The Sun.
London, England, 1849-11-21 00:00:00

elteuina gP=

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1849.

Actors, according to that courtly expression which
has become proverbial, are designated her MAJESTY'S
servants. Assuredly they might yet more truthfully
—and we say this without any question whatever of
their loyalty—be termed also the public benefactors.
For, of all classes of the community, theirs is the one
which dedicates more particularly its whole energies
to the sentiment, the sensibility, and the intellectual
entertainment of the multitude. To them we are in
a special manner indebted for those touching and
graceful impersonations which effect more than ser-
mons or homilies in softening the moral and elevating
the mental character. With them, although unknown
to ourselves personally, we acquire an earnest and
familiar friendship—associated as they are with our
joys and sorrows, our tears and our laughter. They
minister at the altar of our hearts, in the shrine of our
c msciences, and open to us those beautiful regions of
illusion which to the less imaginative would be other-
wise inaccessible. It may be, it has been, and unhappily
comes to pass even now-a-days, but too frequently,
that while conducing to our own amusement, they
themselves ate masking some secret grief with their
smiles, are shrouding some poignant suffering with
n‘i affectation of merriment, and, as has been recog-
'zAl in one or two cases which have accidentally
come before the public knowledge, are throwing the

,use into convulsions when their hearts are all but
breaking. Our object at present is not to dilate upon
these extreme casualties in the histrionic profession ;
it is to draw attention more particularly to the inva-
riable assiduity with which the members of that
profession sacrifice their own comfort and their
noblest faculties for the advantage of the popu-
lation. Every evening, at the very period
when most men and women are disposed to
rest from the diurnal toils of existence--their
labours may be said to begin in earnest. Not, how-
ever, that it must be supposed for an instant that the
previous portions of the day have remained for them
unoccupied. What with rehearsals, with studying
their parts, and with the other duties of preparation,
the morning and the afternoon glide away only to
bring them the time of their principal occupation.
'Thus, for the majority, the chief rewards of a career
—more than any other precarious—is the applause
which nourishes them with an enervating excitement.

Latterly it has become notorious that the theatrical
profession—that portion of it at least which is
devoted to what is vulgarly called the legitimate
drama—has met with no encouragement adequate to its
proper maintenance. A change in the popular taste, a
preference for the more artificial entertainments, for
the ornate beauties of the " opera," and the gorgeous
appliances of mere " spectacle," has led, as every one
knows, to the partial dethronement of the great kings
of our dramatic literature. A country which can
boast of a MASSINGER and a WYCHERLET, a FAR-
QUHAR, a JOHNSON, a FLETCHER, a BEAUMONT, an
OTWAY, a CONGREVE, and a SHERIDAN, One, more-
over, which glories in the possession of that wonder-
ful man whose humble birth place has been for more
than three centuries the objeot of reverential pilgrim-
age—can yet find a difficulty in supporting one of
those great establishments in which their master-
pieces were formerly represented by the genius of a
KEAN or a GARRICK, an O'NEIL or a SIDDONS, a
COOKE or a KRMBLE. To say in extenuation of this
evidence of popular degeneracy that the decay of the
drama, of the legitimate drama, is attributable to
want of histrionic ability, is to place cause and effect
in their inverse positions; while, at the same time, it
argues but a poor faculty for the appreciation of those
indisputable talents, and, in one or two instances, of
that unquestionable genius which still continue to
adorn the stage and to impart a lustre to it even at a
period regarded by some as preliminary to its dissolu-
tion. One circumstance in the matter under argu-
ment i 3, to ourselves, of all others the most incontro-
vertible; namely, that histrionic abilities are
fostered and even created by a popular
appetite for dramatic representations, more than
that a passion for the stage is produced in the
public mind by the appearance of distinguished
=members of the profession. Of this the records of the
drama afford surely sufficient testimony. It was in
consequence of the popularity of our legitimate
theatres during the last generation that at length a
body of actors were assembled together more admi-
rable in their several departments, when regarded
collectively, than any of their predecessors. At that
tim9, when the stage had gradually ascended from its
nadir to its zenith, the principal characters in a tragedy
or a comedy were not only impersonated by actors and
actresses of resplendent ability, but even the subordi-
nate characters were represented by individuals who,
in their different walks, were justly regarded as
inimitable. While in the performance of the great
woi ks of SnAksrEnE, Weil() for example, was realised
in the form of that extraordinary genius whose acting
was of sufficient intensity to throw Lord BYRON into
a tit, and to excite the impassioned enthusiasm of
COIARIDGE—CaIiban, in all his miraculous monstro-
sity, was witnessed in the person of EMERY, Fluellen
in all his Cymrian stupidity, in that of BLANCHARD,
Polonius, the blending of sage and antic, in that of

IquNDEN, Mercutio in CUABLES KEMBLE, Gratiano
in FARLEY, Launcelot in LisTax, and Prospero in
YOUNG. Even the minor parts in an interlude, or
the mere bystanders as it were in a farce, were fill_ d

up by actors who in another age would each have
been some " bright particular star," instead of being
an almost unnoticed burr of light in a sort of
nebulous constellation. Such were the effects of
popular regard upon:the cultivation of the drama as a
distinguished and intellectual profession. Yet, while
remembering the number and variety of the public
favourites in those palmy days of the histrionic art, it
would be an absurdity to speak no w.a days of the
drama as of a profession so far decayed as to be
devoid of talent of a very superior description. Ex-
perience, on the contrary, assures us that, considering
the little support, comparatively speaking, which is
given to our legitimate theatres, they .are rich in
those diversified abilities which are found requisite in
the performance of either comedy or tragedy. Nor
are the many brilliant actors and actresses of our own
generation, now on the boards of the principal
houses in the metropolis, the only powerful induce-
ments to the encouragement of their profession ;
there are, moreover, still visibly connected with the
theatres of London (either public or private) some of
those most felicitous performers whose genius for
the stage have long been the objects of
deserved admiration.: Not to enumerate the surviving
actors of the previous generation, such for instance as
FARREN and HARLEY, it will be sufficient to refer as
examples to two actresses of very eminent reputation,
whose powers are still preserved in a kind of peren-
nial excellence, Mrs. GLOVER and Miss KELLY. To
the latter we have unfortunately occasion to allude in
that language of condolence to which she is entitled
out of consideration for her pecuniary misfortunes.
A. letter, addressed by Miss KELLY to one of our
mornineontemporaries, will be found in another part
of this evening's impression ; and we doubt not that it
will be perused with that respectful attention always
due to unmerited calamities. The appeal made by this
gifted lady requires no enforcement from the pen of
the journalist among those whose familiarity with
her career has: enabled them to appreciate the purity
of her reputation. With others it may be different ;
and to them we would more particularly direct those
hopes which we cannot but entertain, that after a life
of toil, anxiety, and consistent perseverance, the
woman whose very profession has elicited so many
proofs of the exquisite sensibility of her most womanly
temperament, the woman with whom so many have
wept and laughed almost at a breath, and whose
union of heart and intellect has not only amused but
also ameliorated the dispositions of her auditors,
should not be abandoned in a day of necessity to the
miseries accruing from an unlucky speculation, and to
the still greater miseries flowing from a conviction that
no spark of friendship has been kindled among the
crowd by the light of that intellect and the warmth
of that sensibility in the evidences of which they have
so often exulted.

The public attention has already been strongly
directed to the symptoms of disunion and insubordi-
nation manifested in the Protectionist camp. The
orators who undertake the task of enlivening the
bucolic fancy at the various meetings of the party no
longer waste their eloquence or their indignation on
the Free traders. Their own recognised leader, the
only member of the popular branch of the Legislature
in any degree qualified ,to guide their councils and
direct their efforts, is the principal object of their
abuse. The ♦ituperation that was formerly lavished
on Mr. COBDEN is transferred to Mr. DISRAELI ;
and as a greater degree of virulence is always excited
in a family quarrel than in one among strangers, the
reproaches and censures are more earnest and hearty
than those bestowed upon the Free• traders during the
late struggle. The various suggestions thrown out
by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire since the
prorogation of Parliament have in turn been attacked
with the most vigorous determination. The propo-
sitions, which it was fondly hoPed would have been
received with the warmest commendation, and served
as rallying points for the defeated troops, have been
despised, repudiated, and even ridiculed. " Protection,"
and nothing but " protection," will satisfy the agri-
cultural taste. The bitter pill cannot even be gilded,
it must be swallowed in all its naked enormity. All

the protestations of Mr. DISRAELI, with respect to
his unflinching allegiance to the principle, and his fixed
determination to labour for itsultimate restoration, are
not sufficient to appease the malcontents, or to restore
order or discipline. He has admitted the impractica-
bility of any immediate effort in that direction,
and he has even ventured to bring forward
objects as worthy of attainment, and he is
therefore no longer worthy to lead his unruly co-

horts. Sir GEORGE ROBINSON, Lord BRAYBROOKE,
and a host of others, had already raised the standard
of rebellion. But it was reserved for the meeting at
Bromley, on Friday last, to exhibit in the clearest light
the heterogeneous elements of which the so-called
party is composed, and its utter disunion and want of
coherence. We have it on the highest authority that
" a house or a kingdom divided against itself cannot
stand." What, then, can be expected or hoped for
from the once formidable Protectionists ?

On that day the agriculturists assembled in goodly
numbers in the fair county of Kent. Not a town or
village in the " garden of England" was unrepresented.
The " eccentric Earl who believed in CASPER
UAUSER, but who would not believe in Mr.
DISRAELI," filled the chair. Mr. G. F. YOUNG, the
unflinching champion of the navigation-laws, and
Mr. Memiss attended on the invitation of the com-
mittee as a deputation from " The National Associa-
tion for the Protection of British Industry and
Capital," and many a stalwart yeoman was prepared
to uplift his voice, and cheer with the utmost strength
of his lungs the anxious orators. From such an
assembly much might have been expected. It was
intended as an exhibition of strength—a demonstra-
tion that, although " worsted" they were not alto-
gether vanquished ; but that by unanimity and
energy the contest might yet be prolonged, and fair
terms eventually obtained from their antagonists.
But, alas ! the vanity of human hopes and human
wishes, a stronger illustration could not have been

afforded of their complete and irretrievable discom•
fiture, and of the disorganization that prevailed in
their ranks. It proved at least that nothing is to be

dreaded from the exertions of their mutinous and
badly disciplined forces.
The Noble Chairman opened the proceedings in
the gloomy strain so agreeable to the agricultural
taste. He declared that " their future prospects were
far worse than their present situation, and that unless

speedily and effectually remedied the most calamitous
consequences must be expected, and that bankruptcy
and beggary would extend throughout the length and
breadth of this once happy and prosperous, but now
ill-governed and ill-fated country." After this satis-
factory announcement, he cautioned his auditors
against the folly of attempting to mend their position
by "high farming," or raising a greater quantity of
produce from their lands, and clearly pointed out the
calamitous results that must necessarily follow
from a sixfold increase of crops. " Take the case
(said the Noble Earl) of a labOurer whose family
required six loaves, but who was unfortunately able
to buy but five. If the price were reduced from
sixpence to one penny the loaf, of course he would
provide himself with six loaves, but would be pur-
chase six times six, or thirty-six loaves ? Why, his
family could not eat it, if they had it, and the labourer
would purchase other articles of provision useful or
necessary to him. The consumption would not be
commensurate with the production !!!" After thus ex.
citing the terror of his audience at the bare possibi-
lity of so deplorable a catastrophe as that the labourer
should be enabled to obtain a sufficient num-
ber of loaves for his family, and even to
purchase " other articles of provision useful
or necessary to him " a possibility which
naturally produced a feeling of horror in the
assemblage—his Lordship made a furious onslaught on
their recreant general. The equalization of the land-
tax, the first and most equitable suggestion to the
meeting at Aylesbury, provoked Lis utmost
wrath. lie would not be contented with
the virtual abandonment of that fair and
reasonable proposition. " There was no mistake, there
could be no mistake," and Earl STANHOPE was re-
solved that " there should be no mistake." He said,
" He knew it had been said by the. Honourable Gen-
tleman's friends that his first speech on this subject
was misrepresented in the newspapers, but they all
knew the fidelity and-accuracy with which the gen-
tlemen of the London press discharged their very la-
borious duties. As in other cases, there would be an
occasional error; there might sometimes and necessa-
rily be omissions, but did anybody ever hear of a re.