New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-05-06
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
DEAN CHURCH'S "BACON."
Moon nv r. W. ICHuRcu. Dean Of 81. Pauls pp.
PHsS Ola Harper &iBrothers {

The intellectual and the active life Of Bacon pres
.nt differences and anomalies SO great and irrecon'
clabe that his career has become kind of literary
problem, to o solution Of which many capable men
have addressed themselves without achieving a 90
cided success. Macaulay set forth the contradlc-
lions of the case with characteristic brliancy Ills
delight in antithesis made 1t peculiarly coLgenlal
subject to him. But it cannot be SAID that ne
cleared up the mystery, while in some respects nc
rather deepened it. SPEEDING had persuaded NM
self that Bacon was more sinned against than SIN
ming. and tried to convince the world OF TINS bu'
the facts are too stubborn TO uphold such an es-
innate, and Bacon's degradation rests too largely
upon his own admissions for this hypothesis to be
accented The Frenchman Remusat perhaps went
nearer TO thetruth than any of his predecessors but
even he because he could not overcome the barrier
of race failed 10 comprehend that side OF Bacon
character which was specially English Dean
Church has had the advantage of tn" laboTs OF all
these earlier investigators, and he has brought 10
the work some fitness of his own. He has judicial
mind can weigh evidence imPartially, is entirely
free from preconcepton and bias, and has made
careful Independent study Of the subject To this it
NAV be added that his style is clear. simple and
ferse, and that his judgments not only well con-
sidered but fully reasoned.
The questions concerning Bacon which continue
10 interest the world the cause Of his fail the
significance of his philosophical career; the strange
lack of unltv between his intellectual and moral
prn eiplos The admirers of his philosophical work
have endeavored to get the Judgment of his cOntem
porares upon his moral failures reversed, but the
attempt has failed. The truth appears TO be that
Bacon was deficient in consciousness and TINS
deficiency is conspicuous in him throughout his
public. career. The man who could go out of hrs
way to bring his bosom friend to the scahold, as he
did in tie case Of Essex; who could sbase himself
as he did not only before Elizabeth but before
James, and. still worse, Buckingham; who could
follow Cecil all the life Of the latter with seryile
fattery and lose no opportunity Of traducing ibis
character wien hc was in his grave; who could be
merciless T. corrupt judges while he himself was
pocketing gifts right and lcft-can only be CON
cluded to have been TO a great extent without
moral sense. And though it has been claimed that
Bacon's philosophical conceptions informed
with a sincere concern for humanity, we think it
may be shown that this kind of sympathy may be
purely Of the intellect, and need not involve any
genuine draft upon the affections. And in support
of this position it is to be remarked that Bacon does
not appear ever to have really loved any one. His
relation to Essex is not inconsistent with this as
sertlon for it seems to have been confined 10 epis
toary and colloquial expressions of friendship. and
The first time it put to the proof broke down
under the strain. And Essex was useful to him, and
gave HIM OF his substance and tried TO help him 10
advancement. lie married. but for ms wife>
dowry. He wrote an essay on Love, but only sue
ceeded in showing that Lo did not understand it,
aid regarded il from without much as an instinct
not implanted IL his own nature but to be
wondered at when manifested in others.
But all through his public career he was an in
Suitable self-secker. True he pretended TO himself
that his only for wealth the fuTthorauce Of
his great scheme for the restoration Of knowledge
but history shows that he took much more than "a
philosophical pleasure in luxury and pomp and dis
play No Lord Chancellor was ever invested with
greater maCuiGccucc than Francis Bacon. No man
eyor hungercd more after titles and places and per
Quisites. No man ever discounted his rank more
fully or freely. No man, in short who affected
philanthropy 80 much ever lived a more thoroughly
selfish life His bographers have ali been puzzled
by the evidences Of Bacon's unpopu,arity His own
household never believed in him. Neither of the
Ceclls trusted him. Elizabeth Uould not advance
him. James neglected him for years. And this not
wIthstanding that his great abilities were fully
recognized What Is the explanation Of this general
want Of confidence ia the man? Is il not probable
that the summing egOtisn VII ch at once made him
abandon his best friend, and prevented him from
perceIvng the nfamy Of his conduct, colorod all
his actions as TO mark him ont to his contem-
porarics as one not tit to pa, faith with
out bOwels'G
What else can at all satisfactorily explain his
fail Here was philosopher aud close, moralist,
whose intellectual speouAtions scared most nobly,
whose didactic writings are free from all tant of
venality yet who as Lord Chancellor never appears
70 have realized the vice Of giu-taking until he
confronted with dismal catalogue of his own
offences in this regard. A short time before he had
urged the utmost severity OF punishment upon an
inferior Judge charged with similar vcnalitics
han, lr,4t 70 la
lis own wrong-domc and since he refused to de-
1end himself and since ne subscribed to the several
charges, il must be assumed that the proofs were
irrefutable, he could only say that he had not real
lied what he was doing. and IN saying this he seems
20 have been sincere. And though il has been
almost taken for granted that his disgrace short
ened his life there IS really no evidence for this
view. lie retired 10 his seat at GOIhansbury being
bauished from London, but he kept up lis soliclta-
tons and opportunities 10 the Court even 10 the
last and in his constant petitions forpublic en-
ploynout there is nothing TO show that he felt his
fall in any other way than an uutoward event
which had deprived him of an important position
together with It's large em3lumcnts. Sometimes
Indeed, his complaints convey The impression that
h regarded himself a martyr. Only in his alb
jcct and most ptiablc appeals to Parliament during
the inquiry into the affairs Of the Chaucery did lie
admit fully-and then with what noyelIing self.
abascneut-Ais guilt aud LIS igDOMiuy. There was
nothing generous or magnalimous about him. lie
took mean revenge upon Coke when the oppor-
tunity offered, and it cost him dear in the end.
Dean Church suggests that ne may have refused to
defend himself against the charges OF corruption be-
cause ne realized that his conviction WIS prcde-
tenn.ncd; but this does not appear very probable.
He had party in the House. and James and BucG-
ingham would have helped him had they thought it
could be done without danger t. Il emselyes But
he surrendered at once il must be thought as much
because he failed to appreciate the implications Of