, 1874-05-31

He il q good fellow, apends DIS money llecIy,
and ought to be remembered. IL an
actor, he may not amount to more
tisn enper He may be uliHsrable
player. This does not matter. He has
q hundred friends who like to help him out, see
ths s .yo houssp Or
mere tickets printed for him, with which they
arm themselves, ami worry everybody they meet
to purchase a ticket to Mr.. Smiths benefit. ny
diut Of much strength OF argument that Mr.
o ceat in the world (thcy do not say that it is
owing to his own ridiculous improvidence),
they make out that be ought to Lave rous-
ing benefit. They write up a bogus cor
ager. aud tho beneficiary, and secure
its insertion in daily paper. Unlike certain
rigid Scotch presbytoriau. they would rather SEQ
their unrneB in print than anywhere else, and
tho prospect of so glorious q reward for their
autographs has no little potency in obtaining
names to the petition. Mr.. Smith has q full
house. expresses hiH hearty acknowledgment OF
tho honor thus conferred upon him, and feels
deeply grateful that his modest Efforts to plouse
and edify thcatro-goers anu patrons OF art N
Chicago have not been altogether unappreclated,
THE TRUTH.
This is very shabby. It Is not true. a1r.
Smiths efforts to please have not been conscl-
entious, BY auy nieaus. Alr. smith became an
actor just as Mr.. Jones became tinker. anu his
Efforts to please we're never as sincere or earnest
al Mr.. Jones'. Why should not tho public get up
benefit for tho tinker, or the dnstman, or the
butcher or the wretch who tends Madison street
bridge? THIS pcddling OF tickets, this entorc-
ing Of an unworthy caim upon c-edulous pub
lic Ia disgusting from any standpoint II we
are to haye benefits, lot them be decently con-
Quoted, aud be given to persons whose protes-
eioual merits have won higher popularity than
per-room sociability.
And. lest this present article should seem to
bear iuyid1ously upon IN actor vino is to have q
benefit ths wook, ne feel called upon
to rescue him from any such vulgar
imputntion, His popularity rests upon hls dra-
matte merits entirely upart from his social stand
ing, and re feel assured that in condemnlng
tho repnlsive practice u ticket-peddling ne shall
not tread upon his cornn, nor lnjuro his PROS
pects. He has never yet been before the public
"a beneficiary in hin two years stay III Chicago.
and there has been no low trickery attempted to
secure him good house. And as tho benefit is
rendered BY his brothers and sisters OF the pro-
fession, without aid or suggestion from others,
without voluminous correspondence OF purely
apocryphal character, bis claims stand higher
than those of any artist that has been before the
public thia 1eason. This we add cordially and in
pasentheHls.
CHARITY benefits.
With reenrd to benefits for INDECENT and de-
serving porbons, and charitable institutions,
there Is q word to bo said on tho other side Of
the question. Tho actor ID the medium OF ex-
tortinR reluctant contributions from people who
would give nothing "4tAou@ ou e4A1faAoIt. ~
seems to us the more despicsble phase Of the
benefit system than tho othor. The peraon who
gains the credit for charitable sentiments is the
iuan who proposes tho benefits; the people who
contribute. to the beceht do so malnly to
see an unusually interesting performance
Tho whole theory OF charity beue-
its is basod upon the idea Of giving
the contributors the worth OF their money III the
play. This is not charity; 1t is bargain total
~ outside OF charity. Ihe charity must como
in somewhere, aud the only persons who gave
anythiue are the acto1e. The, give their time
and their labor; they receive no equivalent for
it. and bsyoud casual expression OF thanks.
expect nothing. Nowadays the p.sblio has como
to regard actors III tho ever-rcady Instruments
for squeezing money from those who Will not
Weld It without pressure. Charlotte CuHh1nau's =
letter to the d,amatic critic OF the " Washington
Chronicle, in roply to that gentlenan's request
to her to give benefit performance I'll the Cap
ital in aid Of some charity, was copied 1uto
uoarly every paper in the country IS expressing
a feeling that had long been entertained By
thinking porsons. It Ii cheap, detestable
contributions. The test OF true charity would
bo to act the price for admission to such = bene-
fit; high above the ordinary ratio, and pay the
actors for their trouble. II this is not done, tho
public fully deserves to be bored and pestored to
contribute its dollar to any actors benefit. II
Fendess 5o SnlKRefi suey In
iuBtico let the u1charitabe- or, If 1t prefers to
bo 60 called, the charitable, public support the
actor in precisely the same way. II one Is
1oIc OF Earba1ism, the other is O relic Of that
sttotal dcprarity" about WHICH the Chicago Pres
bytery had 40 much to say OF late.