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 Cork Examiner - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
The Cork Examiner - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Bristol Mercury - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
Bristol Mercury - Wednesday, May 1, 1895
Difference
On the trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor being resumed yesterday at the Central Criminal Court, Mr Gill, on behalf of the Crown,
formally withdrew the counts of the indictment alleging conspiracy, and said he did this to avoid any difficulty in calling the prisoners into the
witness-box.
Mr Gill, on behalf of the Crown, formally withdrew the counts of the indictment alleging conspiracy, and said he did this to avoid any
difficulty in calling prisoners into the witness box.
Sir Edward Clarke asked that a verdict of not guilty on the conspiracy counts be at once returned, but His Lordship did not assent to
this.
Sir Eward Clarke asked that a verdict of not guilty on the conspiracy counts be at once returned, but his Lordship did not assent to
this.
Sir Edward Clarke, having intimated that he would ask for the formal verdict on the allegation of conspiracy at a later stage of the
case, at once began his address for the defence of Wilde. He accused the public Press of having imperilled the interests of justice, and felt called upon
to pronounce the reading of Wilde's cross-examination in Wilde v Queensberry as contrary to all the rules of fairness. Having taken the responsibility of
accepting the verdict of not guilty in Wilde v Queensberry, because he felt that the jury would not convict the Marquis of a criminal offence, he was now
here to defend Wilde on a distinct issue, which could not be then properly raised, but which could be raised now.
Oscar Wilde was, at the close of Sir Edward's address, called and sworn. He described his academical and literary career, and denied
that there was any truth whatever in the allegations of the witnesses against him.
Mr Gill, in cross-examination, quoted from a sonnet of Lord Alfred Douglas. Wilde replied that the love there spoken of was the love of
David for Jonathan, the passion described by Plato as the beginning of wisdom, a deep spiritual affection as pure as it was perfect. In this century it
was misunderstood, and a man was put in the pillory for it (applause in the gallery).
Mr Gill, in cross-examination, quoted from a sonnet of Lord Alfred Douglas, Wilde replied that the love there spoken of was the love of
David for Jonathan—the passion described by Plato as the beginning of wisdom, a deep spiritual affection as pure as it was perfect. In this century it was
misunderstood, and a man was put in the pillory for it.
His Lordship said if any further manifestation of feeling occurred he would have the court cleared.
Counsel then called the attention of witness to the statements of Parker, Shelly and Atkins, on which he gave a general denial. There
was to truth in the evidence adduced from the Savoy Hotel, and the statements of Frederick Atkins as to the Paris visit were grotesque and monstrous.
At the close of his examination Wilde again took his place in the dock, and Alfred Taylor, his co-prisoner, entered the witness box. He
said he was educated at Marlborough, and was formerly in the Militia. In 1883 he came into £45,000 and had since lived a life of pleasure. The allegation
brought against him by Charles Parker was absolutely untrue.
At the close of his examination Wilde again took his place in the dock, and Alfred Taylor, his co-prisoner, entered the witness box. He
said he was educated at Marlborough, and was formerly in the Militia. In 1883 he came into £45,000, and had since lived a life of pleasure. The allegation
brought against him by Charles Parker was absolutely untrue.
On the Court re-assembling after luncheon, Sir Edward Clarke again addressed the jury, and intimated his intention of dealing with the
evidence as distinct from topics prejudicially imported into the case. He did not remember the remarkable course adopted early in the day by Mr Gill to
have been followed in any previous case, and he complained that for three days, the defence had been subjected to embarrassment.