THE SCHOOL FOR ACTORS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XII, Issue 746, 23 June 1904, Page 20

THE SCHOOL FOR ACTORS.

A writer in the New York “Sunday Telegraph” says Beerbohm Tree is just now the most abused man ip London, and this abuse comes from his fellow-players. Aboi.t six weeks ago Mr Tree decided that h > would establish at Her Majesty’s Theatre a school for acting. He thought it would fill a long-felt want, and in addition to this he wanted some money. He saw in a dramatic school great possibilities for obtaining the pelf, so he enlisted a whole lot of authors, actors and managers in the enterprise, and a grand opening was pulled off two weeks ago. Everything passed off pleasantly. A hundred and fifty scholars had been secured at 600dol. per season each, and the coffers overflowed to the extent of about 90,000d01. Think of Tree being able to hand out 90,000d01. worth of instruction ! This is joke No. 11,762. After he had g-ot all this money together Tree made a mistake. He wrote to Sir Henry Irving, Wilson Barrett and a whole lot of other stars in England, and asked for their endorsements. Sir Henry answered Tree to the effect that he had kept such a school far thirty years, but he had never taken money from his pupils. Wilson Barrett hurled Tree against the wall so hard that he stuck. Among other things, Mr Barrett wrote:

— “There are hundreds of men and women now walking the streets who have gone through all the teaching offered by Mr Tree, who are now ready to take a few shillings per week as supernumeraries in order to keep body and soul together. I do not speak of the idle or worthless, but of thoroughly deserving people, whohave been pushed out of the running by

amateurs who take little or no salary, being able to keep themselves cut of their private means. I know of cases where amateurs of this class not only play without payment of any kind, but pay a premium for the privilege, and their own fares from town to town into the bargain. I am aware that this never affects the public, so far as the performances are involved, but it affects very deeply the profession itself. Hundreds of actors now out of engagements will have their ranks swelled by those who can afford to pay the fees. Mr Tree promises to place the paying pupils in his provincial companies, but what of those who cannot afford to pay ? And this latter class might be of service to the stage. What chance will they have against those who can pay, and what of those who have been through the grind, and who, but for the Actors’ Benevolent Fund and private charity, would now be starving or in the poor-house ? I feel that the wholesale making of actors suggested by Mr Tree’s scheme will not benefit the dramatic profession. In my opinion, such training as Sir Henry Irving, Mr Benson and others have been giving for years is preferable and more likelv to bring to and keep the right material in the theatre.”

Mr Barrett concludes his argument by saying that he is very sorry this opinion should strike a discordant note, but adds: It is one I strongly hold, alnd feel it my duty to express.”