to be found in his speeches; that, when he was overborne by the almost absolute power of the Court, his apparent sycophancy was merely the wariness of a wise statesman; that Queen Elizabeth eventually acknowledged his services to the country, and, far from neglecting him, repeatedly extended to him most substantial marks of her favor.  This portion of Mr. Dixon’s volume, founded on state-papers, will surprise both the defamers and the eulogists of Bacon.  It contains facts of which both Macaulay and Basil Montagu were ignorant.

Of Bacon’s relations with Essex we never had but one opinion.  All the testimony brought forward to convict Bacon of treachery to Essex seemed to us inconclusive.  The facts, as stated by Macaulay and Lord Campbell, do not sustain their harsh judgment.  A parallel may be found in the present political condition of our own country.  Let us suppose Senator Toombs so fortunate as to have had a wise counsellor, who for ten years had borne to him the same relation which Bacon bore to Essex.  Let us suppose that it was understood between them that both were in favor of the Union and the Constitution, and that nothing was to be done to forward the triumph of their party which was not strictly legal.  Then let us suppose that Mr. Toombs, from the impulses of caprice and passion, had secretly established relations with desperate disunionists, and had thus put in jeopardy not only the interests, but the lives, of those who were equally his friends and the friends of the Constitution.  Let us further suppose that he had suddenly placed himself at the head of an armed force to overturn the United States government at Washington, while he was still a Senator from Georgia, sworn to support the Constitution of the United States, and that his cheated friend and counsellor had just left the President of the United States, after a long conference, in which he had attempted to show, to an incredulous listener, that Senator Toombs was a devoted friend to the Union, though dissatisfied with some of the members of the Administration.  This is a very faint illustration of the political relations between Essex and Bacon, admitting the generally received facts on which Bacon is execrated as false to his friend.  Mr. Dixon adduces new facts which completely justify Bacon’s conduct.  If Bacon, like Essex, had been ruled by his passions, he would have been a far fiercer denouncer of Essex’s treason.  He had every reason to be enraged.  He was a wise man duped by a foolish one.  He was in danger of being implicated in a treason which he abhorred, through the perfidy of a man who was generally considered as his friend and patron, and who was supposed to act from his advice.  As Bacon doubtless knew what we now for the first time know, every candid reader must be surprised at the moderation of his course.  Essex would not have hesitated to shoot or stab Bacon, had Bacon behaved to him as he had behaved to Bacon.  But we pardon, it seems, the most hateful and horrible selfishness which springs from the passions; our moral condemnation is reserved for that faint form of selfishness which may be suspected to have its source in the intellect.