Year: 1874

Governor Dix may perhaps arrest the ruin
which he might have forestalled.


Shakespeare and Bacon-A New Point


in the Discussion.


Although we had closed the discussion of
the authorship of Shakespeare by the consent
of those who had conducted it in our columns,
we are well pleased to make room for a
letter from the writer Of the article in Fraser s
Magazine upon which the recent debate was
founded. As he introduced the subject to
our American readers it is proper that he
should have the last word; yet in printing
his interesting communication we beg leave
to point out what seems to us an extraor-
dinary misconception both on his part and
that of Professor Holmes. In the book of the
latter, as quoted by the author of the Fraser
article in his letter to us, Bacon's account of
an interview he had with Queen Elizabeth is
cited as evidence that Bacon indirectly ad-
mitted that he wrote the play of Richard IL"


This argument, we think, deserves con-
sideration, and therefore we must ask the
close attention of our Shakespearian students
to the letter of the writer in Fraser, in which
it is unfolded. Upon the Interpolation of the
following sentence from Bacon the whole
question depends: -''About the same time,"
Bacon says, II remember an answer of mine
in matter which had some affinity with My
Lords cause, which. though it grew from
me, went after about in Others names"
Professor Holmes believes that the matter
which had some affinity with the cause of the
Earl of Essex was the play of "Richard H."
He believes that Orchard H." was used by
the Essex party to make the rebellion they
planned against Queen Elizabeth more popu-
lar. He says that the subject Of "Richard H."
was identical with that of the history of the
first year of the reign of 'Henry w."
book written by q DR.. Hayward, and
dedicated by him to Essex. He shows
that DR.. Hayward was arrested for
writing this book, which the Queen thought to
be reasonable. Then he says that the Queen
was also incensed at the author of Richard
H." and suspected Bacon to be the real
author. He argues that "Richard H." was
''the matter which had some affinity with My





which, 'though it grew from him, went
after about in others Names" Finally, be
concludes that the Queen suspected Bacon of
having written the play, and that Bacon en-
deavored to parry her blow with jest. Thus
we are asked to accept the sentence we have
quoted as meaning that Orchard H." had
some affinity with the treason of Essex, and
that the play, though it grew from Bacon,
went about in others names-that is, under
the name of Shakespeare.


To US this seems complete misconception
of the text and of the entire story which Bacon
relates. We think it perfectly plain that it
was not the ''matter which had some affinity
with the cause of Essex" which went about
in others Names but that it was the answer
of Bacon which was attributed to others.
Reference to the anecdote will show this. The
Queen questioned Bacon as to the treason in
DR.. Hayward's book and as to the possibility
of Furnishing Hayward for that crime. Bacon
answers there is no treason in the book,
but great deal of felony-that is, Hayward
had stolen his ideas from q Latin author,
Tacitus; had translated his sentences into
English and put them into his text He says
that this answer was his, and that afterwards
it was attributed to others.


In the first place, there is no allusion to
"Richard H." in the anecdote. In the
second place, if DR.. Hayward was arrested
for his book, and the Queen was angry that
the play treated of the same subject, why
was not Shakespeare arrested also? If she
suspected Bacon of having written play
which was by the public ascribed to Shake
speare the surest way to discover the truth
was to examine Shakespeare. In the third
place, Orchard H." was claimed BY Shake
speare only, and not by number Of persons;
but Bacon speaks of something which grew
from him but which was attributed to others
The play was never attributed to more than
one; the answer might have been to
many. In the fourth place, Bacon distinctly
states what was ''the matter which had some
affinity with My Lords cause 1t is in the
very next sentence shown to be 'that book
which was dedicated to My Lord of Essex,
being story of the first year of King Henry
w." 1t was the book of Dr. HAYWARD
that the Queen was angry about and it was
Bacon's witty answer to her that he says was
attributed to others His purpose in telling
the anecdote was to claim his joke, which,
though it grew from him, went after about in
Others names. Professor Holmes himself
says, $50 capital joke did this piece OF wit
appear to Bacon that he could not
spare to record it among his Apo
thegms," and there it will be found
under the number So. We have
explained this passage at this length because
Professor Holmes and the writer of the
Fraser article dwell SO strenuously upon it as
an indirect confession of Bacon that he
.u-o4o ..Rinhard III ~ Il in q n;..x...l.-i..