The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-12-20
THE MORtLTrY or THE sTLGE
A Reply TO the Author OF the New Play at
MnItntk'r.

To THE EDITOR or THE SIR Mr..
J. Steele Mackayr. the authorof Won at Last.
has addressed you "a long letter in response To
my assertion that the moral Of his play is not
good. He chooses to rcarrange my objections
in what he deems the Just order Of their inpor-
lance. scarcely the iairost way Of dealing with
an argument Since reading his communica-
ton have again been 60 see the play. and am
sorryto be confirmed in the opinion that its in
nucnco ne whole is opposed to morality.
SO far as suicide il concerned Mr.. Mackaye
proves the case against himself. He justifles
his hcro's first attempt at sclf-dcstructon be-
cause the motive which prompts it ia pure. be
ing. ne he says one Of total scf-abncgation. In
this his teaching conflicts with that of the Chris
tian religion and Christian morality according
to which the voluntary net Of suicide s terrible
crime against God. irrespective OF the induce
mcnt to commit IT, II needs hut little reflection
to see that an acceptance Of the very different
doctrine OF Mr. Mackayc's play on this subject
would be fraught with the utmost danger.
Again. he SAYS that John Fientings second at
tempt to kill himself il distinctly denounced
through the wife. and SO II is-in words but
this brief and comparatively mild verbal de-
nunciation goes for nothing when. at almost
the very next moment we SOC her throw herself
into the arms Of the would-be suicide and con-
fcss her love.
The truth is that, unless we are ready to dis
card the morality Of the Christian world. there
Is nothing admirable about suicide under any
circumstances Whatever. This play uuquDs-
tion9bly represents one aspect OF 1t ns worthy
the conclusion that its influence in this respect
Ia immoral
however II devoted Ia the bearing Of his So
called comedy-drama upon the relations be-
tween the sexes.
suggested that it would hardly do to call a
play moral whose whole interest turned on the
TACT that the marriage between the hero and tho
heroine WAS not vet onAummatod. The author
defends the prominence given To this rather
delicate relation 10y stating that after the hero
and heroine have become bound by social law
as man and wife. the latter discovers the pro-
iOundcSt moral reasons Tor separation from her
husband. in her horror Of q lOveless mnrriqge.
- To any but the most impure mind" he adds.
II seems 10 me the statement Of this fact Is re-
This last remark sayors Of the familiar saving
that TO the pure all things are pure-a maxim
which Is utterly untrue when applied. as II
usually Is, 10 the Justification Of some form of
indcccncy. \ man does not make a hemp Of
garbage clean by be ing clean himself. The I'M
consummated marriage. which il the subject Of
Won at Last" is so treated n inevitably TO
direct attention TO a feature Of the marriage re-
lation which. although essential. Is one that
most people prefer to veil in a decent obscurty.
That this treatment IL intentional appears from
the interview between jo'n Fleming and his
" wife in namc" about the baby clothes-where
he tells her he wishes he had a bahy-an incl
dent deemed worthy pf special mention on tho
programme. Mr.. Marknyc says he aims To treat
of raj life III society to-day rs thousands know
II and we have this conversation between II
young man and the young maiden he loves rs a
specimen. He calls hie play plea for n nOhlor
love which he thinks should dominate "the
marital relation and the generation oftho race
But l. not the generation Of the race subject
which the stage might rs well let aloneP
Tho really noble imp rsonution Of this hero
inc does much to redeem the drama. for il
distracts attention from the object iouahlc fen-
lures | have mentioned. II does not suffice
however. 20 overcome their influence. Mr.
Macknyc has given ms play which Is both in
terreting and successful. hut II fails 10 embody
the spirit OF morality In which he tells Us It was
written. AN OLD CRITIC.
NEW YORK Dec 10 1871