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
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Thursday, April 4, 1895
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Thursday, April 4, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Dublin Evening Mail - Thursday, April 4, 1895
The Dublin Evening Mail - Thursday, April 4, 1895
Difference
London, Thursday.The hearing of the libel action brought by Mr Oscar Wilde against the Marquis of Queensberry for libel was
resumed to-day at the Old Bailey.
Mr Carson, Q C, resumed the cross-examination of Mr Wilde, who said he used to go to the upper part of a house, 13 Little College
street, occupied by a man named Taylor. The rooms were artistically furnished, and perfumes were burnt. He never saw Taylor attired in a woman’s costume,
or knew that he had one. He used to attend tea parties at Taylor’s rooms. Did not know that one of the men frequenting Taylor’s house had disappeared
within the past week. He did not know that Taylor and a companion named Parker were arrested in a raid on a house in Fitzroy square last year. Taylor
introduced witness to five young men, to all of whom he gave money. He invited a party to dinner at Kettner’s Restaurant. He was not aware that one of
them was a valet and the other a coachman.
Mr Carson, Q C, resumed the cross-examination of Mr Wilde, who said he used to go to the upper part of a house 13 Little College street,
occupied by a man named Taylor. The rooms were artistically furnished, and perfumes were burnt. He never saw Taylor attired in a woman’s costume, or knew
that he had one. He used to attend tea parties at Taylor’s rooms. He did not know that one of the men frequenting Taylor’s house had disappeared within
the past week. He did not know that Taylor and a companion named Parker were arrested in a raid on a house in Fitzroy square last year. Taylor introduced
witness to five young men, to all of whom he gave money. He invited a party to dinner at Kettner’s Restaurant. He was not aware that one of them was a
valet and the other a coachman.
Mr Carson—Was there plenty of champagne?
Mr Carson—Was there plenty of champagne?
Witness—What gentleman would stint the valet? (Much laughter).
Witness—What gentleman would stint the valet? (Much laughter.)
Further cross-examined, Mr Wilde denied driving one of these men to his own private room at the Savoy Hotel, and there committing
indecency. He never paid visits to Parker at a house in Camera square. He did not know that certain men who were arrested in the Fitzroy square raid were
connected with the Cleveland street scandals. The Fitzroy square arrest made no difference in his friendship with Taylor. He was introduced to a young man
named Freddy Atkins, and took him to Paris, being joined there by a gentleman whose name was written yesterday and passed to counsel. Atkins was addressed
as Freddy, and was plaintiff’s guest. He gave Freddy money to go to the Moulin Rouge. They stayed at the same hotel, but no impropriety ever took place.
Freddy suggested he should have his hair curled.
Further cross-examined, Mr Wilde denied driving one of these men to his own private room at the Savoy Hotel. He never paid visits to
Parker at a house in Camera square. He did not know that certain men who were arrested in the Fitzroy square raid were connected with the Cleveland street
scandal. The Fitzroy square arrest made no difference in his friendship with Taylor. He was introduced to a young man named Freddy Atkins and took him to
Paris, being joined there by a gentleman whose name was written yesterday and passed to counsel. Atkins was addressed as "Freddy," and was plaintiff’s
guest. He gave Freddy money to go to the Moulin Rouge. They stayed at the same hotel. Freddy suggested he should have his hair curled.
Counsel—Did he have it curled?
Mr Carson—Did he have it curled?
Witness—No; I should have been very angry if he had (laughter). The gentleman whose name had been written also introduced him to two
young men named Scarp and Mabor. The latter met him on his return from Scotland in October, and they stayed at the same hotel in town. He gave Mabor a
cigarette case at the rooms occupied by Lord Alfred Douglas in High street, Oxford. He met a youth named Granger, a servant, but denied counsel’s
suggestion with regard to him (Granger) was ugly.
Witness—No, I should have been very angry if he had (laughter). The gentleman (whose name had been written) also introduced him to two
young men named Scarp and Mabor. The latter met him on his return from Scotland in October, and they stayed at the same hotel in town. He gave Mabor a
cigarette case. At the rooms occupied by Lord Alfred Douglas, in High-street, Oxford, he met a youth named Granger, a servant, but denied counsel’s
suggestions with regard to him, Granger was ugly.
Counsel—Why do you give that as a reason?
Counsel—Why do you give that as a reason?
Plaintiff—Because you stung me with an insolent question.
Plaintiff—Because you stung me with an insolent question.
Further cross-examined—He knew a masseur at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that the mas- made any incriminating discovery on entering his
bedroom one morning. He also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to misconduct on certain occasions in Paris.
Further cross-examined, he said he knew a masseur at the Savoy Hotel, but denied that the masseur made any incriminating discovery. He
also repudiated certain suggestions with regard to certain occasions in Paris.