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 Boston Globe - Sunday, May 26, 1895
The Boston Globe - Sunday, May 26, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Boston Globe - Saturday, May 25, 1895
The Boston Globe - Saturday, May 25, 1895
Difference
LONDON, May 25 - An Old Bailey jury, cautiously empanelled, and, as it seemed, carefully coached by the judge of a high court, has
declared Oscar Wilde guilty of the abominable offenses charged against him.
Wilde was sentenced to two years in prison at hard labor.
Wilde was sentenced to two years in prison at hard labour.
Taylor, whose sentence had been suspended, was also given two years at hard labor.
Taylor, whose sentence had been suspended, was also given two years at hard labor.
Public opinion, which is usually on the side of the accused and almost invariably sympathetic in regard to any prisoner standing a
second trial for the same crime, had from the first pronounced with nearly absolute unanimity that he was guilty of everything set forth in the
indictment, and of much more. The country judged him out of his own mouth, and so did the jury to a large extent, and any other result would have been a
disgrace to the intelligent English jurymen and a crying shame upon British justice.
It is impossible, however, to conceal the fact that from the first the common people believed that Wilde would never be convicted.
Instinctively they felt that the influence behind this shameless friend of princes and nobles would prove too powerful for any ordinary judicial
procedure.
The police had placed the government in possession of the names of men of rank, wealth and fashion who undeniably shared in some of
Wilde’s orgies, and had collected evidence amply sufficient to place them in the criminal dock with the hearty approval of all clean men, but the
secretary of state took no step against them to vindicate outraged morals.
Lord Alfred Douglas and other men whose evidence would have made the case against Wilde and others even more complete and irrefutable,
were allowed to leave the country. They are still abroad, but doubtless they will return to this country in a short time, secure against punishment.
Possibly it is as well, for Wilde’s conviction can scarcely fail to prove an effectual determent for years to come, and it will be to the public interest
to let this awful scandal become forgotten.
Honest men have, from the first, displayed an unusual, perhaps an unchristian, eagerness for a conviction in this case during the last
two or three days. A fierce and universal resentment was shown at what appeared to superficial observers to be almost a collusion between judge and
lawyers in order to save Wilde, but Justice Willis’ summing up, which unexpectedly proved to a strictly judicial piece of work, together with the
solicitor general's masterly speech and the common sense of the jury of plain citizens finally prevailed.
Wilde was full of confidence to the last, so that the result was a staggering blow to him. He strove to utter something, but his tongue
clove to the roof of his mouth, and he sank back in his chair, a mental and physical wreck. The final scene was truly and perhaps fittingly dramatic.