The Sun.
London, England, 1821-08-01 00:00:00

FOR THE SUN.

ON THE DRAMA.
---- In vitium libertas excidit_ et vim
Dignam LEGE regi.-11on. De Arte lon.

Ma. Eorron—The flattering notice which you
were pleased to take of my remarks on the present state of our
Theatres did not tempt me immediately to resume the subject,
because I etill entertained the hope which I had therein ex-
pressed, that some abler pen than mine would yet do it justice:
Of that hope I have been disappointed ; and undeserving as any
thing which I can offer may be of the notice of your Correspon-
dents, the subject itself is far from being so. The most import-
ant interests of British taste and British literature are involved
in it ; and those who feel any regard for the welfare of either,
will do well to give it their serious attention. Regretting, then,
sincerely as I do, that no other of your Correspondents has
taken up this subject, and perfectly aware of the total ineffi-
ciency of my own unassisted efforts, I will just offer a few ob.
servations more and have done. The public may care little
enough for the opinions of a retired and obscure individual ;
yet to him it will afford no small satisfaction to feel that his pro-
test has been entered against the miserable degradation of his
Country's Drama, and that his exertions, however puny, have
yet been put forth against the overwhelming torrent which bids
fair to tear away this noble page from the volume of our na-
tional literature.
Since the publication of my last letter, the opinion which I
there avowed has been but too abundantly confirmed, namely,
that the system acted on by our great theatres was pursuing our
drama to its annihilation. I could not have conceived it pos-
sible, rapid as was evidently the progress of this destructive
system, that in a fortnight from the date of that letter, PRIZF:-
FIGHTERS WOULD HAVE EXIIIBITED SPARRING MATCHES
ON THE BOARDS OF DRITRY-LANE! Such, Sir, however, is
the disgraceful fact ! On this circumstance indignation has ex-
torted some remarks from a few respectable London prints ;
but still nothing has been started in the way of remedy to so
gross and palpable an evil. Accident, however, has done
something towards it, as a fall will sometimes set a dislocated
limb. Kean has returned ( just in time, perhaps, to prevent his
place from being occupied by the bcinassus), and this is stall-
dent to insure to us (for a few nights in the weak, at least) the
representation of the legitimate drama. The cause of the
drama, then, which was fast declining, has made one desperiste
rally ; and it becomes the duty of all its well wishers to suport
manfully this its last charge on the hitherto victorious ranks
of folly. But the dramatic muse will in vain gain the day, if
her empire is still open to invasion; it is not enough to repel
the enemy ; effectual means must be taken to prevent her from
again profaning the sacred citadel.
These means, I shall, Sir, in a few words, endeavour to sug-
gest. I repeat, that I greatly regret that none of your abler
correspondents have thrown out any hints for the attainment of
this great object ; but, as this has not been done, I shall make
the attempt myself. It is a curious fact, that although the
minor theatres are rigourously prohibited from the representa-
tion of plays, the Theatres Royal are not under similar restric-
tions with regard to " romances," " melodramas," &c. &c ,
and the reason of this is evident ; it never entered into the con-
ception of the legislature that establishments so highly privi-
leged as are the Theatres Royal, • would ever intrude on the
rights of inferior concerns, especially when such intrusion would
be an act of self-debasement, and disgust every true friend of
the purposes for which they were founded. But, impossible as
this might seem to the Governments which licensed our Theatres
Royal, experience has demonstrated its feasibility; and al-
though such an abuse might not then have been contemplated,
and consequently, no provision made against it, now that it has
actually taken place, it is time to legislate for its removal. A
very concise method, therefore, of restoring the national drama
to its proper dignity, would, as it appears to me, be to prohibit
the performance of all dramatic representation whatever, in the
place of plays, on the boards of our Theatres Royal. Let them
give what entertainments they will (provided they be dramatic}
after the play ; but let a play be a necessary and the principal
constituent of the evening's amusement. This regulation
Would, moreover, be an obvious act of justice to the managers
of the minor theatres, whose province is most shamefully in-
vaded, while they are not allowed the most partial retaliation.
I am not insensible that this plan might be open to some ob-
jections ; what they might all be, the natural limits of an article
of this kind would not allow me to consider, much less to
refute them ; two, however, I will mention, as the most ob-
vious, which, I think, are capable of an easy confutation. rt
may be said that a measure like that which I have suggested
would be harsh and oppressive, as it would go to curtail those
privileges'which the managers of the theatres supposed guaran-
teed to them at the time when they embarked their property in
their respective concerns. It might also be said that the
theatres would suffer from the representation of the regular
drama, by the diminution of the audience. To the first of
these objections I reply, that the managers are already VIR-
TUALLY prohibited from exhibiting any thing but the regular
drama, though they do not incur any legal penalty for violating
this prohibition ; as no person can conceive that it was ever con-
templated by the legislature that the conductors of these estab-
lishments should encroach on the province of the minor
theatres. I know of no law which restricts the manager of a
theatre royal from making a picture gallery of his house, yet
we should be somewhat surprised at hearing such a person
gravely urge that he had found this appropriation of it more
PROFITABLE than its regular object, and had therefore re-
tained it. But, absurd as such a plea would be, it would be
scarcely more so than that which is contained in the first of
these objections. • If the managers of the theatres royal think
they have any more RIGHT to convert their houses into " the
Royal Circus," or the " Royal Coburg," than into the " Exhi-
bition of the Royal Academy," they are much deceived ; there
is no law against either; but common propriety is as mucl
against one as the other.

In replying to this first objection, I feel that I have also con-
futed the second. The falling off of the audience can never be
an excuse for the substitution of an entertainment wholly alien
from the purposes for which a Theatre Royal was designed.—
But it may be well to pursue the grounds of this objection far-
ther. The Manager may tell us, that he regrets extremely the
national taste, but that he must necessarily be ruined if he did
not minister to its depravity. Admitting the national taste, or,
more properly, the taste of the mixed population of the Metro-
polis, to be, in this respect, very bad, who, it may fairly be
asked, FIRST exiled the legitimate drama from the national
boards, and introduced the trash which now disgraces them,
the people, or the Managers ? The Managers did it, with the
hope of more crowded houses ; and tha expectation succeeded.
But do they tell us that they actually LOST, when Shakspeare
held the place now occupied by French " romances," which the
FRENCH TIIEATRE ROYAL would not represent ? If they
did not, they were BOUND to continue the regular Drama; if
they did, application should have been made to Government.—
I have before alluded to that noble national Theatre, the
THEATRE FRANCAIS, supported by the French Government,