Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1883-09-13
tn. RLlxARErmAN PLAYERS.

In the reign Of Elizabeth stage play
err we're feeling their way to become q
distinct profession. The Common
Council Of London, in reply to the pat
ronaRe and introduction which the royal
patent Of 1874 insured to Burbadee's
(sic) company "as we'll within our Cyty
of London and liberties of the same as
within other cyties," urge 6rst that con.
slant topic which vas the most pre-
sentable argument against the stage,
viz, tho danger Of plague contaeion
thence arising. They then proceed to
hold that heretofore players lad not
made their living BY their art, but ''ussd
other honest and lawful artes," and
then learned some ''intsrludes'' for ex-
ira gain lin vacant time of recreation"
This shows that new profession was
setting itself up, and that the fact was
viewed with suspicious jealousy by civic
authority. The whole calling Of an ac-
tor had hitherto been q mere 'inter-
Jude" in the Rraver affairs Of life. It
was now to be asubstantive calling, and
the art must maintain the artist.
The deeper cause of antipathy
was tho growth of Puritanio feeling
which had made it, way largely among
municipal bodies, and to which the stat
ute of 1874 was no doubt traceable. At
Leicester, in 1872, Lord Woroester's
players defied tho Mayor, and performed
in spite of him, but had to submit and
apologize. At Banbury. where Puritan
ism Was rampant In 1858, the Mayor and
Justices lodged a company of players a.
wandering rogues," (sic) in the CON-
mon Jail; although bearing q royal pat
emit and the commission Of the master
of the Revels." This was when the tide
Of Puritanio feeling had well nigh reach
cd its height, but II serves TO illustrate
the tendency all along. Middle class
responsibility being thus largely adverse
to them. the players were forced back
on the protection Of the Grown and the
mobiles on the one hand, and on the fav-
or of the lower Glasses on the other.
There was indeed much to be said on
the side Of civic authority. The players
were most In request at seasons of fes-
tivity when license most prevailed. The
feeble powers of police at the period
found It easier to prohibit the inoent-
ives to disorder than to keep them with
10 due limits. The defective sanitary
arrangements and ignorance of the
means TO prevent or combat
oontaRion, caused an alarm, a.
times went, from which London
and the older popular oenters were
hardly eyer entirely free. Thus the
Privy Council propose O. their limit the
number Of hfty deaths per week by
plague - that within which plays
should be permitted (l57l-6) In London,
and James l., In q patent TO the Black
fTiars House, forbade performances
when such deaths were over forty Dor
week. Between Plague and Lord Cham
berlaiu. Justice Shallow and Constable
Doeeerry, the players must have had q
bad time Of Il Bssidss this argument,
which, - unanswerabls, leads their file
Of objections, the Common Council, in
their order for the city Of London, 1875,
alleQe the corruption Of youth with in
eontinonee,n the wasting time and
thrift" the provoking Of the wrath Of
God, the ground Of all plaques" the
Withdrawing Of the people from the re-
sort TO public prayer" and add that
plays were daily cried ont aaainst BY
all preacher And still more outspo-
kenly, in their previous correspondence
with the Pyivy Council, they ureo 'how
uneomsly Il h for youth 70 runns
eereight from prayer 10 paayea, from
Gods service TO the devslrs, and that
ITO play In PLACE fsic time u TO incrsass
the pla9s b. infection; to play out Of
PLACE time 10 70 draw the PLACE by Of
fsndiuee Of God upon occasion Of such
playes. Rsvi<so.