The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-13 00:00:00

ROYAL DRAMATIC COLLEGE. '

After carefully re-perusing the correspondence
between Mr. Dodd and the provisional committee
of the Royal Dramatic College, we adhere to our
already expressed opinion, that both parties are to
blame. ' Mr. Dodd was too exacting, the committee
too peremptory. Mr. Dodd would have clogged
his grant with conditions, which .he thought him-
self entitled to impose, • but which' the committee .
were disinclined to accept. His tone was offensive
and uncourteous, their secretary's disagreeable and
sarcastic. This gentleman, one would fancy, must
have conceived a particular dislike to Mr. Dodd.
At an early period of the negotiations be tvaitted
him rather sharply ; and at the general meeting. of
subscribers, which yesterday afternoon was held at
the Adelphi Theatre, he stated what was. positively
untrue, when he declared that Mr. Dodd 'had pro-
mised, in the first instance, an unconditional con-
veyance of the land, and afterwards withdrawn his
offer. Mr. Dodd may have put an unwarrantable
construction upon the terms which he attached to
his gift; but that he did attach some terms (and
in so doing he was perfectly justified) is proved be-
yond question by the letters of Mr. Dodd himself,
and of Mr. Macphail, the solicitor to Mr. Dodd.
No one at yesterday's meeting defended Mr. Dodd's
cause; whether through his inability, or hii ne-
glect, to find a champion, or because the sympathies
of the subscribers were altogether anti-Doddite, we
are unable certainly to say. Whatever the reason
may have been the fact is undoubtly to be regretted,
not so much on Mr. Dodd's account, who is old
enough to take care of himself, as because the fair
fame of the chiefs of the histrionic profession, and
of the noble lords, their patrons and supporters,
suffers even from the suspicion of discourtesy.
For our own part we should have abstained from
entering into the discusSion, and have left Mr.
Dodd to his own resources, had he not been vigor-
ously assailed by a portion of the public press
upon a one-sided and incomplete report. If
the friendly style of Mr. Webster had been imi-
tated by the secretary to the committee, tor
if Mr. Webster himself had persevered in the
policy of conciliation which he originally advo-
cated, we still think that all acrimonious feeling
would have subsided ; that the dispute might have
been satisfactorily arranged, and that we should
have been spared the unpleasant disclosures eonse,
quent upon the publication of the correspondence.
Whatever verdict public opinion may pronounce
upon this unfortunate controversy, it is sufficiently
clear that the intended benevolence of the Hoxten
philanthropist has been of signal service to the in-
terests of the Dramatic College. In addition to the
offer of Mr. Moore, already announced, the London
Necropolis Company have communicated to the
committee their desire to place at the disiosal of
the college five acres of ground near Woking. .The
intention is generous enough, but there is scme-
thing sinister in the suggested proximity of the
necropolis and the asylum, of death anu decay
We suspect that aged and worn-out actors would
prefer a retreat at Gerrard's-cross, in a spot hal-
lowed by venerable associations, where the poet
Gray was born and his memory is still cherished.
The termination of Mr. Cullenford's report would,
but for the unseemly allusion to Mr. Dodd, have
afforded us peculiar pleasure. We are thereby
informed that, besides the promises of generous
benefactors to build several of the almshouses, a
sum of noarly £3,000 has been subscribed, and
donations to the amount of £250 per annum volun-
teered in aid of the college funds.
Surely such unstinted liberality should have con-
vinced Mr. Creswick that in favour of the Drama
no " standing protest" was needed
"against igno-
ranee, prejudice, and bigotry." Some persons there
may be who entertain a conscientious objection to
visiting theatres. • But we can enjoy a play--we
can weep with Lear, laugh at Dogberry, and grow
melancholy with Jaques, without imputing either
prejudice or bigotry to those who from honourablei
s aiisss
i on.
Actors and actresses are expo:ecl, perhaps, t
scruples deny themselves this oreoexreoalatii.tmon.oporlinot
The
time has gone for stage-players t
the gibes and scorn of society. g
only a recognised but an
honouredrrlle poefo
d
to more formidable temptations than lawyers,
or tradespeople; and some unhappily
fall victims to the seductions by which they are
surrounded. But no one can possibly deny that
hdavviinngdicated the reputation of
undergone the ordeal
those player; who lead virtuous lives are all the
theNllll.iotrheos turategsflepi.enectehlitangfio:quanld. be invidious to mention
names, but there are *so many living examples of
players,. as much esteemed by the educated classes
as they are admired by the vulgar, that to talk of
one clergyman's offer of five acres of land to a
dramatic institution as a " standing protest against
ignorance and bigotry" looks very like an insult to
the giver's cloth. The truth is, that the morality of
the age, as manifested by the improvement oC.• all
places of popular entertainment, including theatres,
has marvellously advanced within the .last 20 or
even 15 years. The national taste haa_,been paria
fled and. refined ; and, as a natural consequence,
those who cater for the amusement of the-.public
have ceased to pander to the wants of the gross and
vicious few, since the virtuous many have rewarded
their honest efforts. But even a young man can
remember when harlots habitually attended the
saloons of theatres, and when no respectable person
could sit for half an hour in any music hall in
London where. the entrance fee was less than
halfsa-crown.-2lforning Herald.