The Sun.
London, England, 1865-09-18 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

I ".THE LONDON REVIEW" ON THE LIBERTY OF
LOVE-MAKING.--AS for Miss Crosse and her papa's
groom, that resolute young lady has deprived the
world of amorous batchelors—who have an eye not
only to the mind and form, but the purses of their
inamoratas—of the benefit of a judicial decision as
to what the Act of Parliament touching the crime
of abducting ladies of fortune means. Had her papa
persisted in prosecuting his paternal wrongs, the
late romantic elopement might have resolved itself
into a " leading case" for the guidance of runaway
lovers. But Mr. Crosse has, at the eleventh hour,
done what it would have been better if he had done
a little sooner. As we said last week, it was not
George Smith who abducted Miss Alice, it was Miss
Alice who abducted George Smith. How it came to
pass that the " natty" groom won the affections of
the rector's slim and ladylike daughter, we know
not, except from her own statements ; and, though
it is not a commendable thing for a delicately-reared
girl to conceive an affection for the lad who groomed
her palfrey and helped her to her saddle, to make
advances to him as they rode side by side in the
lanes of Ockham, it was a greater offence against
paternal prudence on the part of her father to allow
her the opportunities of throwing herself away
which culminated in her elopement and the late'
proceeding at the Wandsworth police-court. Partly
Mr. Crosse redeemed his error after the first inves-
tigation of the case before the magistrate. When
he found that the groom was rather,the victim than
the abducter of his agreeable daughter, he;withdrow
his prosecution—committieg a lamentable blunder,
however, in the indecent intimation which he in-
structed his solicitor to publish. Wholly he re-
deemed it, as far as he had left himself the power to
do so, by consenting to the marriage of his daughter
and George Smith, which took place on Thursday.
It is not given to ordinary couples to enjoy the
ovation which attended the celebration of marriage
between Miss Alice and her groom—we beg pardon,
her bridegroom—at All Saints',Wandsworth. Never
before was there, on such an occasion, such a gather-
ing of the townsfolk. "The church,"says the Express
of Thursday, "was crowded, and every available
spot, both inside and out, from which a glimpse
could be obtained of the couple, was occupied. The
road and paths were literally blocked up for some
distance, and as the pretty church bells rang a merry
peal a stranger might have supposed that nothing
short of a royal marriage was being celebrated.'
The couple arrived in Wandsworth last night, and
took up their temporary abode at the house of Mr.
George, a baker, in the High-street, who was one
of the groom's bail. They were unaccompanied by
any friends saving those who had been made in
Wandsworth. Mr. George and his daughter ac-
companied them to church, and acted as their best
friends. After the ceremony was concluded, and
on walking from the church, they were received
with loud and continued cheering. The young
lady was dressed in a pink bonnet, with a black silk
cape and purple silk dress. The young gentleman
looked exceedingly happy, and escorted his bride on
his arm to the residence of Mr. George, Inspectors
Lovelace and Usher exerting themselves manfully
to clear the path for them. As the young couple
walked for the few yards from the church she seemed
to have the advantage of height over her husband,
who, however, presented a very natty' appearance.
He was dressed in a black coat and trousers, with
a white waistcoat, and wore white kid gloves. They
were quickly ushered into the baker's shop by the
police, but quickly reappeared at the first-floor
window, where Mr. Smith took off his hat and
bowed repeatedly to the crowd beneath. However,
that appeared not to satisfy his friends, and he then
opened the window and briefly addressed the crowd.
He thanked his friends sincerely for all their kind-
ness and sympathy shown to him since he had been
in Wandsworth, and he hoped they would all live
long and be happy. This short speech was followed
with tremendous cheering, and it was some time
before the police could clear the streets and restore
order." When we add that " it was understood
that the newly-married pair intended to travel for
a short time," we may close the romantic history,
which has so enlivened these dull days, of " The
Lady and her Groom."
" THE ARMY AND NAVY GAZETTE" ON Ru-
MOURED CHANGES IN THE INFANTRY DRESS !
There seems to be a general impression that several
changes will shortly be made in the Infantry dress,
mcre especially in that of the officer, and there can
be no doubt that they are urgently required ; but
suggestions are so numerous, that the required
alterations are doubtless most difficult to decide
upon. When the present tunic was substituted for
the old coatee, the authorities urged that it was to
save the officers expense ; and if it was the practice
to wear the former DO oftener than the latter, then
such would really be the case ; but the tunic is
worn every day on parade, and on almost all duties,
so that instead of one red coat being sufficient, a
single season of reviews, and flying
columns, especially field-days, dA- Ida ye
Aldershot,
hot, completely takes
all the gilt off the gingerbread, and necessitates the
provision of a second tunic for occasions when the
officer may wish to appear otherwise than shabby.
An officer finds, on looking over his tailor's bill, an
item of 13 guineas for a tunic supplied since last
Christmas, and already it is quite unfit to appear in
either at a ball or a levee. It is argued that it is
hard that regimental officers should have to do all
the rough work in camp in full dress, when the staff
only wear theirs three or four times during the
whole season. If it is considered indispensable that
the officer should wear red whenever his men do so,
and such is the practice, it either obliges him to buy
a new tunic annually or to be the worst dressed of
the two, and unfortunately it too frequently hap-
pens that such the and from no other reason

than that the officer cannot afford to wear such
expensive clothing, and renew it as often
as might appear necessary. From having to
parade every day in the tunic there is
the certainty of its getting wet through several times
in the course of a season, and consequently of its
being ruined ; therefore, as every officer is obliged
to have two tunics, it is suggested that he might
have one without lace or other ornament for the
daily parades and drills, and all other occasions ex-
cept when the staff wear red, when the full dress
might be worn, The blue patrol jacket (advocated
by so many) would not be so useful as an undress
tunic would be, for there is always the objection to
the officers being in a different colour to the men on
parades ; and this is not the case With those branches
of the service already in possession of the patrol
jacket, viz., the Artillery and Rifles. A. scarletpatrol
jacket, similar to the serge frock worn in India,
might be useful. The buttony frock is so seldom
worn, except by rifle instructors, that it might easily
be dispensed with without a substitute. There are
certain parts of a mounted officer's trousers which
soon become shabby from friction, perspiration from
the horse's flanks, and mud splashings, and as the
staff and mounted corps have long since found the
advantage of leather strapping as a protection, what
reason can there be for the invidious exception ? A
correspondent says :—" I cannot understand why
the present shako is so abused, it is comfortable to
wear and much lighter and better shaped than its
predecessors. I only know of one fault it has,
which is that the grease comes through and makes
it shabby before the men are entitled to new ones.
A bronze plate instead of the present shining brass
one would be preferable, the latter being too con-
spicuous when skirmishing ; those who recommend
a white shako should know that anything white can
be seen distinctly by a sharpshooter when most
other colours at the same distance would be almost
invisible."

" THE READER" ON LONDON MUSIC HALLS.—
All classes and both sexes, with the exception of the
higher grade of women, use them ; and they are as
variously classed as concerns frequenters as the
theatres, which are greatly affected by situation.
According to a late calculation, there are in London
thirty-two music-halls, at which are employed, as
singers. rallSiCl4lll3. dancers. and helpers of all kinds,
fifteen hundred people; and they can accommodate
nearly forty-two thousand visitors, although they
are not, on the average, above half full. It is said
that, including the great provincial towns, there are
upwards of a hundred and fifty music halls in Eng-
land. We, however, can only speak from personal
knowledge of the metropolitan ones. They are of
very recent growth, the. first music-hall (proper or
improper) being built in 1851 ; and the Canterbury
Hall has, we believe, the honour (or the dishonour)
of starting a new and mixed form of popular enter-
tainment. Evans's, indeed, was far earlier, but it
never admitted female visitors, or employed female
performers. That Apollo and the Muses should be
introduced to beer and tobacco—and even to mut-
ton chops and kidney potatoes—seems an anomaly ;
yet Ovid tells us in his classic lines that the andanar
of the ancient theatres were not unmindful of the
creature comforts ; and his hero is told to be very
assiduous in providing these cates for his adorable
mistress. It is not pleasant to associate the Alcestis
or the Medea with fried sausages and assafmtida
sauce, yet we fear that the researches of that great
scholar, whom Le Sage mentions as finding out that
little boys cried when they were whipped at Athens,
might discover that such indulgences took place in
an Athenian audience, and during the performance
of the immortal Greek plays. However this may
be, Music has ushered in Dancing, and the two
seemed inclined to introduce Comedy or even
Tragedy. However shocking this may be, it is
probably a natural process, and we can only hope
that ultimately the intellectual may completely
triumph over the sensual. The question is Beer and
some art, or Beer and no art. But it is no province
of ours at • the present moment to settle this ques-
tion, which indeed is sure to settle itself, and will
probably do so by saying " Less Beer and more
art" We, however, intend only, in our brief view
of popular entertainments, to report what we have
seen, and what are the facts. The West-end music-
balls are thelCosest as to morals and the genteelest as
to company. The East-End and Suburb music-
halls are most frequented by the artizan class,
who introduce their wives, and are frequented
by the family. These latter really show
a new phase of manners, as introducing
women to participate in their evening enjoy-
ments. At Canterbury Hall, the Metropolitan in
Edgware-road, at Wilton's, Wellclose-square, the
genuine artisan and his family will be found, or the
new and populous class of 'girl-workers, and their
affianced and accepted. lovers. At the Oxford,
Weston's, and the London Pavilion, will be found
the faster portion of the grade above the artisan and
small trader, the young assistant and clerks of the
wholesale dealers, with a sprinkling of the fastest
portion of a still higher grade ; but all these are also
intermixed with respectable men and women, who
come solely to enjoy the entertainment. Of course,
the vicious will resort to all available places to ply
their vile trade ; and although there are no scenes
such as we recollect in the two grand (and then
only) theatres for the performance of the legitimate
drama' when the staircases and lobbies were beset
and thronged with the most openly abandoned wo-
men, yet there is a sufficient demonstration at some
of the music halls that they are used as a resort by
habitually misconducted women. Perhaps this is
unavoidable, while there is no open violation of pub-
lic decorum •, but it is to be regretted, as it is desir-
able to afford to the wives and families of the less
rich grades of society a cheap and amusing resort
uncontaminated by obvious vice. We are very
much inclined to think if any proprietor were to
open one of these places of entertainment, with a
strict determination only to admit respectable wo-
men, it would answer his purpose as a pecuniary
speculation. It is perfectly possible for any intel-
ligent person to keep his hall perfectly select, if he
will only exercise his own discretion as to whom he
admits. Indeed, the arrangement would soon work
itself, for disreputable women have no motive for
wishing to get into purely respectable society, when
not formed solely of wealthy men. As to the perform-
ances at these places of public entertainment, it is
noticeable that the same kind of performance pleases
all classes. The country or the town gentleman is
as anxious to hear Vance or Mackney as the coal-
whipper at Wapping. "Slap bang !" is as charm-
ing at the West End as at the East. Plenty of
money and fine clothes give no assurance of mental
refinement ; and it may be doubted if the Faust
music is not more eagerly listened to by the quiet
artizan and his young wife than by the sport-
ing gentleman and the very fast-looking lady in
the pink bonnet. The managers of the establish-
ments have, on the whole, been active and intel-
ligent in catering for their' audiences. They
have provided good concert music ; and in some
instances, as at the Oxford and the Canterbury, a
full and efficient company of instrumentalists and
singers, who have given some of the best modern
music, not even excepting the high productions of
Beethoven. At -Evans's, at one time, they had a
remarkable youthful choir, with some unrivalled
voices, that sang the music of Purcell and other
high masters. Mingled with this has been, and un-
doubtedly is, much buffoonery and some vulgarity.
Comic singing has never been noted for its refine-
ment, and that of the present day is not so coarse as
that of the past generation. The abominations of
the Jim Crow melodists have been much amelio-
rated, and Vance is not so gross as Grimaldi. The
comic songs of a nation are always a re-echo of its
manners ; and every popular comic song has some
sly hit at the ways and conduct of the beaux and
belles of the lower grade, and certainly takes life
as it at present exists and is known in their own
circle. It expresses some foolish confidingness of
Mary Jane, or some crafty deception on the part of
a flash cracksman. It betrays the innate love of
flirting in the sex, as in the case of the damsel who
goes off with the organ-grinder, or is fascinated by
one of a German band ; or it sings the praises of
the dark young girl who works at the sewing machine.
Absolute buffoonery seems sometimes to be in the
ascendant, and the long popularity of " The Cure"
and " The Nervous Man' prove on how infinitely
small an idea many minds will feed. It has, how-
ever, the rare merit of not being. imitative. Alto-
gether, perhaps, music-halls andtheir entertainments
do not give all, or exactly what a philanthropic
philosopher would desiderate for a free, intellectual,
and progressing people. But the question to consi-
der is, are they on a par with other portions of our
manners and proceedings. Look at our system of
education ; our social arrangements as regards our
general mode of living ; on the way the masses are
housed; the state of the domestic arts, and of the
fine arts as concern every-day life, they really seem
to fit in harmoniously. The great populace can
only be taught manners by associating in public;
and at least the music halls conduce to that. Nor
are their morals any worse than other places of
public resort ; and compared with the old fairs they
are refinement itself. Compare Evans's, Canter-
bury Hall, and the Oxford, or Weston's, the Metro-
politan, Highbury Barn, or the Lord Raglan, with
Bow, Camberwell, or Bartlemy fairs, or even with
the more genteel Brook Green, and certainly, as
regards the conduct of the visitors or the entertain-
ment provided, there can be no comparison ; but to
the advantage of the music halls.

"THE ATHENEUM" *ON THE DOUBTS AS TO SHATZ-
SPERE'S HAVING EVER EXISTED !—The life of Shak-
spere is still the puzzle, the disgrace, and the despair
of critical art. Although it is beyond question the
greatest of all literary subjects, nothing has been
made of it better than an antiquary's jest. Genius,
prudence, labour, hospitality, success—noble virtues,
noble services—am stamped upon that story, like

figures on a coin. But the story itself appears to
lack the ordinary marks of actual truth. It is.a
history without details, The tale may be quite true,
and the moral beauty of it may represent material
facts, but we have no evidence to convince the eye
and ear: That large life of the poet--

Ophits are not finely touched
But to fine issues'—
clings to the actual world of dates by such slender
threads that we can barely seize it as a part of the
wide province of prosaic fact. Shakspere is the
highest name in the highest of all arts ; higher than
that of Homer, that of Dante ; and of the selectest
and supremest band of poets, he is also the youngest
born. Yet we have nearly everything still to learn
about him. It is true he lived in a great city in the
neighbourhood of a busy Court, in the midst of
taverns and theatres, and among a nation of news;
mongers and letter-writers; but when we come
to these idlers and gossips, who loved to tell
each other of " some new thing," and bid them
speak what they know of this player, their
faces are all but blank. They have nothing
to say. Player? One William Shakspere ?
Yes ; no more, no less ; the author of " Hamlet,"
" Othello," and "Measure for Measure." Certainly,
he was a man who wrote plays ; those and some
others ; also poems and sonnets. But beyond these
general words the oracles are dumb. Dates, names,
incidents, stories, conversations, everything entering
into the realities of a man's life, must be sought
elsewhere by those who want them ; sought, it may
be feared, for ever, evermore iu vain. Are we sure
of a single fact in what is called Shakspere's life ?
Sir William Penn was said to be a suppressed cha-
racter in English history. Is William Shakspere
another ? A modern critic of the destructive school
would reject as fable the whole bases of the poet's
life. If the subject came in their way, Strauss and
Renan, perhaps Millman and Colenso, would feel
no compunction in stigmatising Shakspere as " un-
historical." And critics of a safer school of thought
would see that in doing so they would be acting in
good faith according to their principles and the
measure of their light. Clouds and mists surround
the poet as a man so closely that of all the theories
of his life, the least unintelligible theory would
perhaps be one assuming that he never lived at all.
Of course there would be difficulties in the way of a
theory making Ohakoporo an illusion of the
a convenient invention—a masculine form of Betsy
Prigg's invisible friend. Every theory has its weak
points. It certainly might be urged in favour of
Shakspere having lived and written books, that the
books remain—a thin quarto of sonnets, other thin
quartos of poems, " Lucrece" and " Venus and
Adonis," a thick folio of plays ; that sundry por-
traits of the man exist in National Portrait Galleries
and elsewhere ; that the house in which he was born
is known. All these things are a part of the case,
and must be taken into account by those who would
argue against an actual Shakspere in the flesh. To
a certain extent, they tell against the theory of non-
existence ; but then it is a question whether they
tell for much. Look at them sternly, and see if
they will not begin to melt away under your ardent
gaze. Even those who stand to the idea that a poet
who bore the name of Shakspere lived in the flesh—
wrote plays and poems—trod on the stage—owned
shares in a theatre—made a little fortune by his pen
—and died in Stratford-on-Avon—as the common
story, told in a thousand books, asserts, will admit
that this old idea of the Poet's life is based on all
sorts of assumptions, contradictions and absurdities.
Which of the facts put forth in the books have ever
been proved ? How do you know that Shakspere
wrote plays? You produce the copies ; quarto, folio;
" Hamlet," " Othello," and their bright compeers.
Very good. But where is your evidence that Shak-
spere wrote those plays? Where are the originals
in Shakspere's hand ? You allow that none of them
are to be found. Why are they not to be found ?
Shakspere is not an ancient. Writings of his time
abound in our public libraries. Spenser's manu-
scripts exist. Jonson's manuscripts exist. Bacon's
manuscripts exist. Raleigh's manuscripts exist. Why
of this great circle of contemporary authors should
Shakspere (if he really lived and wrote), and Shaks-
pere only, have left no originals to prove his right ?
You say the plays must have been burnt in the fire
which destroyed the Globe Theatre. It is a common,
an unhappy leap in the dark. How do you know that
Shakspere's manuscripts were kept in the Globe Thea-
tre ? Is it likely? Between the early plays and the
later there was, according to the usual story, an interval
of about thirty years. Some were written in Lon-
don, some in Stratford. Some were produced at
the Globe, some at Blackfriars, some at Court.
Why should they all be kept in the Globe Theatre ?
Blackfriars was the chief establishment, and there,
if anywhere in theatrical custody, the manuscripts
should have been kept. But more. If a fire at the
Globe were allowed, for the sake of argument, to
have furnished a possible explanation for the disap-
pearance of all the MS. Shakspere plays, such an
agency could only account for the plays. Where
are the sonnets ? Where is " Lucrece" ? Where is
" Venus and Adonis"? Still more, where are the
private letters, the personal accounts, the noted and
inscribed books belonging to this great reader and
writer ? Did they all perish in the Globe fire ?
This query would be pressed by a Strauss with re-
lentless logic. A man's private letters are not easily
destroyed. They are sent to many persons. They
lie up in country houses, and are often preserved
with religious care. Hundreds of Bacon's, Raleigh's,
Cecil's letters—not a few of Donne's and Johnson's
—are preserved. Yet not one scrap of ordinary
writing, known to be Shakspere's, has ever yet
turned up. What is the meaning of this strange
circumstance ? You say there are portraits ; and
you argue that a man who sits for his portrait must
be a living man. The portraits answer for Shak-
spere ; but who will venture to say a word for the
portraits ? We know nothing whatever about these
pretended portraits. We do not know that Shak-
spere ever sat to a painter. We have no record of
any artist ever painting him either with or without
his consent. No contemporary ever mentioned
a painting of him, good or bad. Moreover, the
pretended portraits are each unlike the other, and
all are unlike Droeshout's engraving and Johnson's
bust. The Chandos picture is of a different man
from the birthplace picture, and neither work has a
pedigree worth a straw. What, then, a critic of
the destructive school might urge, is the value of an
argument drawn from the existence of a dozen
spurious portraits ? No more than a Wardour-street
ancestry for a grocer suddenly grown rich on sand.
But, says the fond believer in tradition, there is the
house in which he was born ; house in Henley-street,
Stratford; once a butcher's shop, then a crumbling
cottage, now a sacred shrine; restored, enlarged ;
made into a library, a museum, a picture gallery ;
surrounded by a pretty garden in which Shakspere
plants and flowers are taught to bloom. But alack!
the house is only part of the general legend. Instead
of the house answering for the fable, the fable is
obliged to answer for the house. Shakspere may
have been borne in Henley-street ; but we do not
know that he was so. It is probable, and some
believe it. But no court could receive, in a case
where ss. depended on the evidence, such probabi-
lities as can be urged in behalf of the idea. In truth,
without going the length which a destructive critic
might feel himself free to go we must admit that
very little of the common kind is known of our
greatest writer; We are uncertain of his name. We
find it in the forms of Chacksper and Shaxpur, and
with twenty other variations, including Saxpere and ,
Shagspere. Critics cannot agree even now upon a
common way of spelling Shakspere's name; Malone,
Knight, and Collier having each his favourite delu-
sion on the subject. We only know beyond doubt
that the poet spelt his name one way in his books and
another way in his will. We are uncertain as to
when he was born and where he was born. We infer
that he was born on the 23d of April, 1564 in Hen-
ley-street ; but we only infer the first from the cir-
cumstance of his being christened on the 26th of
April, and the second from the fact of his father
being then the owner of a house in Henley-street.
Books have been written to show that he was not
born on April 23. As regards the house, our only
particle of evidence tells against the received idea.
Shakspere mentions it in his will ; and he does not
describe it as his birthplace. We are uncertain
about his childhood and his youth,—when he went
to school, what he learned, to what business he was
put, why he left Warwickshire, and when he came
to London. That he wrote poems and plays is
Matter of safer knowledge ; though critics like Mr.
Smith and Miss Bacon have not been slow in assert-
ing that the poems and plays which go under his
name were really written by Bacon and Raleigh,
with a philosophical and revolutionary purpose.
Beyond the facts of his being in London for some
years, and producing plays and poems, scarcely any-
thing is known with clearness. He wrote sonnets,
which are the profoundest mystery in all literature.
He retired from London to Stratford ; but we are
ignorant why, and when this change in life took
place. We see nothing of his married life, and we
have only two or three lying stories about the com-
panions of his social hours. The origin of the com-
mon tale of Raleigh founding the Mermaid Club,
of which Shakspere is said to have been a member,
has not been traced. Is it older than Gifford ? No-
thing is known as to the cause of his death. His
will makes no mention of books, papers, letters,
manuscripts, or copyrights; a fact of the utmost sin-
gularity on the part of such a writer in such an age.
All these mysteries make us look upon the life of
Shakspere as the disgrace of our critical art.
THE " EXAMINER" ON FRANCE'S TRIBUTE TO
JENNER.—France has erected a monument at Bou-
logne to record its gratitude to an Englishman who
saved more lives than all the conquerors celebrated in
history have destroyed. Jenner went to his grave
with no title but the title to world-wide honour,
which has just been so generously accorded by the

nation foremost in civilisation. The progress of the
cosmopolitan sentiment is marked by the hand-
some tribute France renders to the fame of a
foreigner who has done a vast service to mankind.
It has been said that we were first in this enlarge-
ment of brotherhood beyond national distinctions,
in the honours paid to the memory of the gallant
and generous Bellot, but Bellot perished a volunteer
in our service, and the monument at Gr • • with has
not so large a meaning as the monument :v., t; logne.
A French author, in doing justice to ratter
and achievements of the Duke of Wellin: , finely
observes that true greatness breaks down the distinc-
tion of nationalities, and throws open to the whole
human family an interest and pride in the superior
natures. When a character or genius stands on
high for the admiration of the world, the land that
has produced it is the last thought, and almost
as idle as the inquiry into the parish. The great
fames pass into the ownership of the whole human
kind, become part of its wealth in all deserving
honour and emulation. Any detraction would thus
become a sort of robbery of the common stock of
worth, a lessening of what all have an interest in
preserving in full integrity. We hail the monu-
ment to Jenner as earnest of a brotherhood trans-
cending nationalities, and the French, in advance of
us, have taken other opportunities of evincing their
reverence for lights of the world. While we, for
example, give our ships names of barbarous destruc-
tion, they show that Newton is a household word
with them, and give it to one of ,their finest vessels.
By such examples the French must deliver them-
selves of the reproach hitherto attaching to them,
of being the most cockney nation in Europe, like
the Chinese conceiting themselves the inner and
flowery people, ignoring all others, or despising
them as outside barbarians not worth knowing.
There is a beginning of the end of this folly in the
tribute to Jenner. And nothing can more conduce
to a cordial understanding between us than accord-
ing due honour to the great minds of both nations
that have conferred benefits on mankind material
or intellectual.