The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-11-25 00:00:00

THEATRICALS.

More interest than the occasion would justify was at-
tached to the revival of King John last night at Covent
Garden. As a drama it is one of the worst of SIIIIIMARR'S
and although the poetry is occasionally not inferior to his
jest efforts, the true vein is very scanty. There are other
objections to the play. The mutat- biography before and
after the birth, of .Falconbridge, is an insult to modern
taste; and although Mr. KEssaLa plays the character better
than any body else might do, we candidly tell him that we
bad moth rather he played it so ill as not to be suffered
to play at all, than that so many females should be
unnecessarily put to the blush, by the bold blustering man-
ner of his reiteration of the frailties of his mother.
The greater part of his earlier speeches are sheer
Ruprudent outrages of every sense of delicacy. SUAKI!.
'runts was the original sinoer, it is true; and this may
plead much for Mr. C. liemitbs; but nothing for the tole-
ration of the audience. lithe part of Falconbridge were
In ether respects worth soy thing, these excresceoces,might
be retrenched ; and Mr. 11811131.1 would doubtless subject
them to the pruning hook; bat take away what is objec-
tionable and nothing worthy of an actor's notice is left.—
The character of Kin,' John, himself, is not worth the
representation. Cruel without courage, ambition without
resolution—an arrant boaster at one period, and a coward
supplicant another—now blusteriag against the Pope, and
then kneeling at the feat of the Pope's legate, he never
obtains any place in our esteem. Nor did Mr. YOUNG do any
thing for the royal imbecile. His portrait of him was bard,
and unequal. Little can be made of the part ; and what
Prom Kintnur did for it, was ellected by playing himself,
an I not the character either of the poet or historian....
AiR. MAC2EADY is the best representative of King John
that is left; but we never wish to see him in the character
_ _

again. Mrs. BARTLEY played Constance in a most boisterous
manner. We cannot speak in censure of this Lady's acting, I
withast great regret ; for we remember to have owed her I
the greatest pleasure, whoa she was no tritling rival to the
h-roine of the tragic muia, Mrs. SIDDOSS herself. But,
without the' assistance of the bills, we should nut have
sseognised Mrs. BAIL melt as the Miss SMITH of our earlier
days. She seems to have lost all modulation of her voice.—
Then Mrs. PEARCE was the Lady Faleonbridge. Per-
haps the m magement might not be able to find another
is wLo 'could be subjected to the tenets of an ungracious
son ; and therefore cecessity may plead the excise.
There are many other matters which might be noticed in
disparagement of this tiresome play;—and indeed there
is little of which we can speak well, except the limbed of
Mr. Liam ET r, which was played with" good emphasis and
discretion;" bu• we are satisfied that as notating but respect
Tor SHAIVIPEAR'S name could tolerate its representation,
that respect will lee shown in so unprofitable an attendance,
that sot eren the new habiliments with which Mr. nes-
eat has very meritoriously furnished the performers, will he
able to att act sufficient audiences. The costume is certainly
elegant, and appropriate; and although we are not of the
class of those antiquarians who would not welcome CA%An,
Ulm had a fold too many, or 'too few in his tunic, we
allow there is great merit in being as exact in such affairs
u possible.
Timonr the Tartar followed, with ;neat eclat. There
is sufficient plot in the story to enable its to sit ont the
embellishments, without being tired of tlv.s. show. In this
respect, it is superior to the Cataract of Me Ganges; but
is magnificence the Cataract has certainly the advantage.
The two last scenes of the respective pieces will bear no
comparison with each other. Drury Lane has decidedly
the advantage; although the horses at Covent Garden ex-
hibit More antics.