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 Freeman’s Journal - Friday, April 5, 1895
The Freeman’s Journal - Friday, April 5, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Friday, April 5, 1895
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Friday, April 5, 1895
Difference
London, Friday Morning.
[...]The length at which the London papers, both morning and evening, have reported the evidence in the Queensberry libel suit has
excited a good deal of remark. The St James's Gazette, with rather ostentations self-righteousness, issued a placard yesterday ascribing itself as "the
only paper containing no report of the Wilde libel suit," which undoubtedly must have been a recommendation in the eyes of many, if not most, newspaper
readers. The Freeman, however, without any such proclamation, confined its report to the briefest and baldest account of the case. In the later edition of
the St James's the following note appeared—"The editor of the Daily Chronicle presents his compliments to the editor of the St James's Gazette, and while,
in view of the grave public questions involved, he does not see his way to a complete suppression of the report of the Queensberry case, he desires to
operate with the editor of the St. James's in preserving the public from familiarity with the grosser aspects of the trial in its further developments."
This is a very proper attitude, and doubtless it will be imitated by the London papers before the case concluded.
London, Friday Morning. [...] The length at which the London papers, both morning and evening, have reported the evidence in the
Queensberry libel suit has excited a good deal of remark. The St James’s Gazette, with rather ostentatious self-righteousness, issued a placard yesterday
describing itself as "the only paper containing no report of the Wilde libel suit," which undoubtedly must have been a recommendation in the eyes of many,
if not most, newspaper readers. The Freeman, however, without any such proclamation, confined its report to the briefest and baldest account of the case.
In the later edition of the St James’s the following note appeared—"The editor of the Daily Chronicle presents his compliments to the editor of the St
James’s Gazette, and while, in view of the grave public questions involved, he does not see his way to a complete suppression of the report of the
Queensberry case, he desired to co-operate with the editor of the St. James’s in preserving the public from familiarity with the grosser aspects of the
trial in its further developments." This is a very proper attitude, and doubtless it will be imitated by the London papers before the case has concluded.
[...]