cess, or have actually succumbed under the difficulties which inevitably beset the early existence of such establishments, will, if attentively perused, not only amply reward the student, but will impose upon him as deep an obligation for the instruction afforded as Mettray itself can do, since, to speak once more in the words of the Founder of that great Exemplar, "we owe no less to him who points out the shoals, than to him who shows us the right course."

ART. IX. THEATRES AND ACTORS, SINGERS AND MUSICIANS.

1. Report from the Select Committee, on Dramatic Literature, With Minutes of Evidences. Ordered by The House of Commons to be Printed, Second of August, 1832.

2. Some Account of The English Stage, From the Restoration in 1660 to 1830. In Ten Volumes. Bath: 1832.

So far back as the year 1832, a Select Committee of the House of Commons, composed of men, many of them eminent in the literary world, agreed to a report, which commences with the following passage:

"In examining the state of the Laws affecting the interest and exhibition of the Drama, your Committee find that a considerable decline both in the Literature of the Stage, and the taste of the Public for Theatrical performances is generally conceded."

In this year of grace, 1856, this decline appears to be equally held as an admitted fact, though if the Drama has indeed been continuing to decline since 1832, it is not easy to explain how it has continued to exist at all at this time. The truth, we are disposed to believe, is, that the taste for Dramatic representation has not so much declined as changed its character. The fashion of late dining; the introduction of cheap literature; and the now very general plan of country residences, have no doubt all of them contributed to lessen the number of regular frequenters of the Theatre. Nevertheless, burlesques, extravaganzas, and farces, still attract numerous

audiences, and what is called the opera, with us in Dublin, is a favorite, because supposed to be a fashionable, resort.

It is not easy to give any rational solution of this Opera rage, as it blazes in its full fury in the great world of London. It certainly had not its origin in a pure musical taste, and love of music, for such are by no means characteristics of the English people. We have no hesitation in stating our belief that more than three-fourths of the title, wealthy, and aristocratic audiences, that assemble nightly in the London operahouses, are wholly destitute of the smallest musical enthusiasm; and take their places in their stalls and boxes solely from a feeling of devotion to the goddess of fashion.

Young England, indeed, seems to regard the opera merely as a fashionable lounge, which he frequents, because " everybody" goes there; and where he passes such portions of the evening as are not occupied in drawling out the vapid nothing which constitute his idea of conversation, in criticizing with the aid of a "lorgnette," the attractions of the female part of the audience, or in staring superciliously at his humbler neighbours, whose object in coming to such a place, forms as large a subject for wonder and meditation as his little brain can conveniently accommodate. But it is when the musical part of the entertainment to his great relief is over, and the glories of the ballet burst on his vision, that we see awakened within him all the animation of which he is capable or thinks it properto display. Then an exhibition which is destitute alike of grace, delicacy, and intellect, and which would hardly be tolerated in a barbarous country, is applauded to the echo; and the bounding and curvetting of a bespangled nymph, win warm greetings from an audience before whom the finest efforts of a Garrick or a Kemble, would be displayed in vain.

It will not do to urge as it is daily urged, that the Drama is unsupported, because there exist no great exponents of its beauties. True indeed it is that the days of the Kembles, and of Siddons, of Kean and of Young, are passed away, and that with Macready's retirement has gone out the last great and shining light; but still are left many lesser stars, whose rays now struggling through the obscurity of public indifference, need but a vigorous breath of public favor, to assert their full and native brilliancy, and to illuminate once more the page and spirit of the Drama.

Who that beheld the earnest, eager, yet attentive crowds

that thronged night after night, in fair and foul weather, in "summer's heat, and winter's snow," into the Theatres in which Kemble, Kean, and Cooke, were "cleaving the general ear," could have supposed the words of Dr. Johnson's address prophetic when he wrote

But who the coming changes can presage,
And mark the future periods of the stage?
Perhaps if skill should distant times explore,
New Behns, new D'urfeys, yet remain in store;
Perhaps where Lear has raved, and Hamlet died,
On flying cars new sorcerers may ride;

Perhaps, (for who can guess th' effects of chance ?)
Here Hunt may box, or Mahomet † may dance.

We have witnessed in these days Drury Lane Theatre converted into an exhibition of wild beasts, and that exhibition graced by the presence of Royalty, and ceiling-walkers, and ropedancers, have more than once formed the chief attraction within those walls which once echoed to the noblest utterance of the noblest sentiments that ever were expressed by man. It cannot however be denied that, however pure and strong the public appetite for Dramatic representations may at any time have been, it could not long continue keen if there existed no good actors; but it appears to us that any deficiency in this respect at the present time is the result, and not the cause of the or change of the public taste.

As the supply of all natural productions will in a state of nature generally equal the demand, so in the dramatic world, the supply of good actors would always be full in proportion to the public requirements as indicated by the encouragement extended.

We cannot surely be called on to admit that the world is daily deteriorating in genius and ability, and that the old cry of modern inferiority is based on truth; and not being disposed to admit this, we think that the number of good actors will alway depend, as we have before stated, on the public voice and favor.

However great the innate taste and turn of mind may be, which makes a man desire to embrace the profession of an actor, he will only pause in his course before committing

A famous boxer on the stage. † A celebrated rope dancer.

himself to its uncertain existence, when he becomes reluctantly convinced that he cannot hope to do much more than earn common subsistence in its pursuit, and that that fame which is the wished for goal of genius, will never be reached by him.

It will be seen that in these few remarks we have considered the Drama, so called, as represented wholly by its serious part, and have not taken into consideration in noting its decline, the position or prospects of the sons and daughters of Thalia.

In truth we think that in those days the latter possess but little distinctive character; the efforts of the best are almost entirely devoted to farce and extravaganza, and the days of the true comedy appear to have gone by. At any time, however, the higher and nobler aim of the Drama was directed through the medium of serious plays-and through lighter productions might occasionally instruct, they were generally calculated (as intended,) simply to amuse.

The preponderance of good comic, over tragic or serious actors in every theatrical company, must have struck every one who has at all considered the subject. This we find especially the case in the present day, when in the persons of Charles Matthews, Alfred Wigan, Buckstone, and Robson, we can point at least to three first rate, each in his line, comedians, for one good tragedian.

With the comic actor a great element of success consists in good animal spirits, gentlemanly manner and address, and a keen sense of humor; he neither requires nor undergoes the patient study, the severe intellectual training, without which success in the tragic actor, is the exception to the general rule.

Whether "Punch," as some think, is to be held answerable for a certain taste to which we are about to allude, or not, we will not undertake to say, but certain it is that the appearance and successful career of that clever publication, brought out an innumerable host of what are termed comic writers, and created an appetite for productions whose only aim was to excite a laugh or at least a smile, if not by either their wit or humor at least by their absurdity. Could our dear Tom Hood have returned to life and seen some of these brochures, how would the current of his genial humor have been chilled, to find the powerful weapons of ridicule wielded by such puny hauds. How mean would be his estimate of that wit, whose

highest achievement would assist in burlesquing some grave and venerable author, or in making the history of nations a vehicle for wretched puns, and how would he have stigmatized as unworthy of true wit the miserable caricatures of cur greatest Dramatist, which men of respectable parts have not been ashamed to write, and actors of no inconsiderable powers to appear in.

The result of this ill directed literature has been that audiences will now-a-days barely tolerate any thing that is not "funny," and will hardly listen with patience to the whole of a serious play, and while the Jew that Shakepeare drew, even respectably played, will be listened to if not with impatience, at least with apathy, Shylock " travestied" will be rapturously received.

This is an evil which will eventually cure itself, and we will dismiss it with the hope that the cure may be as speedy as we are convinced it will be effectual.

We have said that at present there is a paucity of good actors, and assuredly if the Dramatic literature of the country were ten thousand times as varied and extensive as it is, it would soon become a sealed volume to the general public if unillustrated by the genius of the actor. Thus we find Mr. Macready in the report which we have placed at the head of this article, and from which we have extracted, replying as follows to the question:

"Are the tragedies of Racine the most attractive of the Théâtre François ?"

"Not now, because Talma is no more."

"Generally speaking, have you not understood that Racine did not attract great audiences in the Théâtre François ?" "It was generally understood that the chef d'œuvres of Talma were attractive.

"Then was it Talma or Racine that drew houses?" "Both, I should imagine."*

We are not sanguine enough to expect ever again to see so many actors of the first merit performing at the same time, as did our fathers some fifty years ago, when John Kemble, Mrs. Siddons, Edmund Kean, and George Frederick Cooke, formed a constellation in the dramatic heavens. Macready we look upon as "ultimus Romanorum," for though not as an eminent actor contemporary with any of these great names, he was the only actor in late years who approached their excellence. There is hardly any art in which criticism is so various and

P. 135.