The Bottineau pioneer. (Bottineau, N.D.) 1885-1895, 1888-06-14

eeption Of IT. Thus the grave digger In
"Hamlet." though discoursing clumsily that
Ophelia might be buried in consecrated
ground, lays down the law as it had been
laid down in "Plowden's Reports in the
case of Sir James Eales, who commit
ted suicide. II the Shakespeare preconcep-
ton were not 50 strong. the modern lawyer
would say that this passage was written by a
man in practice and keeping up with the
decisions"
4. The author Of Shakespeare" was fairly
well informed in botany. zoology and such
science as then existed.
MINOR INTERNAL EVIDENCES.
The foregoing are only the most salient
proofs; but many more are cited. Thus the
dramatist never refers to Stratford-on-Avon,
the home Of the Shaxper or Shakspere fam.
lily; but there are twenty-three references to
st. Albans, the home of Bacon. Warwick
shire is nowhere praised; but Kent and other
districts In the south are. The fauna and
fora of the plays are not those of War
wickshire; neither is tho geography, the
nobility or the dialect. When "Shakspeare's'
clowns talk dialect, the only Warwickshire
words are those common to that county n
the south of England. Neither the politics,
nor the religion, nor the social life Of the
plays are those Of Standardization. By
all reasonable superstition the ~Shaxperes
were democrats; the dramatist Is an aristo-
crat who only mentions the common people
to ridicu!e them. The dramntist lived
through tho life and death struggle Of
Catholicism and Professionalism in England;
yet it is impossible to decide which party he
favored, and both have claimed him. He
plainly ridiculed the pope's claim to
sovereignty in England; but he rid
iculed the other party's extreme
view just as keenly, and as soon as Queen
Elizabeth was dead he put forth a play in
which her mother, Anne Boleyn, is merci
lessly dissected and held up to our contempt.
We have presented but . 1.-THE Of the
Baconians' evidences; the Shakespearians
meet them with weighty facts. First and
probably strongest on their side Is what
logictans call the universal testimony. All
the world believed from the start that Will.
lam Shakspers was the author; and how
could all the world be deceived They add
to this the written testimony Of three con-
temporary writera The Baconians easily
dispose OF two, ono Of whom attacks Shaks
pere as q pretender and the other only re-
fers to him as a witty, easy writer; but the
testimony of Ben Jonson Is too direct and
explicit to be thus got over. He was very
intimate with Shakspere and for q time
acted as secretary to Bacon; he outlived then,
both and received q pension from, Charles |.
he survived to q time when the political di-
visions of Elizabeth's and James courts were
obsolete. and as Ear as car now be seen, ht
was perfectly free to tell what be knew. H.
knew the universal attribution of tho plays
to Shakspere and never contradicted it. II
he knew that Bacon was their author why
was be silentl IL it was a fact and he did
not know it, how could he he deceived! Mr..
Donhelly's answer is ingenious, and to many
will be conclusive; but in our limited space
We cannot set it forth.
Mr.. Donnelly'e cipher we do not as yet at
tempt to master. At first view it appears to
US very complicated: but of the few who
have worked out sections of it, some insist
that it is conclusive. For explanation we
need in this place only use a familiar form.
Suppose that in some current writing we find
that tho tenth word is ''o0r," the twentieth
father" the thirtieth "who," the fortieth
art" and thus on through the Lords
prayer-we are compelled to conclude that it
is the result Of design. Mr. Donnelly's
cipher, however, proceeds on a far more
complicated plan. 1t is as if one should take
the fifth word, the tenth. the fftieth, the
hundredth, the hundred and iftieth, and
thus Oh to 1900: then return through a
totally different series of figures, arrived at
by dividing, to the place of beginning, and
then proceed Oh a new series Of which the
separate increments were obtained by a feed
system Of division between the previously
obtained increments. Of course. this is not
Mr.. Donnelly's system, but it gives some idea
Of it, and those who maintain that it is the
true solution admit that many days labor,
Of tedious counting, are necessary to evolve
even n paragraph Of the concealed story
But when evolved, they insist, it gives the
inside history of Queen Elizabeth's reign and
shows why the authorship had to be con
cealed.
With this caution to the reader we present
a few of the paragraphs formed by tho words
thus numerically selected from Henry w."