothing new was elicited.
The case for the prosecution was closed, and Sir Edward Clarke, on behalf of Wilde, argued that part of the indictment charging Wilde
with misconduct with unknown persons, was not sustained by corroborative evidence.
The case for the prosecution was closed and Sir Edward Clarke, on behalf of Wilde, argued that that part of the indictment charging
Wilde with misconduct with unknown persons was not sustained by corroborative evidence.
The judge decided that he would not withdraw the charges from the jury. His own impression was that Shelly's intellect was deranged as
regards his accusations against Wilde, but he would leave it to the jury to decide thereon.
The court then adjourned, Wilde being released over night on bail.
The Court then adjourned, Wilde being again released overnight on his own bail.
"What in the name of everything wonderful is meant by the constant references In the cable despatches from Europe, as to the prominent
position stated to have been occupied by Oscar Wilde in London society?" says a writer in the New York Recorder. True, he moved in certain, literary,
artistic and dramatic circles, where he was considered as a shining light, and where his English adaptations of Gallic epigrams and paradoxes were
admired. But he never belonged to society proper in London, was never to be met at any of the exclusive houses, such as those of Lord and Lady Cadogan, of
the Countess of Spencer, of Lady Ripon and Lady Warwick.
Nor did he belong to any first or even second class club. And that is always a good criterion of a man's status In England. Indeed, his
name only figured on the list of one or two unimportant and new-fangled clubs, not a single one of the more respectable institutions of this kind having
ever consented to admit him. When a man haunts the Regent street cafes and the ephemeral proprietary clubs in the streets leading off St. James and
Piccadilly, you may take it for granted that it is the best he can do and that he has no social status of any kind whatsoever.
The only reason that I can give as accounting for the prevalence of the impression that Oscar Wilde was a shining light of the London
great world is that he was a successful playright and a magnificent self-advertiser in the press. But he was never to be met at any good house or at any
really fashionable entertainment, and the most that can be said of his mother, Lady Wilde, the widow of the Dublin physician, who was knighted for his
services to medical science, was that she kept a sort of fourth or fifth-rate literary salon, such as there are a few in this country, notably in New
York.
Whatever association Oscar Wilde possessed with the aristocracy or even with the gentry constituting London society, was of an unsavory
character.