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 San Francisco Examiner - Sunday, April 28, 1895
The San Francisco Examiner - Sunday, April 28, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Cincinnati Enquirer - Monday, April 29, 1895
The Cincinnati Enquirer - Monday, April 29, 1895
Difference
LONDON, April 27. - The trial of Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor, charged with serious misdemeanors, was resumed at the Old Bailey Court
to-day with a large attendance. Alfred Wood and Frederick Atkins were examined and cross-examined. The latter was asked if he had received £500 ($2,500)
from a foreign Count while he was at Scarborough in his yacht, and he denied it. He repeated his testimony concerning Wilde. Sir Edward Clarke tried to
show that he had blackmailed men at Nice, Paris and other places. The witness denied that he had extorted a large sum of money from two Americans at the
Hotel Victoria.
When Edward Shelly, formerly employed by publishers Matthews & Land, was asked to tell the jury what had occured in Oscar Wilde's
rooms, he particularly appealed to counsel to read it from his previous deposition and thus spare him the shame of repeating it. Counsel, however, made
him repeat the story. Other evidence of the character already outlined was given, and the trial was then adjourned until Monday.
When Edward Shelley, the former employe of the publishers Matthews & Lane, was testifying, and was asked to tell the jury what had
occurred in Oscar Wilde's rooms, the witness pathetically appealed to counsel to read it from his previous deposition, and thus spare him the shame of
repeating it. Counsel, however, made the witness repeat his story. The day was occupied by the examination of the same witnesses who have been called to
the stand, and the testimony was of the same character as already outlined.