THE STAGE

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XII, Issue 750, 21 July 1904, Page 18

THE STAGE

(By

“Comus.”)

OPERA HOUSE.

FULLER’S ENTERTAINERS.

The genial John Fuller and his son Ben, who are much too busy nowadays to give us 'a taste of their own quality on the boards, have taken care that their show shall not suffer more than it can possibly help from their absence. The company with which they opened their new season at the Opera House, on Saturday, are “ entertainers ” in a very real and substantial sense, and I have to confess that for a good many minutes, consecutive and intermittent, I laughed as heartily as anybody. The Fullers came here fully determined to please, and they have undoubtedly “caught on.” On Saturday night there was hardly breathing space in the big theatre, and quently the houses have been.so full and": ’ so contented that John Fuller’s ..wonted beaming smile is several sizfejH larger than -ever. He- iseems . to,'., have caught *. the laughing infe.ction < from " the audience,■ for • the whole.;, house * is jibMaUyi ’ one thuge composite,- . "co.Kf"! 2 g%rin,; : The . performers.: are in the . itipnspiracy " of- merriment, also, while- / the-band plays*> with the vivsidity. of<« schoolboys. John sticks to. the venerably : first-part semi-circle -of •chairs, with gaily dressed damsels: and large-ihputhed 1 pseudo-Ethiopian corner men,- bit' the ef/ ; feet as. chastened by the -rigid suppression of conundrums, :and each; artist - is ip, som§ line or other.; Miss , Addie , Wright, Miss Dorothy 1 Swift, and the Misses. Trevena are all pleasing ■ singers and agile' danseuses, while Messrs Will" Dyson, Dick Davis, and Jim Marion are several cuts above the ordinary negro comedians. Bichard ' Davis introduces some specialties that are really reminiscent of Mel. B. Spurr,. and-. James Marion’s “ Tired ”• song is excrutiating. Dyson’s legs.would be amusing even if he lost his head. Mr Henry Brown, the interlocutor, sings several songs admitably, using a sweet, if not powerful, bass voice with perfect judgment. The second part of the programme is loaded down to the Plimsoll mark with good things. Professor. Carmo and his clever wife give an exhibition of juggling which is. admirable in every way., Since Cinquevalli we have seen nothing so good, and many people will prefer the Carmos, who, while exhibiting equa’tneat-, ness and dexterity, present an infinitely more interesting series of feats. This turn alone would give distinction to the entertainment. The Swifts, a clever family ■ give a most artistic representation of the- playlet, “ Counsel’s Opinion ” (played here by Mr Hawtrey). Mr Swift, as Sir John Bendwell, and Miss Dorothy Swift as the sharp boy “ Max,” keep the house in a condition of tense interest, while Mr Will Dyson, as “ Morgan,” the Clerk, and Miss Amy Swift, “ Max’s ” mother, are both worthy of honest praise.Miss Kitty Lenton sings very archly some coon songs ; Miss Berridge is a serio who shakes up the sensibilities of the gods ; and Mr Rodda Perry, the male alto, sings some beautiful ballads in fine form. An amusing farce sends the audience away in the best of good humour. HIS MAJESTY’S THEATRE. THE WOODS-WILLIAMSON COMPANY. This capable combination have been running somewhat rapidly through their repertoire of plays, but as all are in the nature of revivals of productions already reviewed in these columns, it is not necessary to do much more than merely to mention the fact, “ The Gates of Bondage,” “ Hands Across the Sea,” and “ The Christian ” are all plays in which both Miss Williamson and Mr Woods are seen to peculiar advantage. They have made a specialty of the Hall Caine drama, and perhaps Miss Williamson’s stage versions of the novels, are as near to perfection As it is possible to bring them. On the whole, the principals have been adequately supported, and praiseworthy care has been bestowed on the mounting and costuming of the plays. The season closes this week, and then the Company go to Wellington, where .-. they are certain to meet ; with. A large;pleasure of support.

MR J. C. WILLIAMSON’S NEW COMEDY COMPANY. “ THE MARRIAGE OF KITTY.” At His Majesty’s Theatre, on Monday evening, July 25, Mr J. C. Williamson’s new Comedy Company will make their first appearance in Auckland, their initial production being “ The Marriage of Kitty,” an adaptation by Cosmo Gordon Lennox from the French of Madame de Gersac and Francis de Croisset. It is described as a most delightful comedy, and recent visitors from Sydney who saw it being played in that city are unstinted in according it the highest praise, and also, the company who interpret it. The advent of this company really marks a new order of things theatrical, or, perhaps, it would be better to say it rehabilitates an old order in such a way as it is fondly hoped will make it permanent. In other words, Mr Williamson has organised it for the purpose of presenting legitimate comedy, such a? was so ably-done by the Broughs, and. previously by other companies under the aegis of the old firm of; Williamson, Garner, and Musgrove.' This' class of comedy,^/seefiied,-.l'was going, so far as * the , colonies . .at/Jeast were con- . cer'ned, to be effectually, displaced .by that of an entirely fardical>naTure;fbtft iU is pleasing to note, that su<sh IS- not*,; going to .be the case/ as is evidenced by/ the success already achieved by ;the pre- j sent undertaking. . .When Mr Williamsom takes a .thing in hand it is wi.tu a firm, ■ and decisive grip, and as he has purseveral, new comedies, as' well' "a$ > having secured:, the .rights of all of-Pinero’s—-past; presents and. futures-play-goers may look forward to many plea--surable. seasons devoted to the production of these pieces. The Australian critics are absolutely unanimous as to the merits of “The Marriage of Kitty,” and the cleverness of the new company. First produced in Adelaide on Easter Saturday last, the daily papers were full of the highest encomiums. Scanning a great number of notices, the following excerpt from the leading daily may be taken as a digest of the statements of all :—“ Ingenious in construction, with dialogue pointed, witty and epigrammatic, the comedy is as sparkling and effervescent as champagne, its humour is spontaneous and genial, its characters admirably drawn, and its laughter-compelling qualities pre-emin-ent. The crowded audience fairly revelled in the novelty of its situations, the quaintness of its story, and the brilliancy of its story, and the brilliancy of its dialogue, smiles and laughter rapidly alternating throughout the evening.” The majority of the artists of Mr Williamson’s New Comedy Company were en-

gaged by him in London during his recent tour through Great Britain. As this will be their first appearance here, a few particulars regarding some of them will prove interesting. Mr Wilfred Draycott is the leading man of the Company. His first important engagement was with Sir Charles Wyndham, in America, with whom he remained for two years. On his return to London, Mr Charles Hawtrey had just made a great success with “The Private Secretary,” and Mr Draycott succeeded this fine actor in the part of Douglas Cattermole, and played it' for over six months. During the last six years he has appeared in a round of important characters, and in one alone, that ; of Sir Charles Hampshire, in Grossmith’s play, “ The Night of the Party,” he played for as long as two and a-half years. For four months prior to embarking for Australia he had been appearing as Sir Reginald Belsize, in “The Marriage of Kitty,” the part which he will also portray here. Mr Draycott is a graduate of Oxford, and is somewhat of a renowned botanist. Miss Florence Hamer is one of the most capable, painstaking, and best-appreciat-ed actresses on the English stage. She is very versatile, and has many brilliant successes to her name in parts diametrically opposed to one another in character, but has never vet had the black mark of failure attached to any of her impersonations. Before leaving England on the present occasion she was with the Marquis of Anglesey’s Company - in “The Ideal Husband.” Prior to that she was playing for eighteen months on a starring provincial tour with Sir Charles Wyndham’s Company in “ The Mummy and the Humming Bird.” She was also for over two years with Miss Fortescue.

Miss Florence Le Clerq is a niece of the late Carlotta and Rose Le Clercq, and is now the only representative of the family on the stage. She has played with Mrs Langtry, Mrs Kendal, Mrs Patrick Campbell, Forbes Robertson, George Edwardes, and Edward Terry, and has been twice to Africa, and four times to America. Recently she has appeared as Georgie Chapin, in “An American Citizen,” Beula, in “Miss Hobbs,” Johanna Goodlake, in “ Mice and Men,” and Maisie, in “ The Light That Failed,” besides other productions under the management of Mr Forbes Robertson. Mr Fred Permain has had fifteen years’ experience, and is stage manager of the present company. In 1898 he managed his own company in “ The Marriage of Convenience.” He was subsequently with Edward Terry, and then joined Miss Kate Rorke in Pinero’s “ The Squire,” playing Gunnion, the old man’s role. Mr Permain was afterwards, with Miss Fortescue, and then received engagement from Mrs Patrick Campbell, appearing as Dr. Kerk in “ The Notorious Mrs Ebbsmith.” Amongst one of. his best parts is George Fisher in “’ Are You a Mason ?” which he played .all through South Africa. ' Miss Rose Musgrove, needless to say, is not making' her first appearance here; as> she has already been seen in drama and in musical comedy,, and. is one of the biggest favourites ' imaginable, Miss Musgrove stands to-day as' clever an artist as thqre is on the Australian stage, and her. performance 1 ofKitty . Silverton ■’in -‘‘ The. Marriage- ; pf Kitty” has -enhanced her* reputation immeasurably. In the, first place,’ Mr Williamson, ■ after, searching throughout Londqn, cabled out that he saw no one that he thought so capable of playing the part as Miss Musgrove,and that his judgment was right has been evidenced by the absolute triumph she hasi achieved. CLEMENT L. WRAG GE. WORLD-FAMED ASTRONOMER AND METEOROLIGIST. Mr Clement L. Wragge, F.R.G.S. ; F.R.Met. Soc., the subject of our illustration in this week’s issue, is now touring the provincial towns of the Auckland district', prior to his Auckland season, at the Choral Hall, on August 1, 3 and 4. Mr Wragge’s scientific entertainments have met with very great success in Australia and the South of New Zealand, where he has been lecturing for the past six months. His entertainments are described as most instructive and interesting ; the quaint humour and unconventional mode of treating a subject engross and charm his audience. The many lantern-slides with which each lecture is interspersed are unequalled, and the journey on which he takes his hearers to the beautiful and curious places of our little planet is illustrated with a number of artistic views. Mr Wragge describes in in a simple and forcible way the Solar System and the wonders thereof. Nearly one thousand boxes of wedding cake have been posted throughout Auckland and district by Mr Harold Ashtom as a reminder of “ The Marriage .of Kitty.” This ingenious and catchy farm of advertising should show its good results in an exceptionally heavy box plan. In addition to this, he has been deftly leaving on shop counters, on tramcar seats, etc., nice square, unclosed envelopes, with the address “ Lady Belsize.” Curiosity has, of course, at once been aroused owing to the aristocratic addressee, and on drawing out the supposed letter, it has been found to contain a “ Certificate of Marriage ” of Reginald Belsize to Kitty Silverton.

The Sydney “ Mail ” entertains a very exalted opinion of Auckland. Our contemporary, referring to the performance of “ Tapu,” remarks that the opera was first produced by the Royal Comics in Auckland, “ by way of ‘ trying it on the dog.’ ” Mr Williamson evidently does not regard our beautiful city as a “dog.”

I learn from Melbourne “ Punch ” that Edwin Geach has postponed his intended visit to London, having completed arrangements with Chas. Holloway for a tour of the West of his popular Dramatic Company. A. Cowan will act as business manager.

Mr Williamson’s comedy season will last three weeks, during which “ The Marriage of Kitty,” “ Cousin Kate,” and “ The Duke of Killecrankie ” will be presented. * * * * , “TVI A dramatised version of Bunyan s Pilgrim’s Progress” is said to be the next attraction on the American stage. * * ♦ * G. S. Titheradge is to appear in the new play, “ The Edge of the Storm,” in London. Miss Gertrude Elliott and Miss Henrietta Watson are also in the cast. * * * * Miss Roxy Barton, the gifted young Australian actress, who k was here twice as leading lady in the. Willoughby-Geach Company, has gone to try her luck in London. * #. «•

J. C. Williamson (says Melbourne “ Punch ”) is importing the very latest form of the Biqgraph. W. ; J. Lincoln at an early date meets the machine and its operator in the West, and a tour will immediately be . entered upon. ’ After Westralia, South Australia will .be visited, the new picture machine comihg : into Melbourne for the Cup. •.* * *

Generally in the melodramas of to-day, in any scene; calling for a. tussle between the villain qr his lady r accomplice and the heroine, the latter person gets the worst of the encounter, and is just on the point of being trussed up, swooning, or corpseing,- /when '.the hero, arrives . and rescues her—apparently by telegraph. In a new drama; ■ entitled . “ The Seal of Silence,” recently, produced in England, this state of affairs is - reversed,,..for the heroine, when attacked by- ~ the bad man of the story, catches him up and bangs his head against the wall, and; throws him about the room generally, the Kero arriving just in time to . prevent her-putting an end to the life of the surprised villain. » * *

Mr J. C. Bain reports that business continues excellent with his Gaiety Entertainers at Hobart and Launceston. He has a strong show in each town. * * * *

Miss Maggie Moore has gone to London from Fremantle. It is probable that the popular lady will return to Australia in twelve months with her husband, Mr Harry Roberts. » * * *

Mr Ernest Knight’s season of drama at the Criterion Theatre, Sydney, will commence on Saturday, July 23. In addition to the opening play—a costume drama by Thomas Hardy, entitled “Hfs Majesty the King ” —Mr Knight will present several plays new to Australia, including .Opie Reed’s American drama, “ The Jacklins,” and Mr Mel. B. Spurr’s comedy-drama, “On the Cards.” Mr G. F. Sales will manage Mr Knight’s Sydney season.

Mr and Mrs Eardley Turner, Miss Olive Noble, and Mr E. A. Warburton, all leading members of the Beerbohm Tree Company, left Sydney lor London a fortnight ago. * * *

In view of the projected departure for South Africa and London of Mr Pat Finn (says the “Referee”) it may be of interest to note his principal works for the Australian theatres —“ A King of Shadows and Dreams,” a four-act dramatic phantasy, was produced at the Alexandra Theatre, Melbourne, the occasion being both a Vice-Regal and a ’Varsity night. “ The Trilby Burlesque,” a West Australian Vice-Regal night. “The Genial Mrs Goldstein,” John.F. Sheridan’s Melbourne Cup musical comedy, staged at the Criterion Theatre, Sydney. “ Puss in Boots, pantomime, localised, for Harry Rickards, and produced at the Tivoli Theatre. “Ha 1 ha ! ! ha ! ! !” musical comedy, produced at the Adelaide Tivoli Theatre. “ The New Barmaid,” Christmas version, produced by Mr William Anderson at the Lyceum Theatre, Sydney. “ Life’s Great Panorama,” a four-act sensational drama, written for John F. Sheridan.

“ Shenandoah,” a four-act military, sensational drama, written for Mr William Anderson, together with something like fifteen or twenty pantomimes and burlesques, all of which have been produced in different parts of Australia. “ The Palace of Dolls,” lyrics (still running at the Tivoli), are also Mr Pat Finn’s handicraft.

THEATRICAL PARTNERSHIP. Mr J. C. Williamson has taken unto himself two partners, in the persons of Mr George Tallis and Mr Rainaciotti. The former has been his Melbourne manager for nearly twenty years, and has really grown up with the business, so that he knows every detail of it. Mr Tallis was recently through here, having charge of the Ada Crossley tour. He is a most courteous gentleman, and withal shrewd and clever, not to say brilliant, at his work, and will assuredly form a fitting companion to such a giant amongst theatrical managers as Mr J. C. Williamson himself. Mr Harold Ashton, who is at present here on behalf of “The Marriage of Kitty ” Company, expresses delight, in which he says all his brother managers join, at the elevation of their co-worker, as they regard it as a fitting reward for his long and admirable work. The other gentleman taken into the partnership is a well-known solicitor in Sydney, who has for many years been a close confidential friend of Mr Williamson’s, and who is regarded as one of the most acute business men in that city. He had been a good deal associated with theatrical matters in that city, throupn looking after the interests of the Theatre Royal, which he has made one of the most popular and up-to-date places of amusement in the colonies. Mr Williamson’s main idea in accepting a splendid offer made by the two gentlemen mentioned was. to relieve himself of a great deal of detail work, which was becoming unbearably heavy owing to the ever increasing growth of his business, and thus enable him to pay more attention to supervising the many productions being constantly brought forward. With an acknowledgment of the handsome w’ay in which they have been catered for in the past, theatregoers will wish the new’ directorate every prosperity in the future.

The Angelos left Sydney for New Zealand on Saturday week for a season with Mr Dix, by arrangement with Mr Rickards. Mr J. W. Winton, Miss Fanny Lowers and Miss Frieda Maher left last Saturday.

The oldest theatrical managers in London not remember so disastrous a season as the one just ended. There have been many failures, and it is estimated that one hundred thousand pounds has been lost.

Mr Alfred Dampier is touring Queensland. The Bundaberg “Star” speaks very highly of the production of “Second to None.” * * * Mr Geo. W. Lederer, the American manager, has filed a voluntary petition in bankruptcy in America, with liabilities of £3-1,000. * * * ♦ According to the San Francisco “ Argonaut,” Nance O’Neil, the actress, has just purchased the famous old Brinley Estate in Tyngsboro, on the Merrimac River, and will make it her summer home. The property is part of a grant to Jonathan Tvng about three hundred years ago. * * * * Mr Andrew Smart (“Lorgnette ”), Wellington, has been appointed sole agent in New Zealand for the Samuel French Co., Limited, and will collect all fees on behalf of that firm. Amateurs who intend producing any of the ' plays of which French and Co. hold the copyright should first communicate with Mr Smart. * * * * “ Yvette,” a new’ play by Paul Berton, author of “ Zaza,” was produced at the Knickerbocker Theatre, New’ York, recently, for the benefit of the Actors’ Fund. It is described as an interesting but repellant play, telling of a woman, an immoral adventuress, who is planning to have her daughter lead the same life. The awakening of the daughter to her mother’s character and intentions forms the chief motive of the play.

Mr Henry H. Vincent, who is Mr J. C. Williamson’s associate manager in all matters appertaining to the dramatic portion of his enterprises, is coming to New Zealand in charge of the new Comedy Company. Whilst here Mr Vincent will be kept busy personally supervising the rehearsal of two or three new comedies, one of which, “ The Duke of Killecrankie,” will be presented in Auckland for the first time on the colonial stage. Mr Vincent is himself a line actor, and a man of very great talent and experience. For some years he was general manager for Mr Geo. Alexander, at St. J ames’s Theatre, London. It was whilst filling that position that the company were commanded to appear at Balmoral, and aftei - a performance that was greatly appreciated by Queen Victoria Mr Vincent was presented by Her Majesty with a magnificent diamond pin, which is now one of his proudest treasures.

A member of the J. C. Williamson “Admirable Crichton ” Company, writing to a friend in Christchurch, says : —“ We had a more than busy time in Sydney, and out of a nine weeks’ season we actually rehearsed morning and afternoon for seven consecutive weeks, in. addition to pla' - ing every night. During those nine weeks it was found necessary by the manage, ment to change the bill no less than eight times. Our season started brilliantly as regards business, but fell off considerably towards the end, people complaining that our ‘ star ’ was the same in every play we put up. We opened with ‘ Chrieton,’ and ran it for three weeks to good business. ‘ ’The Light That Failed ’ followed, but was voted too sad by the majority, and came off after a fortnight’s indifferent business. ‘ Holmes ’ was then revived to a week's excellent business, and then we produced a brand new play, entitled, ‘ Rallies,’ for the first time in Australia. In spite of the play being beautifully staged and dressed, it came off after a week of rotten houses. We still had a fortnight to fill in, so we w’ere announced to appear in four different revivals — two pieces a week —but we couldn’t stem the tide of disaster that had set in, and although business improved, it never really became big again. We practically lived in the theatre. Directly the production of ‘ Crichton ’ was over, we set to work on a new script of ‘ The Light That Failed.’ Even at the close of our Sydney season our troubles did no cease. Susie Vaughan’s contract expired, and she returned to London. That meant that someone else had to be rehearsed in the whole of the repertoire for the parts she used to play. They were eventually split up between Mrs G. B. W. Lewis and Miss Lane (who rejoined us specially for that purpose). As a further illustration that there is no rest for the wicked, Olga Beatty-Kingston left for London three weeks after Miss Vaughan, and someone else (Miss Elsie Austin) had to be engaged to fill her place. On top of that, an epidemic of influenza sweeps through the company, and necessitates understudies appearing and rehearsing with the remainder of the healthy principals. You can, therefore, well imagine that during the last two or three months life has been one absolute round of rehearsing, studying, and playing, especialIv rehearsing. * * * * Wilson Barrett has copyrighted a new edition of “ East Lynne.” Sounds almost like revising “ Hamlet.”

Mr Harry Rickards is (says the “ Referee ”) having a new home built at Darling Point, adjoining his old residence,. Carthona.” Judging by the plans, it will probablv be the finest residence in Sydney. When completed the entrepreneur expects it will be worth £25,000. The residence will have a magnificent water frontage. Mr Rickards is also having a steam yacht built, and it should be a very fine craft. * * « * Miss Belle D’Arcy, writing to a Wellington friend from Durban, under date ■June 6, states that theatrical business is in a very bad way in South A frica at the present time,and the cost of living is very high. The Frawley Company played at Capetown, Johannesburg, Pretoria, Maritzburg and Durban, and the seven weeks’ season at Johannesburg was very successful. Miss D’Arcy left the company at Durban, and has since proceeded to London. She enjoyed her tour through South Africa, but thinks it is unwise for theatrical companies to visit that country for some time yet. * * * * A Melbourne stage connoisseur in London saw Mrs Patrick Campbell as Paula Tanqueray a few weeks ago. The company “ supporting ” the “ star ” was worse than mediocre, but, says this expert, “ Mrs P. is an actress that appeals to me, though I should imagine she wouldn’t appeal to most folk, that is, without her Reputation, which would win over the ‘ Age ’ and ‘ Argus ’ experts to praise her for qualities she doesn’t possess. She is artificial, highly artificial, and I use the word strictly. I don’t mean ‘ theatrical.’ She is intense, biting, higl - ly-strung, made out of nerves. She has a magnificent appearance, but that is by the way. She is emotional, but not at all in the same class as ‘ emotional ’ actresses —tearful, whining, gesticulating, moaning, shrieky, juicy, appalling, sympathetic, d d bad, ‘ leading ladies.’ Her emotion is kept under, it seethes beneath the surface, and, at times, comes out in spasms, ‘ flashes of fire.’ It is never broad and homely, something that, in my ‘ bete noir ’ phrase, ‘ touches the heart.’ Nay, it is subtle, elliptical, and, in my opinion, makes the play ( f The Second Mrs Tanqueray ’) seem more ridiculous than it really is. I don’t often care much for the ethic of a play, but at times it sickened me with its stupidity. Still, it has good suggestions, and might have been a masterpiece, instead of an interesting, utter failure.”

“ WHO’S WHO ?” AT THE SAVOY.

Nearly forty years ago Henry Morley protested emphatically against the then current endeavour of playwrights to “ scoop, and cook, and sugar these rotten Trench windfalls (of drama) to the English taste.” The protest might be opportunely repeated at the present time, and the recent production at the Savoy Theatre of Mr Sidney Dark’s adaptation from the French of M. Tristan Bernard might be cited as a representative instance of the evil of this kind of alienderived play. The farce is constructed with a considerable amount of technical skill, and displays a keen sense of theatrical effect, but the atmosphere of the play, or such atmosphere as the adapter has retained, is distinctly and Parisianly French. In the original one may be quite sure that it is greatly daring and immoderately immodest ; also that it is vastly amusing. In its English form it is, in parts, almost distressingly dull and commonplace. There is plenty of bustle and confusion and complications of the cleverly-contrived but machine-made variety ; there are situations that compel laughter, and one cerulean joke that will be retailed wherever men do congregate together. , • , xu The pair of intrigues with which the story deals are notable only for the absence of interest created by one brace of lovers, and the absence of modesty in the relations existing between the other two. Lady Gerrard, the young wife of a middle-aged retired jam manufacturer, t olerates apparently the inanities of Harold Fortescue because his rich old uncle allows him sufficient pocket-money to enable him to make her expensive presents. He is the mast idiotic specimen of stage-adorer that has been seen for years. Lady Gerrard, though bourgeois to her bones, is well-favoured and exceptionally well-gowned, and while she accepts young Fortescue’s presents and protestations in the drawing-room of their flat, the youth’s doddering old uncle makes the running with her maid in the kitchen. When the Gerrards make arrangements to go to the seaside, the maid, Fanny, is sent on ahead to get the rooms ready. Uncle Fortescue goes with her, and as he omits to advise his housekeeper of his intentions, that worthy promptly notifies Scotland Yard that her master has disappeared. The blunderings of the police in their efforts to discover the body of Fortescue senior, and his amorous dally - ings with Fanny, and his nephew’s adventures with or in a lady’s dress-trunk, form the subject-matter of the play. The dress-trunk is a gift from Harold to Lady Gerrard, whose husband has expressed his ' intention of smashing :the young 'man s head with the largest piece of lurniture he can lay his hands on if ever he l.nds him in his flat again. The youth is explaining the beauty of the self-acting lock to Lady Gerrard and her sister when the jealous husband is heard

approaching. Fortescue takes refuge in the trunk, which closes with a snap, and. the receptacle with its living contents is dumped down the stairs, tumbled with the other luggage on to an omnibus, and cairied off to Bexhill. The police, who haxe associated the purchase of the trunk with the disappearance of Uncle Fortescue, aie soon in hot pursuit of the party. The man in the box owes his escape to the nefarious interference of the hotel porter, who picks the lock of the trunk for the purpose of purloining a silk petticoat a “ rustler ” —on which his sweetheart has set her covetous mind. The porter himself seeks sanctuary in the trunk from the rage of the hotel proprietor, and he is presently discovered there, to the amazement of the police and the relief of Lady Gerrard. Old Fortescue endeavours to convince the detectives that he has not been done to death, but is, on the contrary, particularly well and frisky, but as he has been introduced to Lady Gerrard by Fanny as her cousin from the country, and has explained his presence in Fanny’s bedroom to Sir Charles on the ground that he is the doctor attached to the hotel, no one believes him. and at the close of the second act everybody is ar-

rested and hurried away to the local police-station. In the last act the police are still engaged in elucidating the mystery, while the much-wanted corpse is amusing himself in helping Fanny to unpack her mistress’s under-linen. There is a bold display of lingerie of a necessary but not necessarily publishable nature, and a suggestive demonstration of amorous senilitv on the part of the old man ; but the fun is feeble as well as indelicate, and the end comes as a sensible relief. A play that opens with a pert servant-maid folding a pair of lady’s continuations and closes with the spectacle of a white-head-ed debauchee ecstatically kissing a lady’s bathing suit is a new departure from the traditions of the Savoy, and although one desires to see the entente cordiale preserved, one could not blame the gods for the boos that were heard at the fall of the curtain. Mdme. Yvette Guilbert has recently been deploring the lack of Art in English theaties —it would be curious to know how she regards this latest acquisition from artistic Paris. Of course, in the French the piece is frankly, and amusingly indecent ; in English it is simply indelicatelv bowdlerised out of respect

for the prejudices of the Lord Chamberlain’s department, although it is marvellous that the Censor is prepared to swallow in the exploitation of sexual possibilities so long as it is not presented to him in the form of a serious artistic effort.

The acting of the piece, calls for no special remark. Mr C. W. Somerset's notable talent is thrown away in the part of the jam manufacturer, and the rest of the company —including Miss Fanny Ward, Mr E. Bagnall, Mr Arthur Longley, Mr Ivan Berlyn, Miss Nellie Sydney, Miss Mary Brough, and Miss Florence Hooten —exerted themselves without particular distinction in other parts. i THE UTILITY OF CRITICISM. (By “ Hammerthrower,” in the “ New York Telegraph.”) Some time in the past century Mrs Langtry, then the Jersey Lily, appeared at the Fifth Avenue Theatre, New York, as Rosalind in “ As You Like It.” After she read the criticism next day she discovered that her tour would be a success —no two critics agreed ■ A cartoonist of the day, with a particularly keen sense of the ridiculous, depicted the incident right neatly. In the centre of the drawing-room the Lily appeared smiling, and surrounding her were the critics writing madly at their desks. Each one of the “ experts ” held in his outstretched hand a sheet of paper with a few words written thereon. One of these sheets was inscribed : “ She is noactress,” and another, “ Mrs Langtry is a brilliant artiste.” One bore the legend, “ She is not much far beauty still another, “ Mrs Langtry is a goddess of loveliness.” This capital cartoon has as a caption : “ As you like ; yoti pay your money and you take your choice.” Now, some will say that this cartoon and the diversity of opinion among the critics regarding Mrs Langtry’s art and beauty were ample evidence to justify the late query : “ Are critics a nuisance ?” This conclusion is not a logical one, and will not withstand close investigation. The Langtry cartoon proves but one thing, and that, the extreme yer sat i i and sterling honesty of the critics. If there had been a generous and general flow of vitrol, the adherents of the actress would have shouted that the critics were in conspiracy ; while, on the . other hand, had there been a steady jet cf saccharine those who dislike an excess cf sweetness would have set up a cry that the critics were bewitched. Indeed, it is as natural for critics to disagree as for an Italian to play a harp, an Irishman to eat a potato, or a Finlander to milk a reindeer. They are built that way, ard you can no more change them than you can the spots on a leopard. What then, somebody asks, is the use of critics, “ if an actress can’t get justice ?” —for surely the scales are not

working properly when the full bench can’t agree. This question is hardly relevant, first because an actress usually gets what’s coming to her —and a little more besides ; and secondly, it is the public and not the pesky critics who determine the standard of the player and the play. Many of the splendid personages of the theatre were contemptuously used by the critics of their time, and the same is true in a large measure regarding the classics of the language. It is only the minor actor who is generally well spoken of. The great personality and commanding talent alone challenge drastic criticism. Harsh and peevish criticism harms no one —except the feelings of such foolish players as read them. It may not be generally known that very few of our prominent histrions ever read criticisms. Consequently, the critic who imagines he has a mission to correct what he takes to be the false methods of our actresses, or who would usurp the place of nature, and give an actor a new face, voice or manner, does no harm. He is simply a source of amusement, and so serves a goodly purpose, even though he makes himself ridiculous. In olden times it was the prince alone who could afford to maintain a clown. Nowadays we have them for a penny at the breakfast table. Criticism, certainly, has its uses, and it is only a nuisance when the critic is a dreary, dull person. The one with some curious mission or quixotic notion in his head is usually the most serviceable and useful sort. To be sure, it does not take very long for the average critic to adopt some fetish or other —either Ibsen or the Endowed Theatre —the public does not recognise as talented and rightly trained. But it would be a sad mistake to disillusionize the critic, for then we would he deprived of one of our chief diversions, and until then he does not attract much .attention or provide much entertainment. Your old critic, with the unmelted snows of fourscore of years nestling on his brow, is the one who could least be spared, although the demand for the enactment of the age limit has been rather insistent of late. Cut off the hoary-head-ed critic and how would we know how much better all the actors of the past were than those of the present ? This would be a very great misfortune, although it is a tune that grows rather doleful if ground out too often. The disagreements of critics serve no illpurpose. Surely they did not harm the Jersey Lily. Nothing short of the unanimous approval of her beauty and artistic attainment would have done that. Then nothing would have been left for the public to decide ; no curiosity would have been aroused, and the Langtry would have gone back home, an accepted beauty, with an empty purse. So it is the critics are only valueless and a nuisance when they are consistent and humdrum. Nobody but a dreary and dreadful old Puritan would chop off their ears and fling away the handy fountain pen. Life is dreary enough at best ; to ■deprive us of our wide-browed critic would be a calamity.

Those of our fellow citizens lacking in a grim sense of humour, and who take no pleasure in witnessing the pleasant spectacle of grown-up men crying to Heaven in despair because of the failure of a pet, or else pawing the earth with delight in consequence of the success of a beloved fetish, should not read criticisms as written in New York. The critic, like a

fragrant Havana, is the most delightful part of the theatrical banquet ! Indeed, the New \ ork critic beats the band, or almost any kind of a show you could mention. One of the things that they generally agree upon, and it is curious that they should agree upon anything except upon their own individual worth and the advisability of drawing the weekly wage, is that they “ discover ” players. But by this harmless and mistaken notion nobody is in the least injured, except that some particularly hilarious manager should suffer a dislocation of the jaw in an over indulgence of laughter. The critic who “ discovers ” actors reminds one of the astronomer who jumped with joy when at night the pale moon name within the focus of his glass : “ Why,” said he, “ this luminary promises to be another ‘ star.’ ” When the critic “ discovers ” anybody, that person has already discovered himself, and has been approved by the stage manager and the public, and usually by the hated “ provinces.” The list of critical “ discoveries ” would make pleasant reading. Let us take a few of our most proficient and best-liked players. When it was announced that Julia Marlowe, Mrs Carter, Viola Allen and Maude Adams would “star,” how about the critical astronomer ? Where was he ? Did he look in the glass and approve ? Not a bit of it.

The managers of these players were ridiculed and laughed at, as were the pretensions of the players themselves. Here again was contention, and it served a useful purpose. If the critics had approved right heartily, these “stars” would very likely have failed to escape the critical halo. So it is that Viola Allen, Julia Marlowe, Maude Adams and Mrs Carter can thank their “critical stars” that they were not “discovered.” Then, the critics tells us that they “make actresses.” Here is more entertainment for the gallery and an additional cause for rejoicing that the critics are with us. But how are actresses “made” —except by inmate talent, developed by persistent application ; and opportunity, assisted by the advice of a good stage manager ? The manager then provides a suitable role, usually of the hateful “machine made” and cut-to-order variety, since every actor and actress these three hundred years has succeeded best in the “made to order play.” The public is invited to be present at the “ presenting.” The critic then “ decides,” and all the printer's ink and critical homage in the world can’t make a good actress appear a bad one, or a bad one accepted by the public as great. No critic can “make” an actor or actress whom the public won’t have.

George Lauri prides himself greatly on his pugilistic powers. * * * *

An American paper says that a theatrical manager in the States, for reasons of economy, had the back rows of his chorus composed of cleverly constructed dummies. The superb proportions of their figures excited tremendous interest, and the inanimate thinking ladies would probably have continued to exercise their fascinating spell had not one accidentally lost her head. This is not the first time a lady of the chorus has lost her head, but the results in the case referred to, it is reported, were decidedly more serious.

The Dampier Dramatic Company are doing well with Charles Owen and Adam Pierre’s new five-act play, “The Unseen Hand.”

When Mr Bent, the Victorian Premier, goes to the theatre he usually takes a huge orange with which to refresh himself between acts. The suction of the orange by Tommy provides the audience with healthy amusement ■ during the interval.

Bendigo is evidently an energetic place as far as theatrical affairs are concerned. This month, “In the House of Lords,” a play by J. S. Stanley, a local author, will be produced. A musical piece by C. E. Taylor is also to be produced in Bendigo for copyright purposes. Lastly, E. A. Bindley, who has done so much for Bendigo musically, is said to be desirous of seeking wider fields in Melbourne, where he hopes to run a grand opera season at the Bijou Theatre.

The literature of theatrical advertisements fashions itself variously to suit new modes of expression (remarks the “ Australasian ”). “Mr J. C. Williamson presents ” such and such is now the correct form. Mr Charles Krohman, of New York, invented this elegant turn of phrase, and it certainly looks neat. At “ The Admirable Crichton ” first night a printed inset was inserted in each programme, giving the argument to the piece. It contains this amusing instance of mixed metaphors : —“ As in all previous works by this dramatist, he diverged entirely from the beaten track of dramatic fare, and created within the portals of his story something which would not merely afford a diverting entertainment, but an idea original in theme.”

Mi- Frank Weathersby writes to the “ Referee ” from Albany (W.A.), under date June 24 :—“ Just on point of sailing by Persic in beautiful weather. Had a record four nights’ business at the Town Hall here. We open in Pietermaritzburg on July 11, and play a week ; then Johannesburg, Julv 18, for a five weeks’ season. Good-bye to all Australian friends from John F. Sheridan and self, and heartfelt thanks to ' Referee ’ and many contemporaries for kindnesses shown us during our five years’ trip in the colonies. I should have said au revoir, but not good-bye.”

The London “ r ra,” referring to the production of “The Prince of Bilsen” by Mr George Musgrove at the London Shaftesbury, says : —“ ‘The Prince of Pilsen,’ which was introduced to a London audience by Mr Henry W. Savage’s company, may be described as possessing all the requisites of a successful American musical play. There is a Ger-man-American low comedy character, an English ‘dude,’ a dashing widow, two pairs of lovers, and the usual et ceteras. In the case of an American musical comedy, these et ceteras are a very important part of the entertainment. There are no less than forty ladies, each of them appearing in what is known as a ‘thinking part,’ and each of them enjoying the honor of the appearance of her name on the programme. Nor is this separate advertisement undeserved ; for each of these fair artists applies herself to the business in hand

with as much vigour as if the whole success or failure of the play depended on her exertions. There is nothing of the languorous poser about the American chorister ; and the effect which she creates, when applied in large numbers, may be called hypnotic. When forty young women are engaging in magnetising the audience by sheer intensity of volition, it needs a stronjger will than is usually possessed by the after-dinner play-goer to resist the effect. And it is the same with all the acting. If a lady is playing a 10-ve-scene she never allows her features a moment’s rest, lest she should defraud the management of the proper return fairly due to them for a liberaL salary. There is something almost pre-Raphael-ite in the distinctness with which every syllable of every word is pronounced by everybody and, from the smallest frill to the biggest ensemble everything is thoroughly worked out, crisp, careful, and complete.”