New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-06-24
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
MORE BACONIAN BOSH.


FRANCIS BACON, POET, PROPHET. PM OsOPnER.
VERSUS PHANTOM CAPTAIN slIAkEsEARE TIE
ROsICRUUlAN MASK. BY W. f. G. Wigston. ovo'
PIP. 436. Chicago: f. J. Schultz d Co.
This volume Is appropriately dedicated TO Mr.
Ienatus Donnclly, for 1t Is unlikely to commend
Itself 10 any one else outside OF lunauc asylum TIC
auhor has for several pas, been producing BOOKS
OF much the same character and his faith seems IN
exhaustbe, which is much more than can be snd iof
the patience OF such endeavor TO read him. The
present contribution to the literature OF the Bncon'an
craze is In the line OF an attempt 10 make appear
that Shokespeare's works written By the Rosi-
crucians with Bacon 1T their head. IT is perhaps
unnecessary TO say that no sCntih OF evidence Is
advanced In support OF this thoroughly mad hyPo'D-
eas. Instead Of evidence We find roundabout
incohercnt and irrelevant rgnarole about the RoSi
sr1cians: and rs the author Is furnished with voln
minors mist Information concerning the whole subject
be only succeeds IN making confusion wore con
funded. OF The purposes and doings OF the lsoi-
Grucdans he Is penOmenaly ignorant and us me'iooS
ol so-aIled Investigation simply chshish.
LIKE the rest Of the Bsconians, oil OF whom seem
Incapable Of sane rattocnaton. he depends. In all IBIS
arguments upon what he Is pleased 10 call parallels
That is when he finds in Rosicrucan document OF
book or In the works OF Bacon and Shakespeare. the
same words OF similar IDEAS, matter how differently
Expressed he agines that lie has Strengthened his nm
tastc positions. Thus ne finds mention OF the bas'l'sK
in Shakespeare and ols) IN Bacon wherenpon nc
trumphantly cites the wonderful "paullel' as
proof that Bacon wrote shakespcare's works An
other piece OF evidence I'm the direction Is TIE it
That lacon and Shakespeare both speak OF 'alaIran
dcrs Of the laughter OF parrots of tie lions whep.
OF the Book OF Nature, OF PSrtieD shafts and sueh'
Nke rrcondite matters. He might hive EXTENDED
these parallels, much further For DO not Bacon ana
Shakespeare both speak Of the sun. moon and stars
OF men md women and beasts; Of trees and hero' OF
Tire hcld Of land and water; Of storms and sunshine:
- ~. and tuE IN
they sometimes differ. for Instance where sh"Re-
speare mahes one Of bis characters say; "Tme wos
that when The br,ins were ont the man was oeao
whereas Rncon Invariably tOds that tie phenomena o'
death arc and have been the sme. We are con
strained 10 say that the volume before Ills KoeS lar 20
show t0at Shakespeare light. for 1t indicates fha'
loss Of brains need not Involve tic physical dec'a'e
OF the sufferer.
Tint two men living In the same age ana country,
using the sane literature. Speaking and thinking !"
the same language. breathing the same literary NJ
fhosphcre Influenced by the same "zeitgeist-Shou'u
occasionally have similar Ideas and employ slnhIar
expressions is OF course merely perfectly simple
hut altogether Inevitable good test OF THIS Is a
comparison not only between Bacon and Shake
speare but between Bacon and any score OF Ills con
temporaries The result OF such comparison il's
be seen In Mr.. DcnnclN's monumental folN Inc
Great cryptogram' Honest enough 10 recognize 1ha'
the evidence offered by such parallels III the cass
OF Ben Jonson, Decker, NARROW Webster aId Others
is of precisely the character and Significance rs
that In the Bacon Shakespeare case-he WINS driven
TO extend his preposterOus theory as TO lhcsuoe
all these authors other masks OF Bacon 10 MaVc
taken a rationa! view of the situation would nave
compelled him to admit that he had been hl>l"h'h
throughout To this frank confession he c0lid ho'
bring himself. Obviously, however. there was no
warrant for stopping where he did stop. Y his
methods II was possible 10 prove-atcr his fashion
OF rtion-that the whole OF the literature OF
the Flizabethnn age written by Bacon why
he failed no live up 10 ads theory has never Dcch
explained
HIS follower, Mr.. Wgston, Is even more eXtravagnnt
In the selection OF his Imaginary paraeiismS, bnt h'
is less amusing He has but the hancs Dotion> about
ANYTHING ,nd entirely scy. t;s faculty Of lucid state
meat. That indeed Ia. 10 Il greater or F'S extent
Of all BacoaiaDa Of this type, for 10 be
such Baco1l,an II Is necessary to be unable TO PER
cdve the most evident and simplest considerations
Inability 70 understand what evidence really Is marks
this cass Of paIsdOxcrs'as in fact II does oil para
doyer The man who believes In the possibility of
rcrnr,a motion N IL convinced that he has succeeded
In sm,ortnp the circle has mind more than usually
defective m sDnng powers. Just so inc man WHO
cannot At once perceive the essential mental o,s-
t,nc,ions and differences shown In the writings al
trttutcd to Iscon and the writings attributed 10
shakespeare suffers from intellectual myopa. The
true test every question Of disputed authorship Is
psychical NOT mechanical. and IN the case OF Bacon
and Shakespeare the result of applying Is conclusive
Mr. wicston and his fellow BacOnianS, however
..,,c warned IN rhc,r "interecual.s as old writer's
used 10 have H. naturally 60 further wrong the more
they try 10 push their theories. The Roscruchn folly
Il perhaps not more absurd than the cipher folly, but
IL Is adding one kind OF ignorance to another All
these fantastic spcculatons have been weighed In the
balance and found wanting BIZ, Is not now to te dis
covered that such wrong headed c1lliEfasts this
author are always the las to rSalize the futity OF
their endeavors and doubt the pubic VIII for
some time longer be called upon ~ test Its patience
sless indeed n is satisfied to take the advice which
pcr,sal of this book only too strongly susgests-ahi
that Is to let II severely alone.