The Birmingham age-herald., 1910-07-03
What The Bdconidns Say
SECOND pApER-By REV. ". E. EVANS

w not the author of the dramas
 and poems that have come down to u E as the works of William Shakespeare P but Sir Francis Bacon was. This is wha
 the Baconians say This is their primar,
 proposition, to prove which they say
 many other things. Many volumes hav'
 been published in defense of the Ba
 conian view by men and women oi |4 scholarship whose learning and sanity nc
 reasonable person should question. Ant # yet a partisan spirit has been awakened < among critics of the ''old school" and j the Baconians all have been charged
 with madness" and with "defaming the
 dead" by this same intolerant partizan-
 ship.
 One writer calls the Baconian theory
 the Baeonian lunacy." Who was this
 writer? Would you believe it? He was the author of criticism on the Henry L Irving edition of The Tempest" in which he says that Prospero stands for King I James the First. In view of this laugh able absurdity one asks. Where is the T lunacy? and who is the lunatic? Another writer says, "The Baconians are assail- ! ants of genius. .O, for one hour with the giant Christopher North.'s As if | Christopher North, though a learned | critic could give better judgment in this case than he gave respecting Tennyson | North said when Tennysons first book of poems was published 'the poet is an owl; all that he wants is to be shot, stuffed and stuck in a glass case to be made immortal in a museum What would be the value of his criticism on this subject? "Shot stuffed and stuck in a glass case?" Why the whole world knows Tennyson. while only the world 8 literary four hundred ever heard of Christopher North, and not half that number knows that there was no such person in the realm of letters, but that Christopher North was the pen-name of John Wilson. Thomas Carlyle said that Lord Bacon could as easily have created this planet as he could have written Hamlet" Carlyle was generally in g. bad humor He had few words of praise
 in his vocabulary He said that Sir Wal ter Scott was "toothless retailer of old wives fables" that Lord Melbourne was a monkey that Keats was a curried dead dog" that Shelley was ghast ly object" that Coleridge. who wrote The Ancient Mariner. was talking in a maudin sleep" And thus he went on. His judgment, when considered in the light of the criticisms that l have quoted, Is of but little value
 Some of the critics evidently do .not want to know the truth. The power of tradition holds them with a steel-like grip George L. Kittredge, professor of English in Harvard university, wrote: 'I advise you not to read Beconian books" This is the limitation of consummate mar rowness Why not read them? If any new truth may be discovered or if any fact hitherto obscured by the dust of time or the msts of mere tradition may be discovered. why not let us have 1t? Let us have the truth and facts, if pos sibe, though our dearest idols be shat tered at our feet. Are the professors of Literature in our institutions or learn ing afraid that they shall have to re- wise their former premises and conclu- sions?
 l have before me an autograph letter written by a professor in one of our old est and largest American universities
 Writing of the Baconian theory he says, T looked over number of tn, earliest books on the subject, mainly to satisfy my curiosity. and as furnishing an Illustration of how ridiculous men can be in their literary beliefs as they are often in their religious ones." Here we have an illustration of the rankest form of Philistinism. Satisfied with his own requirements, this university professor thinks that there is no wisdom or knowl- edge beyond his own. He has not even | over" the first ones that were published, which was about 50 years ago. man who does not keep abreast of recent discoveries in any realm of thought bet ter than this professor. should be retired from his place as instructor of the young.
 Now, this spirit or sentiment grows out of deep rooted prejudice. Such a prejudice as would, if 1t had the oppor- tunty, use the thumbscrew and the rack, silence free-thought and deny the liberty of the press: If it had the chair of theol- 'fgy 1t would forbid the reading of works on the Higher Criticism because the higher critics 'defame" the dead Moses. and because all has been learned that can possibly be ascertained about the author ship of the books of the bible.
 | However. in the face of the uterances Of some prominent men of letters, the conviction that Shakspere could not pes stbly have written the works of Shake. speare grows. In some centers of learn Ing this growth has been called an "epi- de mic,' by the enemies of the Baconians
 It will continue to grow, however until the world shall go on pilgrimage, not to StraHord, but to St. Albans
 While the adherents of the actor
 Shakspere, say Do not req dthe Ba- conian bool<s; the Baconians say, Read the life of Shakspere; acquire all the | reach; study him well; his habits and
 his friends, and then reach your own conclusion" This they can we'll afford to say, for there Is not line in his biogra- rhy nor even a syllable. that can pos s,bly connect Shakspere of Stratford with the dramas and poems of Shake speare. Whenever a conclusion contrary to this statement would be drawn, there F. inevitably inserted bare inference Tt was then perhaps;'' he probably did SC and so;'' most likely he wrote then" and various other terms of uncerta int y and positive ignorance of what he did or what he did not. are employed And thus, a few facts, many of which are not of sayory nature, have been ,n-
 Hated into what some people call The
 Life of Shakspere; whereas all that
 we positively know of the Stratford
 Shakspere could be written on few sheets of note-paper If this declaration
 subject to take any popular Life of
 Shakspere and read it with a blue
 pencil in his hand; let him read what
 is actually known of the actor, striking out. all other subjects and all inferences
 and he will be amazed that men of scho;- arship can hold to the old tradition.
 One of our best magazines published
 a short while back, long paper on the subject, "New Shakespeare Discoveries.
 r. was written by d doctor of philosophy
 I seized the magazine with interested ex- citement exclaiming, This is what I
 want" The writer sneered at the Bacon
 ans. Yet from the beginning to the
 end of the long article there is not a
 single argument, nor necessary infer
 ence, that connects the man of Strat-
 r. xx,tx1 kl.- 1r