New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-05-13


oughly sane intelligence it does not require to be
said that between the minds of Shakespeare and
Bacon there is an impossible gulf One considera-
tion alone would establish this. DR.. lnglcby
saws truly: "Of all men who have left theli
impress ON the reign Of the first maiden Queen
not one can be found who was so deficient IN
human sylnpathies as Lord Bacon As for such
man portraying q woman in all her natural SIM
plicity purity and grace; as to his imagining
and bodying forth in natural speech and actlon
such exquisite creations as Miranda, Perdita, Cor
della. Desdemona, Marina,-thc supposition is the
height of absurdity." Richard Grant White has
eloouently and wildly contrasted the poet ana
the philosopher, with similar result. lie indeed
goes so far as to maintain that Among all the
men of that brilliant period who stand forth IN
the blaze of its light with sufficient distinction
for us at this time TO know anything OF them,
no two were so elementally unlike in their mental
and moral traits and in their literary HABITS as
Francis Bacon and William Shakespeare; and each
of them stamped his individuality Enthusiastically
upon his work" That is what is thought by those
who are not Baconians, but the latter are, I'M
fortunately for all, unable TO distinguish between
intellectual colors and to them sentence IS a
concatenation OF words, and nothing more
II may. no doubt be said that while the in
ternal evidences furnished by Shakespearcs WORKS
are fatal to the Baconian theory, it is yet far
from proving that the man called William shake
spcare wrote what is attributed to him. But inc
assumption that William Shakespeare was not
capable Of writing these works has no solid basis
An that can be said truly is that we do not
know where, how or when he acquired the edu-
cation necessary for the work. Many years Of
his life are unrecorded But this leaves wide
in fereucp and taken
with the testimony of his contemporaries who I'M
ouestionably did believe in his authorship ana MS
capacity, the natural and rational presumption Is
that his genius enabled him to acquire knowledge
in many fields in phenomenal way. To what
extent this is possible the case OF Mozart shows
When that musical prodigy was only six years
old we are told, he astonished his teacher not
so much by an avidity for information, as by the
mpossibility of telling him anything which ne
did not know before This child asslmlated
knowledge with an extraordinary facility. why
may not Shakespeare have done the samcf we
know upon the testimony of one OF his coh'em-
porares, that he was in the habit OF modelllhs
his characters upon people he met. Lake balA"c'
he went out into the streets and ROADS IN scAIoli
of ideas and suggestions. We know iurther' on'V
he was brought into contact with many, IL ho'
most of the brightest minds OF the age we ha'e
literally no ground for the conclusion that Ne
did not study the fact that he led busy lie
NOT varranting any such inference. Bacon also
was externally active, yet this did not hinucr
him from writing.
Mr.. Donnelly lays much stress upon the EVIL
dence afforded by the plays that the WRITER was
a lawyer. There certainly is plenty OF TINS Khu
Of evidence. but on the other hand it is quite
ms easy TO find evidence in the plays that the
anthor knew very little law, as for example
the curously bad law in the Merchant OF ven
icc,n Mr.. Appleton Morgan has dealt so luiiy
and ably with that instance that 'here -
nothing more 10 be said about IT, lie nos nlad'
il clear that Francis Bacon, at all events, cannon
be imagined to have written that play, out tha'
tho octnal writer was undoubtedly a stage man
ager, who cared nothing for legal principles save
as thew were conducive to the production OF
dramatic effects. As to Shakespeare's medical
there is no reason why he could not
have picked that up Mr.. Donnelly, by the way
IN his earerness TO award all the knowledge OF
the time TO Bacon falls into the error OF ascriDin9
10 him perception Of the so-called modern sclentlnc
discovery that heat is mode OF notion Inc |
truth is that ell Bacon knew on this suoJect nc
derived from Plato. This indeed is not solitary |
instance of the kind. In Mr. Donnellys Dook |
there are several examples Of the same klnd' |
N which he imagincs knowledge really |
borrowed from the anclents 10 ha'o
been discovered for the first time by his IDOL
In approaching the alleged cipher we are con-
strained TO examine the question OF the production
,f the first folio Here the external evidence
against the Baconian theory is of the most 1ormlo-
able character for the folio of 1923 bears every
mark of sovenly and careless mechanical eXecu-
ion. Its pagination is wildly irregular. One
hundred paces nearly are not PACED at all. The
work is equally careless and
,aprieous Brackets and hyphens are inserted III
he most reckless manner, yet not so as 10 DC
utterly unintelligiblc. To those who are aware
hat the folio plays were set up III oil propaoll1y
rom the parts used by the actors that these parts
were marked by the actors with marginal notes
md with whatever private helps and suggestions
Tor stage use might occur to them; that the
printers of the period very apt to follow
;opy" in the most literal manner. and SO too in
corporate in the text all these accretions that
here are in the folio as it stands many palpabe
proofs of this as for instance, the frequent III
ertion in the text OF the names of Elizabethan
ctors, placed originally in the stage directions or
N the margin of the acting parts; all these indi-
ations warrant the conclusion chat. the folio is
either more nor less than what it.ceppears,
amey, collection of the plays thrown together
n the most careless fashion, printed probably not
n one place, but in half dozen or more-the
rnters taking home copy and working there
nd that proof-reading was done upon It,
When it is remembered further, that the folio OF
623 was largely compiled from the earlier quartos,
1hich in their turn swarmed with corruptions and
rnters' errors, the difficulties attending anything
emanding basis belief in the absolute and
Microscopic perfection of the work will be seen t
0 be considerable. IL
Mr.. Donnelly does not, because he cannot sur
lOunt these difficulties nor can he clear away
hat which proceeds from the obvious considera- .
ion that il Bacon inserted cipher in the first
olio he must have personally superinterded the
rinting; must have read all the proofs himself
ay, If he meant to keep his secret, must have
It up every stickful of the type with his own :
ands. Mr. Donnelly tries TO escape this reduc- $