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 World - Friday, April 19, 1895
The World - Friday, April 19, 1895
Most similar paragraph from
The Nassau Guardian - Saturday, May 4, 1895
The Nassau Guardian - Saturday, May 4, 1895
Difference
LONDON, April 19. -- At the Bow Street Police Court to-day Oscar Wilde and Alfred Taylor, charged with serious misdemeanors, were
brought up on remand and were formally committed for trial, bail being refused in each case.
It was noon before the prisoners were brought into the dock, and it was noticed that Wilde was much more pallid and distressed than he
has appeared since he first appeared in court.
He was obliged to be allowed a seat in the dock, and resled there in a limp fashion, paying no attention to the proceedings.
Wilde was much paler and far at ease than heretofore. He was allowed a seat in the dock and rested there in limp fashion paying little or
no attention to the proceedings.
After the evidence in the case had been presented a list of the charges of gross indecency against Wilde was read, and he was asked if
he wished to say anything in reply. Wilde answered:
"Not at present."
Alfred Tavlor was then charged with attempting to perpetrate a crime, and both prisoners were committed for trial.
Counsel on behalf of Wilde made an application for ball, but the presiding magistrate replied that, in his opinion, the offense was so
grave, and he considered the evidence so serious, that bail could not be allowed.
Counsel for Wilde made application for bail, but the presiding magistrate replied that the offense was so grave and the evidence so
serious bail could not be allowed.