The Weekly Journal. — 1904-11-18 (Hartlepool, Cleveland, England)

THE REV W. J. DAWSON.  Most men are usually more attracted by the speculations of history than by the sober truths. Carlyle may cry," Give me facts," but the bulk of men much prefer fictions. If we turn to our great historical novels, we usually find that the plot is grouped round some obscure gossip of the court in preference to cold, well-authenticated fact. Yet it is curious to note how vety little really exact history exists. There is hardly a character to be found which does not lend itself to a variety of constructions. In the hands of such a historian as Lord Macaulay history did become more or leas exact, but it was at the expense of illative. To satisfy him a man mnst ho either black or white; he knew of no gradations in colour. The West modern tendency in biatorical ieeeareli has been the re-examination of the characters cf the villains of history, and the re-adjustment of the verdict, either for or against, when the ease has been re-tried before an uabiassed tribunal. The injnstice with which man, men have been treated may be illustrated by quoting the Case of Oliver Cromwell. Before Carlyle had brought his genius to the task of vindicating Cromwell's weniury, the peat Puritan leader was spoken of by most men as a cold-blooded seherver, who, by skilfully making use of his religion, had gradually fought his way into the political arena, with the sole end in view of murdering the King and securing the crown for himself. I would have you compare this crafty ItFAANSitI, with squinting eyes, heavy jaw bones, and a face disfigured by warts, as depicted by Cavalier historians, with the stern, honourable, patriot soldier portrayed for us by Carlyle. Yet both sets of historians have drawn their facts from the same source of knowledge, but with what different iesults! ••• There was once a Bishop who maintained that it was possible to prove or disprove anything that you pleased. Ile therefore set to work and wrote a book, in which he conclusively proved that no such person as Napoleon Bonaparte had over existed—that he was, in fact, a mere myth. The worthy Bishop's reasoning was so skilful that he gained quite a large following of disciples, all of whom were prepared to prove that Napoleon Bonaparte was a more historic ghost. It subsequently leaked out that in writtug the book the reverend gentleman had been playing a practical joke on the public; yet despite this fact there etill remained en obstinate few who were firmly convinced that the great French Emperor was altogether a mistake. Now, if it be possible to disprove the very existence of an historic personage so recent as Napoleon, it is fairly evident that it is equally possible to mistake the patriot for the traitor, and vice-versa, when dealing with personages of a more remote age. C.  I suppose there is no man who has not been carefully taught from bis youth upwards to think of King Richard 111. as the most repulsive of English Kings. The legend of the wicked uncle he.s early taken hold upon the childish mind. 'rho impressive scene of the dying father committing his two sons to the charge of his beloved brother, the solemn proinise made by Richard to cherish them as though they were his own children, and lastly the brutal murder in the Tower by two hired ruffians, have taken a film hold on the childish imagination, and have led Englishman to regard King Richard with a horror hardly equalled in the pages of history. It is, however, surprising to find that his centemporaries looked upon him in a for different