The Young Man from Stratford;: a Juryman's View of the Bacon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
8L js\ OA WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE THE YOUNG MAN FROM STRATFORD A Juryman's View of the Bacon-Shakespeare Controversy BY HENRY SAINT-GEORGE LONDON: WM. REEVES, 83 Charing Cross Road, W.C. MCMXI Printed by The New Temple Press, Croydon. TO THE INCENTOR. How oft have you in dispute deep exclaimed ' Would it were true the author of this store Of poesy was really Shakespeare named, Then had we one great Englishman the more." It is to lift this veil of darkness dread That blots the greatness of yourself, good friend, And not to justify the poet lying dead, (For he is justified from start to end) That I have made this book of argument, Hoping to kill the shallow doubts that mar The brightness of your mind. These I resent, Knowing, but for them, how great you are. For till you're purged of such foul doubts that press Englaud is one great Englishman the less. : PREFACE. years ago the Pilgrim Fathers settled LONGthemselves in the New World and heard a strange wild-fowl sing its curiously prophetic " note. Whip-poor-Will, Whip-poor-Will," it cried, and to-day many denizens of that land are whipping poor Will Shakespeare soundly and roundly. "And, not content with this battery of his memory, they would filch from him his fame in order to hand it over to one Francis Bacon, who is already sufficiently endowed in that respect. Verily 'tis a queer world, my masters. If this singular craze had been confined to the land of its birth, if Baconianism had never passed beyond the precincts of Chicago—Porkopolis, its most appro- priate birthplace—there would be no need to give it a second thought. But this intellectual trychinosis has been imported into England, and the poison spreads, hence it behoves us to beware and waking to combat its further advance. vi Preface. This poison works by argument, and the safest precaution against infection is to know exactly what argument really is. To change the simile, argument may be called a Court of Law wherein the witnesses are Facts, the lawyers are Inference, Deduction and Analogy, the judge is Analysis, and the jury Man- kind. In this little book that I have ventured to write I hope to have shown that for Shakespeare there are a few lawyers and a few witnesses, while for Bacon there are many lawyers and no witnesses. Inference, K.C., can work up many damaging- looking things arising out of various simple, and to average minds, ordinary and easily understandable circumstances, but he is not allowed to give his opinion on the facts that the Circe of the West who " " first brewed this lep'rous distilment bore the significant name of Delia Bacon. We need not speak of her sad end. It must be conceded that a loophole is provided for these attacks by the bulk of the devout Shakespeareans, for, instead of boldly looking into the matter and endeavouring to form some reason- able idea as to what manner of man he was, they are content to imagine a William Shakespeare as they would dearly like him to be. This insubstantial wraith can be easily blown away, and the airy victory thus achieved treated as ample proof that Preface. vii the more forceful attacks are equally successful. Hence it is that we find the serried ranks of verbal parallels marshalled with their tin swords flashing fiercely in the sun, the pop-gun artillery of historical parallel, ready to discharge its parched-pea missiles, and the harmless mines of inference which are expected to blast poor Will's reputation as a man of knowledge and observation for ever. The verbal parallels I have treated fully in this booklet. The historical parallels are demolished by the axiom "History repeats itself." Histories of men and women, whether in fact or fiction, are an endless chain of repetitions. The world's history is concrete mathematics, and we are wisely denied the formulas of its arithmetical elements, for accurate foreknowledge would rob us of our energies. Bacon and Shakespeare—Shakespeare and Bacon. How these two names stand out to the student of genius ! Just as there is no trace of similarity in their writings, so is it impossible to compare the men, save that presumably each had the usual complement of limbs and organs. What would Shakespeare have been had he possessed Bacon's learning ? What, indeed, yet is it not thinkable that his volatile fancy might have been crushed beneath the weight of so colossal a scholarship ? And take the opposite case. What would Bacon have been viii Preface. without his learning? Did his mind possess that radium-like property, that internal energy, that could maintain the brilliant fusillade without recuperation from external sources, or was he not rather an intellectual mill grinding patiently what grain was brought him in his studies, and so making him amanuensis to the thought of his time? In Bacon we have that genius which is the "capacity for taking infinite pains," in Shakespeare we find a form of genius which has not yet been classified, and which still defies analysis. And now—a grain of comfort for Shakespeareans who are fearful of these onslaughts. Eacon is not the only claimant. Some there are who are con- vinced that the Earl of Rutland wrote the plays. Others are equally positive that one William Shapleigh wrote them, and again others maintain stoutly that Henry Wriothesly, Earl of Southampton, was the real author of these immortal works. Let them fight it out amongst themselves, and, in their mutual demolition, leave William Shakespeare where he stands, untouched, unapproachable, supreme. INTRODUCTION. Fellow Jurymen— We have the responsibility of arriving at a definite conclusion in a case of the gravest import- ance and the most immediate necessity : for the authenticity of the personality of our National Bard is a question that should now be set surely at rest, if, indeed, it be ever possible to attain that desirable end. First, let me explain the form in which I now address you, and the circumstances that have led to that address. I, in common with a large number of people, had been what I would call a Negative Shakespearean. That is to say, I, from force of habit merely, attri- buted the "Shakespeare Plays" to their traditional author. I was certainly dimly aware that there existed somewhere a Baconian cult, but without going into the question took the more popular side, i 2 2 The Young Man from Stratford. and treated all who would dethrone the Swan of Avon with the contemptuous indifference I felt was their only desert. Then it fell out that a Great Friend revealed to me the fearsome fact that he was a staunch Baconian, and furthermore contended that Francis Bacon's authorship of the plays attributed " to Shakespeare was a matter that had been proved up to the hilt," as though anything in this world could claim such certitude ! My fast-cooling regard for him was fanned again into a semblance of its former warmth when I discovered that, while upholding the Baconian faction to the fullest, he had as much contempt for the section that toyed with ciphers—bi-literal, or " otherwise—as could any victim of Shakespeari- olatry." I then perceived that there could be Baconians and Baconians, and that the nobler- minded of them might be worthy of attention. My Great Friend thereupon lent me certain books written by lawyers in which was alleged to be proved " " beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Baconians were in the right. " These books, three in number, were The Mystery of William Shakespeare," by His Honour Judge Webb, "The Bacon-Shakespeare Controversy," by " Lord Penzance and The Problem of the Shakes- peare Plays," by G. C. Bompas, K.C. These three Introduction. 3 powerful advocates of Baconianism have made me a Positive Shakespearean, and in the following pages I propose to show you how. The first of these interesting examples of the " power of ratiocination is sub-titled A Summary of Evidence." The second purports to be in the form of a judge's summing up in addressing a jury, and the book by Bompas, while not professing such, is practically a speech for the prosecution. And now, dear readers, you know why I address you as fellow jurymen. There are further justifications for taking upon myself the quality of juryman in this case. I must frankly state at the outset in self -protection that I am writing on a subject I know very little about. It seems a quaint idea, but its quaintness lies in the acknowledgment only : the practice is common enough in all conscience. And if I lack special knowledge in the way of independent study or research, I must also plead my deficiency in the matter of skill in argument. But what is the cus- tomary procedure in grave cases? On whom rests the onus of the ultimate verdict? On the lawyers —on the judge, himself? Of course not. A certain " number of good men and true," v/ho have known absolutely nothing of the matter in hand before, and who are entirely without legal training, are set 4 The Young Man from Stratford. above all these as the fairest deciders. You and I, dear readers, are of their number. Therefore chide me not that I plunge into this dispute with my puny pen, but accept it as the natural outcome of Lord Penzance's "Gentlemen of the Jury!" What are a juryman's qualifications? (1). He must be between the ages of twenty-one and sixty.