There was published in 1732 "The Life of the Great Statesman William Cecil, Lord Burghley." The preface signed by Arthur Collins states:—

This "Life of Lord Burghley" is referred to by Nares and other of his biographers as having been written by "a domestic." It contains about 16,000 words and is the most authentic account extant of the great statesman's life. The narrative is full, but the observations on the character and habits of Burghley are by far the most important feature. The method of treatment of the subject is after Bacon's style; the Life abounds with phrases and with tricks of diction, which enable it to be identified as his. The concluding sentences could only have been written with Bacon's pen:—

In 1592 the "Responsio ad edictum ReginÆ AngliÆ" of the Jesuit Parsons had appeared, attacking the Queen and her advisers (especially Burghley), to whom were attributed all the evils of England and the disturbances of Christendom. The reply to this was entrusted to Francis Bacon, who responded with a pamphlet entitled "Certain observations upon a libel published this present year, 1592." It was first printed by Dr. Rawley in the "Resuscitatio" in 1657. At the time it was written it was circulated largely in manuscript, for at least eight copies, somewhat varying from each other, have been preserved.[37] It is quite possible that it was printed at the time, but that no copy has survived. Throughout the whole work there are continual references to Burghley. Chapter VI. is entirely devoted to his defence and is headed "Certain true general notes upon the actions of the Lord Burghley." Either "The Life" and the "Observations on a Libel" are by the same writer or the author of the former borrowed the latter very freely.

It is to be regretted that the original manuscript of the "Life" cannot now be found. In 1732 it was at Burghley House. Application has been made to the present Marquis of Exeter for permission to inspect it, but his Lordship's librarian has no knowledge of its existence. If it could be examined it is probable that if the text was not in Bacon's handwriting some notes or alterations might be recognised as his. The writer says he was an eye witness of Burghley's life and actions twenty-five years together—that would be from 1573 to 1598, which would well accord with the present contention. If Bacon was the author it throws considerable light on his relations with Burghley and establishes the fact that they were of the most cordial and affectionate character. It is reported that Bacon said that in the time of the Burghleys—father and son—clever or able men were repressed, and mainly upon this has been based the impression that Burghley opposed Francis Bacon's progress.

Burghley's biographer refers to this report. He writes: "He was careful and desirous to furder and advaunce men of quality and desart to be Councellors and officers to her Majesty wherein he placed manie and laboured to bring in more ... yet would envy with her slaunders report he hindered men from rising; but howe true it is wise men maie judge, for it was the Queene to take whom she pleased and not in a subject to preferree whom he listed."

It will eventually be proved that such a report conveys an incorrect view. In the letter of 1591,[38] addressed to Burghley, Bacon says:—"Besides I do not find in myself so much self-love, but that the greater parts of my thoughts are to deserve well (if I were able) of my friends and namely of your Lordship; who being the Atlas of this Commonwealth, the honour of my house, and the second founder of my poor estate, I am tied by all duties, both of a good patriot, and of an unworthy kinsman, and of an obliged servant, to employ whatsoever I am to do your service," and later in the letter he employs the phrase, "And if your Lordship will not carry me on," and then threatens to sell the inheritance that he has, purchase some quick revenue that may be executed by another, and become some sorry bookmaker or a pioneer in that mine of truth which Anaxagoras said lay so deep.

Again, in a letter to Burghley, dated 31st March, 1594, he says:—"Lastly, that howsoever this matter may go, yet I may enjoy your lordship's good favour and help as I have done in regard to my private estate, which as I have not altogether neglected so I have but negligently attended and which hath been bettered only by yourself (the Queen except) and not by any other in matter of importance." Further on he says: "Thus again desiring the continuance of your Lordship's goodness as I have hitherto found it on my part sought also to deserve, I commend," etc.

It is very easy, with little information as to Bacon's actions and little knowledge of the period, to form a definite opinion as to the relations of Bacon and Burghley. The more information as to the one and knowledge of the other one gets, the more difficult does it become to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. Here was the son of Elizabeth's great Lord Keeper, the nephew of her trusted minister, himself from his boyhood a persona grata with the Queen, of brilliant parts and great wisdom—if he had been a mere place-hunter his desires could have been satisfied over and over again. There was some condition of circumstance, of which nothing has hitherto been known, which prevented him from obtaining the object of his desires. That he had a definite object, and had mapped out a course by which he hoped to achieve it, is evident from his letters[39] already quoted. It is equally clear that the course he sought to pursue entailed his abandoning the law as a profession. Either he would only have such place as he desired, and on his own terms, or he was known to be following some course which, although not distasteful to his close friends, caused him to be held in suspicion, if not distrust, by the courtiers with whom Elizabeth was surrounded. Every additional fact that comes to light seems to point to the truth being that through his life Burghley was Francis Bacon's staunch friend and supporter. Upon Sir Nicholas Bacon's death Burghley appears with Bodley to have been maintaining Bacon in his travels abroad. Upon his return to England Burghley gave him financial support in his great project. In 1591 there was a crisis—someone had been spending money for the past twelve years freely in making English literature. That cannot be gainsaid. Burghley appears to have pulled up and remonstrated; hence Bacon's letter containing the threat before referred to. It is significant that it was immediately after this letter was written that Bacon's association with Essex commenced. Bacon would take him and Southampton into his confidence and seek their help. Essex was just the man to respond with enthusiasm. Francis introduced Anthony to him. The services of the brothers were placed at his disposal, and he undertook to manage the Queen. The office of Attorney-General for Francis would meet the case. "It was dangerous in a factious age to have my Lord Essex his favour," says the biographer before quoted.[40]

That Burghley was favourable to his appointment as Attorney-General two letters written by Francis to Lord Keeper Puckering in 1594 testify. In the first Bacon writes: "I pray your Lordship to call to remembrance my Lord Treasurer's kind course, who affirmed directly all the rest to be unfit. And because vis unita fortior I beg your Lordship to take a time with the Queen when my Lord Treasurer is present."

In a second letter he writes: "I thought good to remember your good Lordship and to request you as I touched in my last that if my Lord Treasurer be absent your Lordship would forbear to fall into my business with her Majesty lest it mought receive some foil before the time when it should be resolutely dealt in."

Only Burghley was found to support Essex's advocacy, and on the whole this was not to be wondered at. Such an appointment, to say the least, would have been an experiment. Possibly Essex was the stumbling-block, but it may be that the real objection on the part of the Queen and her advisers was that Bacon was known to be so amorous of certain learned arts, so much given over to invention, that the consensus of opinion was that he was thereby unfitted to hold an important office of the State. Or it may be that he was discredited by his suspected or known association with certain printers. There was some reason of which no explanation can now be traced.

It has been suggested that in 1591 there was a crisis in Bacon's life. That is evident from the letter to Burghley written in that year. John Harrington's translation of "Orlando Furioso" was published about this time. The manuscript, which is in a perfect condition, is in the British Museum, and has been marked in Bacon's handwriting throughout. The pagination and the printer's signature are placed at the commencement of the stanzas to be printed on each page, and there are instructions to the printer at the end which are not in his hand.

There are good grounds for attributing the notes at the end of each chapter to Bacon.

It is very improbable that Sir John Harrington had the classical knowledge which the writer of these notes must have possessed. There is a letter written by him to Sir Amias Pawlett, dated January, 1606-7. He is relating an interview with King James, and says: "Then he (the king) enquyrede muche of lernynge and showede me his owne in such sorte as made me remember my examiner at Cambridge aforetyme. He soughte muche to knowe my advances in philosophie and utterede profounde sentences of Aristotle and such lyke wryters, whiche I had never reade and which some are bolde enoughe to saye others do not understand." It would be difficult to mention any classical author with whose works the writer of these notes was not familiar, or to believe that "Epigrams both Pleasant and Serious" (1615) came from the pen of that writer.

At the end of the thirty-seventh chapter the following note occurs: "It was because she (Porcia) wrote some verses in manner of an Epitaph upon her husband after his decease: In which kind, that honourable Ladie (widow of the late Lord John Russell) deserveth no lesse commendation, having done as much for two husbands. And whereas my author maketh so great bost only of one learned woman in Italie, I may compare (besides one above all comparison that I have noted in the twentith booke) three or foure in England out of one family, and namely the sisters of that learned Ladie, as witness that verse written by the meanest of the foure to the Ladie Burlie which I doubt if Cambridge or Oxford can mend."

The writer of the Latin verse was not Ladie Russell, and it was written to Ladie Burlie, so she must either be Ladie Bacon or Mistress Killigrew. It is not an improbable theory that Ladie Bacon was writing to her sister Mildred, who had, through her husband, power either to send Francis to Cornwall or permit him to be sent away over the seas.

There is a copy of Machiavelli's "History of Florence," 1595, with Bacon's notes in the margins.[42]

At the end is a memorandum giving the dates when the book was read "in Cornwall at," and then follow two words, the second of which is "Lake," but the first is undecipherable.

Is it possible that Lady Anne Bacon had a house in Cornwall which Francis Bacon, inheriting after her death, was in the habit of visiting for retirement? But this is conjecture.

The following point is of interest. In the "Life of Burghley" (1598) it is said that: "Bookes weare so pleasing to him, as when he gott libertie to goe unto his house to take ayre, if he found a book worth the openinge, he wold rather loose his ridinge than his readinge; and yet ryding in his garden walks upon his litle moile was his greatest Disport: But so soone as he came in he fell to his readinge againe or els to dispatchinge busines."

Rawley, in his "Life of Bacon" (1657), attributes an exactly similar habit to the philosopher, and almost in identical phrase: "For he would ever interlace a moderate relaxation of his mind with his studies as walking, or taking the air abroad in his coach or some other befitting recreation; and yet he would lose no time, inasmuch as upon his first and immediate return he would fall to reading again, and so suffer no moment of time to slip from him without some present improvement."

It is difficult to approach any phase of the life of Bacon without being confronted with what appears to be evidence of careful preparation to obscure the facts. This observation does not result from imagination or prejudice; Bacon's movements are always enshrouded in mystery. Investigation and research will, however, eventually establish as a fact that there was a closer connection between Burghley and Bacon than historians have recognised, and that they had a strong attachment for each other.