GARRICK.

-MISS O'NEIL.

369

the sudden insanity of a mother, out of whose arms her child had fallen from a window, and been dashed to pieces before her eyes, that women fainted in horror at his feet, on "acting of that dreadful thing?"

North. Good. And had he come on a stage, wide as a wilderness, hearts far remote in the galleries as in the clouds, would have beat

66 At every flash of his far-beaming eye."

Tickler. Good.

North. Mr Matthews and I are at one when he says, that the magnificence of the style of John Kemble and his sister were seen to as great effect in large theatre as in a small one; but there are a great number of persons1 whose countenance alone carries them to small theatres, for they cannot be seen to the same advantage in a large one. But Charles adds wisely, "I never heard that objection stated, during a fashion to run after everything attractive; I never heard any people say, they could not see Miss O'Neil; she was a beautiful actress, and everybody admired her"

Tickler. All the world and his wife.

North. My esteemed friend then observes, that he finds "all the people who go in with orders, say the theatres are far too large, but those who pay for their admission are good-tempered."

Tickler. Our provincial theatres, compared with the great London ones, are all small-yet

North. Except that in Glasgow. It is of the same class as Covent Garden, but of a peculiar construction. It may be divided into three parts; in one you cannot hear, in another you cannot see, and in the third you can neither see nor hear. I remember once sitting alone in the third division—and never before or since have I had such a profound feeling of the power of solitude.

Tickler. I say, our provincial theatres are all of moderate size; yet when stars appear, are they not worshipped? All our great performers have trod the Edinburgh stage; and there has been "hush as deep as death," followed by peals of thunder.

North. And where else than on provincial boards have great performers been bred ?

VOL. III.

1 i.e. Actors.

2 A

370

DRIFT OF THE DISCUSSION.

Tickler. Has this discussion any drift?

North. Oh, yes. Without joining the cry against the size of the Great London Theatres, I for one am clear for putting an end to their monopoly of the regular drama. In theatres of a smaller size, it may be, and has been, acted as effectively as in them; and experience alone can decide whether with Freedom of Trade it will flourish or decay.

Tickler. It has not flourished under Patents-without them it may.

North. Sir Charles Wetherell would not listen with patience to any proposed change in the Close System, nor agree to Mr Bulwer's motion, unless he could prove to him that the multiplication of theatres will "give us another Shakespeare and Ben Jonson, and restore the golden age of Dramatic Literature."

Tickler. That was rather a little unreasonable in our most excellent friend.

North. Rather. Another Ben Jonson may be imagined— though one is quite enough; but Mr Bulwer expressed no hope of being able, by any efforts of his in Parliament, to produce another Shakespeare.

Tickler. Nor yet, so far as I have heard, to restore the Golden Age

North. Not he. But seeing the regular drama in a languishing condition at the Great Houses, and, as Sir Charles himself says, "Lions and Tigers, and Cameleopards, and, in fact, the whole of Noah's Ark trotted up and down the stage," he thinks, that were there several moderate-sized theatres judiciously set down in the Mighty Metropolis, such would be the resort to them of respectable and well-educated people, that they would always be able to engage, and would probably sometimes produce, excellent actors; and that thus a permanent love of the regular drama (along with an occasional passion for the irregular) would be created, and more encouragement given than at present to men of genius to write for the stage.

Tickler. I should have voted for Mr Bulwer's motion.

North. Charles Kemble has no doubt, that along with the patents would go the very life of the Two Great Theatres.

Tickler. I should be sorry for that—but they could be van

CHARLES KEMBLE'S ARGUMENT

371

quished only by better houses-and the public would in that case gain by the death.

North. His arguments are ably put, but to me they appear inconclusive. He says "that the new theatres would bribe away certain individuals of acknowledged talent and celebrity," (and he adds, parenthetically and pathetically, "God knows they are too few !") "but those few would be scattered then in half-a-dozen different theatres, instead of being collected in one or two; and the perfection of a play depends extremely on the talent you get into it."

Tickler. No doubt it does.

North. The conclusion he draws from these premises is, that the Great Theatres would be ruined, and at the same time the smaller ones good for nothing.

Tickler. Whew!

North. If one first-rate actor could not support a small theatre, and if, as Mr Kemble thinks, only one at the most could be got, then, in a very short time indeed, the small theatres would be changed into conventicles-and Covent Garden and Drury Lane, after transient obscuration, effulge, like suns, brighter from eclipse. He says that a long time would elapse before the legitimate drama could be adequately represented in one of those theatres; and I say, that if so, the public could not wait a long time, and the actors of genius and celebrity, that had been bribed away, would return to their former spheres.

Tickler. I have the highest esteem for Charles Kemble, but I fear you are right.

North. Neither will he admit that the competition of the new theatres would bring forward new actors of talent or genius. "If," says he, "you divide the little talent there is among us into a great number of theatres, you will be worse served." Tickler. Whew!

North. There would not be a great number of theatres; nor does anybody suppose that, by dividing a given quantity of talent, and that quantity little, you will make it great. It is to talent not yet displayed, not yet born, that the stimulus of competition will be applied

Tickler. Don't dwell longer on that point, or you will get prosier than you may suspect. Keep moving.

372

IN FAVOUR OF DRAMATIC MONOPOLY.

North. "It is not the increase of theatres," cries Charles, with great animation, "that will give you an increase of fine actors. The qualifications of a fine actor are a gift that God gives, and they are not to be multiplied as theatres may be." Tickler. That is very spunky-but whence arise fine actors but from theatres? John Kemble-Sarah Siddons

North. Don't get prosy, Tim. Mr Kemble then says that many of the smaller London theatres have acted the legitimate drama in defiance of all law, but that we do not see those results which the advocates for minor theatres seem to calculate onwe have not seen that great actors have arisen in them.

Tickler. A manifest sophism. Those theatres have indeed occasionally acted the legitimate drama (some of them never have), but in defiance of law; and is it to be expected that, under such uncertainty and peril, and even discredit, great or good actors are to arise ?

North. Mr Kemble even goes the length of denying that there is any demand for any other theatres. If the public call for them, there is good reason, he allows, for answering the public; but the present demands are got up, he asserts, by a set of interested adventurers and speculators, who have nothing to lose, and think the best course they can pursue is to ruin those whom they think have. Some have already become bankrupt.

Tickler. In that case, then, he has little to fear. But great theatres, alas! become bankrupt too

"The paths of glory lead to the Gazette."

North. Mr Charles Kemble, however, though arguing throughout under a strong bias, is a man of honour; and on this question being forcibly pressed upon him, "Do you not think that the cultivation of a taste for the Drama, which would be favoured by the increased number of theatres having the power to exercise the legitimate Drama, would more than make up for any loss you might sustain by competition ?" He answers, with laudable candour, "If I speak conscientiously, which I wish to do, I should think they might prove a nursery; that it is probable that in a length of years, if the number of theatres were restricted to a reasonable number, and those theatres were only allowed to act the legitimate Drama, and that there might be none of those spurious entertainments

MATTHEWS' EVIDENCE.

373

given”—(no, no, my dear Charles, that would be a most unfair restriction, while spurious entertainments were allowed in the Great Theatres),-" then I agree that the Drama might be improved, and in course of years we might expect to have elèves, who would fully replace the good actors we have now." Tickler. What says Matthews?

North. To my utter astonishment and dismay, that permission to perform the legitimate drama at other theatres besides the two patent ones and the Haymarket, "would, in the course of a very short time, brutalise the drama."

Tickler. I am dumfoundered. How feel you at that discharge?

North. As if a bullet had gone through my head.

Tickler. In at one ear and out at the other, without touching the brain.

North. Nevertheless, I would fain try a fall with this Charles; but I feel fatigued with my tussle with the other strong man, so must retire from the ring; though it forces me to eat my heart to see the castor of such a customer flung up without my pitching in after it my vernon.

Tickler. I take.

North. The Drama, I fear, is in a bad way, Tim, in London; and if so, it cannot be very flourishing in the provinces. Mr Matthews acknowledges that fashion is fatal to it. "I meet young gentlemen now," says he, "who formerly used to think it almost a crime not to go to the theatre; but they now ask, 'whereabouts is Covent Garden Theatre?' although the same people would faint away if they thought they had not been to the Italian Opera. If they are asked whether they have seen Kean or not lately, they will say, 'Kean? Kean? No. Where does he act? I have not been there these three years.' Formerly, it was the fashion to go to the theatre; but now a lady cannot show her face at table next day, and say she has been at the theatre. If they are asked whether they have been at Covent Garden or Drury Lane, they say, 'Oh, dear, no! I never go there-it is too low!'"

Tickler. Taglioni, I am told, is a seducing Sylph-Heberlé a dangerous Dryad. They dance you into a delirium.

North. And the German opera is divine.

Tickler. Those morning, forenoon, afternoon, evening, and midnight concerts, private and public, are sadly against play