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 - Thursday, May 2, 1895
The Freeman’s Journal - Thursday, May 2, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Thursday, May 2, 1895
Dublin Evening Telegraph - Thursday, May 2, 1895
Difference
London, Thursday Morning.
[...]The disagreement of the jury in the case against Oscar Wilde was received everywhere with astonishment except in the court. Those
who had heard the judge's charge were not unprepared for such an unsatisfactory result of a highly unsavoury case. The procedure in such circumstances is
that the prisoner is put back for re-trial at the next sessions. Of course it is optional with the Crown whether they will proceed again with a case or
not. It is only in Ireland in the cases of prisoners charged with offences of a political nature that the full rigour of the law is strained to get
convictions where a jury has failed to agree. In the present instance of course there are felt to be special reasons why the responsibility of the Crown
should be exercised with particular care. There will, naturally, be a desire to avoid raking up anew these abominations, while there is also the necessity
of visiting with condign punishment an offence which, if established, is of the most odious nature.[...]
[...] The disagreement of the jury in the case against Oscar Wilde was received everywhere with astonishment except in the court. Those
who had heard the judge’s charge were not unprepared for such an unsatisfactory result of a highly unsavoury case. The procedure in such circumstances is
that the prisoner is put back for re-trial at the next sessions. Of course it is optional with the Crown whether they will proceed again with a case or
not. It is only in Ireland in the cases of prisoners charged with offences of a political nature that the full rigour of the law is strained to get
convictions where a jury has failed to agree. In the present instance of course there are felt to be special reasons why the responsibility of the Crown
should be exercised with particular care. There will, naturally, be a desire to avoid raking up anew these abominations, while there is also the necessity
of visiting with condign punishment an offence which, if established, is of the most odious nature.