The Press.
London, England, 1854-04-22 00:00:00

372

THE :

MINISTERIAL GREEN-ROOM GOSSIP.

THE Coalitic n managers of the Westminster Theatre have been placed
in a condition of embarrassment, owing to the failure of so many of
their late productions, and the early withdrawals thereby necessitated.
We believe that they hardly know what to open with after Easter, but
it is probable that Alma Mater; or, the Collegians—a long affair, which
was produced with no great success and played to very thin audiences
last season—will be the piice de resistance for the present. The managers
will endeavour to make shift with this, and one or two other stopgaps,
until they are furnished with something more exciting by Mr. Napier
and Mr. Dundas, whose services have been enlisted for nautical drama.

Upon the success of these gentlemen they depend for their very
existence, and, should they be even temporarily disappointed, it is far
from impossible that the management may pass into other hands.
There is a clap-trap farce, called The Oath, in rehearsal. The
subject has been treated several times, but always without success—if

one House has tolerated the affair, the next has condemned it—but

there is some novelty of treatment, we hear, in the present version ;
, and the part of a Jew, which has hitherto been offensively prominent,
sis now subordinated. We cannot say that the author's name inspires
us with much confidence, or that we anticipate a different fate for his
work from the fate of its predecessors.

The melancholy failure of The New School of Reform has caused
many disputes and recriminations among the managing committee.
The author, Mr. Russell, continued to maintain to the last that it was
a good piece, and that, though the public showed great indifference
towards it, they approved it, and that it ought to have been kept in the

bills. But the books, it seems, show that only eleven inquiries after

it were made at the box-office, and of these only four were made in
friendly language. The writer, however, with an author's habitual
love for his worst work, perseveres, and has extorted a sort of pledge
from his colleagues that, if they retain the management, the piece,
with some alterations, shall be put up again next season. Mr. Temple
and one or two others are understood to have objected to the affair, as
going into too low life, and also to the clumsy construction, which hurries
to a catastrophe by no means acceptable to the public. Mr. Moles-
worth found another fault, that it was not calculated to please the
masses, and he desired to introduce a startling feature—a ball in the
dark. But this was resisted on the ground of public morality.

A piece of extravagance, called Bank! City ! Bank !—by Mr.
Gladstone—was, it may be remembered, condemned at the close of

the last season ; but it has taken its place in the repertoire of the
management, and will be put forth again, with some lengthy additions
which the author has made—in order, he says, to render it more com-
prehensible. The interest of this piece cannot be called slight, inas-
much as it turns upon a species of robbery effected in the dashing Rob ert
Macairo style. An old lady residing in Threadneedle-street is the
victim, and there is good comedy in the efforts of the plunderers to
persuade the poor old soul that whether she has her money, or whether
it is handed over to somebod3, else, it is all the same. The prin-

cipal character (played by the author) makes a proposal to her which
is entertaining from its audacity. He assures her that she will be just
as able to lend assistance to her humble neighbours whether she has
her money or not; but she cannot see that; so he explains that all he
has to do is to follow a rich gentleman, called Bull, and demand his
purse, whenever the lady wants cash. She cannot agree that this is
right, and there is some showy language in the scene. But the affair
is certainly immoral, and we hope that it will be so regarded by the
public, and classed with The Beggar's Opera and Jack Sheppard.

The melodrama of The English Pauper was also a failure, but from
a different cause, for much of the affair was really good, and was
received with strong approbation by the best part of the audience.
But when it was found that in order to please certain supporters of
the management a low Irish part was to be engrafted upon a subject
with which it had no connection whatever, while it was introduced
in such a manner as to confuse the piece, so that the public really
did not know what was before them, or what was meant, much
dissatisfaction was shown. It was suggested to the management that
the work should be postponed for reconsideration; but this was
refused. At last, however, the supporters in question were sought to