The Sun.
London, England, 1864-01-18 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

SATURDAY REVIEW.—WO do not intend to weary
ourselves with recounting all the little squabbles of
the Shakspeare Memorial Committee. The com-
mittee has attracted to itself, somehow or other,
names honourable and dignified ; but the original
promoters have not as yet sold out. The secretaries,
who, we suppose, appointed themselves, as most
secretaries do, have contrived to make the Shak-
speare Memorial a very unpleasant chapter in the
annals of contemporary literature. And now many
of the gentlemen who have been imported into the
committee are doing their best to preserve, if it be
possible, from utter shipwreck the whole scheme,
which, merely as a scheme for honouring Shak-
speare's memory, deserves every encouragement.
The past, however, cannot be undone. The ugly
little episode in which an affront was intended, or
at least inflicted, on the late Mr. Thackeray, must
remain as a piece of personal pique and very bad
management, as well as bad taste, exhibited by
somebody. The misunderstandings between Lon-
don and Stratford ought to have been prevented.
Such an unseemly meeting as that of last Monday
ought never to have been necessary. An executive
committee which is so badly administered that its se-
cretaries permit the newspapers to publish a draft
report which had never even been considered in com-
mittee, is evidently unfit for the functions it has
assumed. The gentlemen of this committee have
done the work of " promoters" by getting some good
and honourable names added to their body, but it
is quite plain that they are fit for nothing else. Nor
is this to be wondered at. If such veteran students
in Shakspeare as Messrs. Collier, and Dyce, and
Knight are not entrusted with devising the best
means of honouring Shakspeare, it is no great won-
der that small authors and small artists, editors and
paragraph writers, surveyors and popular journal-
ists fail. If this Shakspeare Memorial is not a
genuine success, it will be a very disreputable na-
tional failure. As was very properly observed on
Monday, " the Committee was compromised in the
face of Europe." The name and fame of Shakspeare
are too precious and too solemn a trust to be com-
promised by even an approach to those little arts of
jobbery and self-seeking of which we have seen too
much in Albert Memorials and Great Exhibition
Memorials. Certain names and certain influences
recur periodically in these Memorial Committees.
The Society of Arts, according to its wont, has im-
parted its usual spirit of meddlesomeness into an-
other" national" commemoration. We have no
great wish to see a great Shakspeare statue erected
—and of course it is hoped to erect it in that chosen
home of all jobs, the South Kensington site—and
decorated with an inscription as brazen and preten-
tious as their own estimate of their own merits, re-
cording all the Presidents and Vice-Presidents and
Secretaries and Committees who have made capital
out of the name of Shakspeare. We have an anti-
cipatory dread and horror of Mr. Bellew and his
lectures. We see in the threatening distance fancy
fetes and Crystal Palace celebrations to eke out the
funds. The vision of pretty actresses exhibiting
themselves and their admirers under the mighty
name of Shakspeare is not encouraging. The
provincial programme proposed by the Committee
scarcely reassures us. To order a national holiday
for the 23d April is a feat of self-confidence
which savours somewhat more of boldness than pru-
dence. To declare that the committee will on that
day lay the first stone of a memorial for which most
inadequate subscriptions are as yet forthcoming,
and for which probably no design is prepared, is a
little strong, not to say premature. To offer medals
for prize poems on Shakspeare revives horrible re-
miniscences of Mr. Phelps spouting Miss Isa Craig's
dithyrambics in honour of poor Burns at Syden-
ham ; and the Shaksperian Soiree to be held in
Westminster Hall suggests speeches which it is a
nightmare even to speculate upon. It is all very
well to nominate Archbishops and Dukes and Pre-
sidents of Artistic Societies to do this, that, and the
other; but will they come when they are called?
and are the provinces of the Site Committee, and
the Address Committee, and the Dramatic Com-
mittee, and the Finance Committee, and the Execu-
tive Committee adjusted and understood ? The un-
toward circumstances connected with the Aston
Park job, and the use that was made of distin-
guished patronage on that discreditable occasion,
render us, if not suspicious, at least cautious. As
things stand, the managing "parties" have done
little to attract, much to alienate, public confidence.
The national honour is concerned in everything
connected with such an undertaking as a Shaks-
peare Memorial. If good taste, perfect straight-
forwardness, and entire self-renunciation do not
connect themselves with the scheme, let it perish as
an abortive instance of bad management, bad taste,
and bad feeling—characteristics which we regret to
see are not altogether absent from the proceedings
as they stand. Our national neglect to render the
I honour due to the name of Shakspeare, and the un-
happy absence of a public monument, may still
plead Milton's noble apology :
What needs my Shakspeare, for his honoured bones,
The labour of an age in piled stones ?
Or that his hallowe reliques should be hid
Under a star-ypointing pyramid ?
Dear Son of Memory, great heir of Fame,
What need'st thou such weak witness of thy name?
Thou, in our wonder and astonishment,
Hast built thyself a live-long monument.
For whilst, to the shame of slow endeavouring art,
Thy easy numbers flow; and that each heart
Hath, from the leaves of thy unvalued book,
Those Delphick lines with deep impression took;
Then, thou, our fancy of itself bereaving,
Dost make us marble with too much conceiving;
And, so sepulchred, in such pomp dolt lie,
That kings, for such a tomb, would wish to die.
And we had rather that this disgrace, if such it is,
should continue than that an attempt should be
made to redeem it by anything which even looks
like meanness, bad taste, and a job.
READER.—With all due deference to the Anti-
Commemorationists—and we confess to a sympathy
with Anti •Commemorationism in general—we sub-
mit that their interpretation and application of
Milton's lines are capable of being disputed. We
do not see that, Milton's though they be, they need
smash Tercentenary. " What needs our Shake-
speare for his honoured bones ?" is Milton's ques-
tion; and if that were the question now,
the answer would still be, as Milton volun-
teered it, "No visible monument at all, but
only that reading and re-reading of his works
which makes ourselves his marble.' But that is
not the question now: Two hundred and thirty-
three years have elapsed since then; and Shak-
speare is not now to us the Warwickshire poet and
player recently dead, and whom we might have
seen many a time in Fleet-street or Blackfriars, but
an olden hero of our nation, whose form and man-
ner as he lived we strive eagerly to fancy through
the mythical mist, and whose name and fame are
identified with oar highest intellectual exultatione,
and all our notions of the historical greatness of Eng-
land. The question no v is not" What needs Shak-
speare ?" but "What needs our feeling for Shak-
speare?" There is a considerable difference. It is not
for Shakspeare's sake,nor because any honour can be
done to him, that the Tercentenary Commemoration
is proposed; it is because the strength of our na-
tional feeling about Shakspeare would vent itself,
according to a natural instinct which has existed
among men since the beginning of the world, in
some suitable form of expression on an occasion so
marked as the three-hundredth anniversary of his
birth. This is the true principle of monuments and
commemorations—it is not that they do anything
for the dead; it is that the feelings of the living
require them, or find delight in them. The pas-
sion for such public celebrations is, no doubt,
weaker in these recent times than it was in times
of old ; and there is at least a considerable sect who,
as opposed to all such shows and excitements, may
be called Anti-Commemorationist on principle.
But the Commemorationists—those who think
that it is a right and proper thing to have occasional
public celebrations of important anniversaries—are
still in the majority ; and on the present occasion,
it would appear, they are overwhelmingly in the
majority. While a few people here and there are
in ill temper with the whole Tercentenary business
of which they are hearing so much, and keep mum-
bling to themselves Milton's words, "What needs
my Shakspeare ?" as if these words Battled the
question, the overwhelmning majority seem to have
made up their minds that, for once, Britain may
try a celebration on a national scale, and that, if
only proper arrangements are made for such a cele-
bration on the next 23d of April, they will go
heartily into it. When it is remembered that our
Poet-Laureate has signified his approval of the in-
tended Commemoration by accepting a Vice-Presi-
dency in connexion with both the London
and the Stratford-on-Avon preparations, it will
be seen that this is a case in which many in
whose nature it would bo rather to discourage
public celebrations than to delight in them have
concluded that an 'exception may fitly be made.
But all depends on the nature of the arrangements
that are made beforehand. The willingness of the
public to join in a national celebration of the Ter-
centenary, if they can be told the proper way, is
nearly all that has yet been avowed ; and the cele-
bration may yet be wrecked, or crippled, or dwarfed
by mismanagement on the part of those who have
dertaken to organise it. Whether, as far as Lon-
, uduen is concerned, irretrievable damage has not
already been done by recent unfortunate occurrences
remains to be seen.
LosapoN REVIEW.—Why should Shakspeare
have a statue? There are no distinct memories of
the greatest poet of the world. In spite of Gervinus
and the Gernians he has neither a history nor a
personality. To Englishmen and to manhind at
large he has become a voice. Like Ramer he has
passed out of the region of statues and of portraits
into the re lm 9f mists and shadows. A statue to the

blind Father of Greek poetry would be a less ap-
propriate memorial than a temple. We give statues
to those whom we wish to immortalise, not to those
who are already immortal. A cathedral is the only
fitting monument that England could erect to
Shakspeare. The notion of a statue originally pro-
ceeded from a clumsy but well-meant desire to do
national honour to a genius whose art will make
the English language classical to all time. If it is
not too late to reconsider the scheme, it is to be
hoped it may be reconsidered in the interests both
of good taste and of art. Thousands of lovers of
Shakspeare will never contribute to such a plan, con-
taining, as it does, endless possibilities of ludicrous
failure and fiasco. Who is to choose the man to
make the statue ? Is it to be Sir Joseph Paxton, the
Lord Mayor, and Mr. William Tite, whose names
occupy so conspicuous a place on the committee, to
nominate the site, or are we to have universal
suffrage, the ballot boxes to b© held by Mr. Hep-
worth Dixon ? Before everything else, the public
naturally asks in whose hands so great a piece of
artistic patronage is to lie. There are many indi-
viduals who would use it well, but not so many so
well known as to command general confidence and
respect. It is in vain to summon the country to
follow without informing them definitely who is to
be their leader. Mr. Palgrave proposes to substi-
tute for the present unwieldy executive of the
nascent association a small knot of four or five first-
rate men, whose judgment may be trusted and who
are known for their genius and good sense. He is
right in believing that the present course will end
in disappointment ; and, if the association are wise,
they will listen to his suggestion. A decisive reason
for altering the constitution of the managing com-
mittee is, that they have begun with remarkable
energy to quarrel among themselves. Those who
know the way in which societies and associations
are got up, need not be surprised to hear it. Efforts
for promoting somebody's benefit, or for doing some
one honour, are usually set on foot by the nobodies
of various professions. The work is easy, and re-
quires no ability. Barristers without business are
very fond of promoting something. Second-rate
literary men have the same morbid wish to create
some sensation in the world. They are glad to look
forward to seeing their names in the advertisement
columns of the Tmes, in close proximity to noble-
men and bishops. The first step is to meet and
form a committee. The next thing is to get a few
illustrious outsiders to lend their names to leaven the
lump. This is plain sailing; for if the object of
the organisation be plausible, the illustrious out-
siders never refuse ; and noblemen are gregarious
animals and go together for public purposes in
droves. The management remains with the ener-
getic nobodies, while the great outsiders are used
as decoy-ducks to attract attention, and to lend
lustre to the whole. This suits everybody, especially
the outsiders. It also affords perpetual gratification
to the virtuous promoters. They reap their re-
ward in sitting by Lord Brougham in council, in
being on a joint sub committee with the Archbishop
of Canterbury, or perhaps in fetching the Lord
Chancellor an orange when he is in the middle of a
speech to a public meeting. These are the gentle-
men who are usually so active in getting up asso-
ciations and demonstrations, and it is very natural
that they should begin to quarrel when once the
scheme is in full swing. The prominent members
of the Shakspeare Committee do not seem to be ex-
empt from the failings that are incidental to their
position. They have the passions of their kind.
The proceedings recorded in the papers seem very
much on a par with the regular proceedings of a
public meeting of shareholders in a railway com-
pany. Every body is dissatisfied with everybody
else—especially with the directors—and has not the
slightest hesitation in saying so. Votes of censure
upon the managing committee are freely bruited to
and fro. Mr. Hepworth Dixon disagrees with Mr.
Tomlins, and Mr. Marston rises " to order " amidst
considerable confusion." Mr. Martin attempts to
address the meeting in the midst of such manifes-
tations of impatience and cries of "spoke " that he
is completely " inaudible." Irregular skirmishing
takes place as to whether amendments are " regu-
lar," and whether Mr. Hepworth Dixon and his
coadjutor have not taken too much upon themselves.
This is the national committee which is to do honour
to Shakspeare. Most of the speakers are utterly
unknown beyond their own clique, and some of those
who are known are known to be second-rate in
their profession. Of the illustrious outsiders who
are so conspicuously advertised we see and hear
nothing. Like Essex, they know better than to be
there. The consequences of their absence are per-
ceptible. Already an unseemly piece of bad taste
has brought the managers of the concern into dis-
grace, with respect to one great man who has sud-
denly passed away from us. Nor until a very dif-
ferent Directory takes the lead will the country
give the association any but the most limited confi-
dence. The best advice to be bestowed on one and
all of them is that the committee should purge it-
self. A self-denying ordinance is wanted. Those
whom the public does not know at all, as well as
those whom the literary public knows too well, will
do good service to the cause by retiring into that
honourable obscurity from which they are right in
wishing to emerge, but from which they are wrong
in trying to use Shakespeare as a stepping-stone.
Where are those gentlemen who ought in so great
a manifestation to be acting as managers and secre-
taries ? Where is Monckton Milnes, the Dean of St.
Paul's, Sir C. Eastlake, Lord Granville, Mr. Foley ?
Their names are on the list, but the reins do not
seem to be in their hands. They may rest assured
that the sooner they take the conduct of the matter,
the sooner the world at large will begin to interest
itself warmly in its success.
SPECTATJR.—Centenary celebrations are exotics
in this country. The idea comes from Germany,
and has been acclimatised in England by the enter-
prising speculators of the Crystal Palace. Atter all
there is something lobe said for a musical festival in
honour of Handel or Mozart; their music is
always charming to listen to ; and it may
be performed with equal appropriateness on
one day as on another. There is, however,
something exquisitely absurd in the notion of pass-
ing a national vote of thanks by acclamation to
Shakespeare, and the projectors of this ingenious
scheme seem painfully aware of the absurdity of
their own proposal. Nobody can suggest any mode
of celebration which is not either impossible or ludi-
crous. The original conception of the great London
Committee was to erect a statue in one of the central
parks in honour of the great dramatist, Whether
there exists any authentic likeness of Shakespeare at
all is a question on which opinions are divided, and
it is quite within the bounds of possibility that the
proposed statue, even if it ever gets beyond the hypo-
thetical stage, might be a likeness of some person
who bore no more resemblance to Shakespeare than
to Messrs. Collyer or Halliweil. Leaving aside this
initial difficulty, we all know beforehand that such
a statue would be certain to be an eyesore and a nui-
sance. The Iron Duke at Hyde Park Corner and the
Guards' Memorial in Waterloo-place are quite bad
enough, without our disfiguring London with a third
and even more unsuccessful attempt of a similar kind.
Moreover, such a project would entail a large outlay
of money, and the public has remained utterly and
obstinately deaf to any appeal for money on behalf
of the Shakespeare memorial. One hundred thou-
sand was the first amount demanded, then twenty
thousand was suggested as a compromise, and finally
we hear of rumours that "a neat thing in stone"
might be put up for some twentieth part of the ori-
ginal demand. Practically, therefore, we may assume
that the idea of a statue has been abandoned, and in
default of that we are offered a performance of
Shakesperian mosic—whatever that may be—a
representation of ono of Shakespeare's plays at the
two national theatres; and a conversazionc in
Westminster Hall, at which the characters of
Hamlet and Lady Macboth are to be discussed
between the intervals of tea and sherry negus.
The Stratford-on-Avon Comnittee has not quite
equalled its London compeers in absurdity, from the
simple fact that this body has a sort of faint shadowy
raison d'etre. The sole glory of Stratfurd is in con-
nection with Shakespeare. In the words co' Steevens,
" All that is known with any degree of ce?tainty
concerning Shakespeare is, that he was born at
Stratford-on-Avon, married, and had children
there, went to London, where he commenced actor,
and wrote plays and poems, returned to Stratford,
made his will, died, and was buried." If therefore,
the memory of the dramatist has a local habitation
anywhere it is at Stratford; and if the neighouring
gentry like to put up a monument to Shakespeare
in his native town nobody can object to their doing
so. This very reasonable proposal, however, is coupled
with a plan that all the lions of England, and every-
body who wishes to see the said lions, shall spend a
week at Stratford, iu solemn contemplation of the
genius of Shakespeare—a plan which, doubtless,
commends itself to the intellect of the landlords
and lodging-housekeepers of the dull little War-
wickshire town, but is not likely to find favour
with the public. The amateur suggestions fur
doing honour to the tercentenary are even wore
wonderful than those put forward by its profes-
sional patrons. A tradesman suggests a commemo-
rative medal, to be struck, of course, under his own
superintendence. A correspondent to one London
journal proposes a gigantic monument on the top of
Primrose-hill; another wishes for a "boulevard"
leading from Charing-cross to Hampstead-hill;
third proposes the erection of a new city in a thriv-
ing district to be called Shakespeare-town, and
containing Hamlet-street, Verona-crescent, Romeo-
square, and so on. Finally, a grave public newspaper
recommends a general -holiday, on the idea that
admiration of Shakespeare's genius will thus
be diffused amidst our working classes, just es
loyalty is implanted in the hearts of our school
boys by en extra week's vacation on the occasion
of a royal marriage. The manner in which the

—..----- .
idea has been worked out so far is on a par with its
innate absurdity. We have no wish to ester onoe
merits of the various squabbles in which the
don Shakespeare Committee has been involved during
°
its short and inglorious career ; we look simply is
the facts patent to the world, without touching
the internal history of this unsuccessful agitate*
Four hundred and odd gentlemen, all of more or,
less rank, or position, or reputation have forelect,
themselves in a society for the props
Shakespeare's fame. The persons who, to us°,
most apropriate Yankee phrase, formed the „bagi
beetles'' of the body, gave it their adhesion, Part,,,,g
because they thought it the proper thing to esPrt:
an abstract admiration for Shakespeare, partlf 7it
cause, as men of rank, they rather liked the er,e„uho
of being connected with a literary movement. 1"_
working bees of the organization consisted of prvta.
gatiou oti,
fessional literary men. Now we have no Viis,:hy,
say anything against our own class, and web e"%i
that, as a rule, authors and men of letters are 11,..,
so jealous of each other, nor so incapable of actwo°,
together, as men whose profession is either law' or
medicine, or theology. If any great principle or
~
human interest bad been involved in this Shale,
0
perian movement, literary rivalries and jeal°llBtile.
would have been at once forgotten by the ge/3:e,
men who had undertaken to aid in its proseov
Unfortunately this was not the case. With thee
13 ~
ception of some dozen persons whose hobbl--.
Shakespeare, probably not one member of the cee're
mittee cared a sixpenco personally whether there
was a tercentenary celebration or not. It °Tole
no want of charity to suppose that the bulk 0' ye,
acting members attached themselves to the °foto
ment with a view of bringing their names be'ro
the world. In so doing they used a very °tuing
and perfectly irreprehensible method of aciv4l3,-heir
their professional interests. They give in ,01
names for exactly the same reasons that barrisoo,
join a society for the study of the law, or that "co(
tors subscribe to a testimonial for the disco tins'
some improvement in the art of ileficoor
If, however, you give your guinea, 00 di es•
five guineas, as the case may be, cote
men some return for your money ; and all the gei7coto
men who took an active part in what, by a our to
euphemism, was described as doing 12011911`,w0
Shakespeare's memory, wished to have their wt, of
names brought forward in connection with tuarreto
the Swan of Avon. Hence arose the various c1115:10
which have amused the critical public. Their
and nature may in every case be briefly desorla it
by saying that Mr. Septimus Smith eonsidefergt
extremely undesirable for his own interests th,a' 'tile
Sextus Smith should ta leading share 'ncifa
proceedings, and utterlyunreasonable that 00t,tbit
Smith should even wish to do so. The result 0 sit
state of things is that nine months have been 1-cri,
in alternate phases of mutual admiration anrir-cei
mination, and that the acting Council has Pituted'
a report which the general committee has or:41o!
The ill-luck which invariably pursues unsuec:oto
enterprise brought the committee into an unfert"; 01l
dispute with regard to the late Mr. Thackertli 00
the very eve of the great novelist's death; an:gar
result has bleu to throw an accidental arid ",-0 of
served obloquy on its later acts. The “111$13,eisti°
Shakespeare are not, we suspect, likely to be bioll
fled by tercentenary festivities. Possibly tbj AO
that his works are to be found in every ,„..14:iiot
library, that his plays are acted on every -F.411,1°,04
stage, and that no Englishman can speak $„-otiog
earnest sentences without unconsciously t 1,7,,- cot
Shakespeare, may console the departed gelPirri tor
the loss of a statue and a soilee at Virestn3l)
Hall.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

,1.

NORTHAMPTON—SATURDA.Y.
We had a moderate show of wheat on offer at tifio tie
market to-day, in middling condition. The trade
tie
ther quiet, and recent rates were not supported. t Iso
little animation in barley. Oats and beans dull, Pe
rates.—White wheat, 40s to 47s ; red, 395 to 428; 4.1,,1
to —s per qr. Barley, 35s to 37s—grinding. 2.70
Oats, 26s to 33s per 24 stone. Beans, 385 to 415*
30s to 38s per qr.

YORK—SATURDAY.
mare eapi,
1P
There was a fair attendance of farmers at mar te
0 8 tlaP
but the supply of wheat was hardly so large a lied •-.„el
A languid feeling in the trade, and buyers 8111134 d,
wants at currencies is per qr in their favour. Ilan
a sluggish demand. Oats and beans also slow. . to'lo,
Wheat, red 3Bs to 41s Oats.... ....... ,s, to I
White do .42s to 46s Beans ........ ,to ;30,
Barley .28s to 32s Peas ......... ••"00al,
Malt, 58s to 60s per qr. ; rye, 30s per qr.;
to 32s per sack.

LEICESTER—SATURDAY.
We were supplied with a fair quantity of iv.-.„to
from the growers, but a dull demand, and late prl
18 per qr lower than last week. Barley was alBo,l- er:)t.
—New white wheat, 44s to 46;" • `red, 44s to 490 roislP
stone. Old red, 39s to 41s per 36'stone. BarleY, dog
new, 32v,t0 35s per qr.; grinding, 27s to 295; c'i3oo'
25s to 28s; new oats, 21s to 23s per 24 stono.A
tjtoN
old, 40s to 42s per 38 stone ; flour, 283 to 32s per :2u

NORWICH_SATURDAY. via
There was a good supply of wheat, but millers nett, ,00
at all free buyers the advance established last wee ua
lost.. A fair supply of barley, and prices the sael°
this day se'nnight. Flour 6d per sack cheaper. t 049
White wheat. 44s to 46i 1 Red wheat ........ 1315t0P
Malting barley 36s to 37s 1 Chevalier barley•••,;;:to0i
Distilling do 30s to 32s I Oats.. ............
Flour, 28s Od to —s Od per sack from thew'

of
NOTTINGHAM—SATURDAY. docete,
At this corn market to-day there was a fair atteljtolerAbp
farmers and factors, and the show of wheat waBjout 12.4.
Sales were slow, at is reduction upon the Pr0,1,r9, to flog
—White wheat, from 41s to 45s ; red wheat, '3os. vr,Bl
Barley—malting, 30s to 388 ; grinding, 26s to old tit
old, at 24s to 31s Od ; new, 19s to 255. Deans
to 42s per qr. ; new, 34s to 365.

365 t,;
GRANTHAM—SA.TUnD).Y.
ner ft
Old white wheat, 44s to 48s • red, 39s to 420 re bar'ei)
now white, 40s to 45s ; red, 32s to 428. MaltinTcl ‘2.°
33s to 36s per qr ; grinding, 28s to 30s ; oats, to
28s; new, 20s to 24s ; beans, 38s to 40s; peg, 34°