The New York herald., 1874-10-11
me snake.pe.ro Controversy.

6D6uTt . Pibybi ~ Wuo py AO hCsAAio "AsA ssN~
desire to crate what the illiterate press is
pleased to call HERALD sensation. Our pur-
pose was to elicit opinions from persons. who
we're qualified to judge, and to transfer to
journalism debate which had previously
been almost entirely confined to books. Those
persons who became indignant because the
question was asked, and considered the dis
cussion an insult to the great dramatist,
were we think, misled by their feelings
They do not understand the value OF literary
investigation nor the importance OF ac-
knowledgin8 the. new issues which ore con-
stant.y arising in criticism The assertion that
Bacon wrote the plays waS made by scholars
by such writer's as Professor Holmes and Miss
Della Bacon: it had been revived in leading
periodicals, and to speak Of it was simply to
take notice Of fact There could be no
iconoclasm in such o discussion. II Shake
speare wrote the plays the effect Of discussion
would be to silence his opponents; if he did
not write them the true author or authors
should have the credit In either case the de-
bate would tend to good results. In this
spirit we laid the subject before the intelligent
public, and it is their misfortune and not our
fault that few papers have looked upon it as
an effort to discredit Shakespeare
But by its own inherent force the question
became sens .tion--not Of the HERALD, but
of modern literature. The article from
Nqser's Magazine called forth responses from
hundreds of correspondents, Of which many
of No
gave place to great number OF
these contributions, and the more in
tellectual portion of the American press
also took active part in the debate. The re-
suit was to teach the public more of the vital
characteristics of the writings Of Shakespeare
and Bacon in month than it would have.
learned without such assistance in years. The
two greatest inte.lects Of the Elizabethan age
were contrasted and compared, and we are
not surprised to be informed that one conse-
quence has been an increased demand for all
books which treat Of the important subject.
Among those who have contributed to our
columns are, prominently, Professor Hiram
Corson, Of Cornell University; Professor
O'Leary, Of Manhattan College; Pro-
fessor John S. Hart of Princeton;
Judge Pierrepont, Mr.. L. Clarke Davis, Mr..
Horace Howard Furness, Mr. Z. G. Sted-
man, Mr. A. Oakley Hall, Mr.. Henry Ward
Beecher, MIR. Richard Grant White, Mr.. Bret
Harte Recorder Hackett, MIR. Howard Paul,
MI. Boucicault, Mr. Lester Wal!ack, Mr.. John
Brougham, Mr.. John E. Ovens Mr.. Wheeler,
Mr. Daniel Dougherty, and even His Honor
Mayor Havemeyer. Besides the opinions and
arguments Of these distinguished gentlemen,
representing nearly all the principal profess
sions, we have published those of an equally
large number of correspondents whose sig
natures it is unnecessary to compile. We
believe the investigation to have been the
most thorough of the kind ever made in the
columns OF a newspaper 1t is only to be re-
gretted that so few Baconiaps came to the
defence of Professor Holmes theory, for
by far the greater number Of our correspond
ents opposed it. Up to this time we have de-
| clined to interpolate our own opinion upon
the authorship; but now, in closing the discus
sion, after yielding ample time and space to
those pho wished to take part in it, we must
say that the weight Of testimony is altogether
against the claim made for Bacon. Nothing
new has been advanced in behalf of the
Holmes theory, while, on the contrary, the
internal evidence of the pays and the facts of
history have been overwhelmingly shown to
be in favor of Shakespeare as the author. To
60 over these Investigations and conclusions
would be superfuous. 1t is enough to say
that the theory that Bacon wrote the tragedies
and comedies which were published as
Shakespeares more than two centuries
ago is more difficult to reconcile with his
established character and authentic works
than the belief that Shakespeare wrote them
is with our ignorance of his career and per-
sonality. The evidence brought against
Shakespeares authorship is radically weak,
being necessarily founded upon conjectural
idea Of his life. It's negative, while, on the
con rary, the Baconians have TO explain away
gigantic contradictions between Bacon S
known life and intellectual pursuits and
the claims they put forth in his behalf.
We believe, in short, that nothing has been
said in this debate to weaken our faith in
Shakespeare, while much has been shown
which strengthens it. William Shakespeare
is, therefore, in our opinion the author Of the
plays which in his own day and ever since
have been attributed to him by universal
consent, and the plea made for Bacon is 'of
such stuff rs dreams are made Of" theory
which has for its chief use to make the fame
of Shakespeare more glorious.
The Fate Of Ritualism.