Los Angeles herald., 1892-12-12


Lawrence Barrett, genial gentleman
and erudite scholar that he was, dined
at my house in Portland eight years ago.
A gentleman present asked him whom
he considered the greatest of American
actors.
ut lies between three men," said Mr..
Barrett, land those three are Edwin
Forrest, Edwin Booth and William
RUFUS Blake"
The gentleman's under jaw dropped
as he gasped out:
"And who was Mr.. Blake?"
Good Lord, Tom, what hasn't he
missed ?" was all that poor Barrett could
eav.
1t is question open to dispute wheth-
er any English speaking actor ever
equalled Blake In certain class of parts
which he had made peculiarly his own.
DR.. Cantwell, in the Hypocrite, was one
OF these, and Old Rapid, in Cure for
the Heartache, was another. But his
jesse Rural, in Old Heads aud Young
Hearts, was as clean-cut bit of acting
as Burton's Captain Cutie or Tyrone
Powers Teddy the Tiler. No one who
ever witnessed his impersonation OF the
country ceigymsn could we'll forget it.
1t was just as far ahead of Mr.. Stod.
dard's Jacob Fletcher as that cameo is
ahead of everything else in the same
line.
x*%
The reason why Barrett placed For
rest ahead of Booth was, as he said, be.
cause Forrest had educated the American
people up to that high standard of
dramatic art of which Mr. Booth has
reaped the benefit. The best proof of
this lies in the fact that Mr.. Forrest
played quite as many nights as Mr..
Booth and never made one quarter of
Booths money, for Continued Mr.. Bar
rett) you must remember that Mr.. Booth
is now worth three-fourths of million,
after having sunk two other fortunes
nearly as large in unsuccessful specula-
Mr.. Forrest was specially great, parts
which MIR. Booth never attempted
These were the Roman characters of
Shakespeare. such as Brutus, Coriola-
mus and the like, parts in which Mr.
Forrest excelled as much as Booth
did in Hamlet or Macbeth. The
only ground upon which there was room
for comparison between these two great
actors was in their respective renditions
OF Lear, Richard III and Richelieu.
In the latter character Barrett fell but
little below either of the two great act
Ors l have named. To man who had
first seen Forrest and Booth in the
beretta and cassock of the mighty war
rior priest, Barrett was revelation
not that he for once equalled Forrest in
dramatic intensity or Booth in that sim
uous grace with which Booth invested
every character he essayed. But to his
credit it must be said that his concep-
tion OF the great Armand Duplessis
was something of unmistakable origin
ality. There was half military swsg-
ger under the priestly garb, as if the
crafty prelate longed once more for the
shout and smoke of the battle fields
whose far-of light now flashed from his
cavernous eyes. Instead Of the angry
leonine roar in which Forrest used to
give the great malediction scene, Barrett
mixed in the craft of the serpent and
almost hissed out his defiance OF Bara-
das in the liz es:
"Aye, and is it 60? Then wakes the
power that, in the age OF iron, BURT
forth to curb the great and raise the
low. Mark me well, where she stands !
About her form l draw the solemn
circle OF our holy church. Dare but to
set loot therein and on thy head, yea,
tho 1T wore crown, launch the curse
of Rome !"
x*x
AS to Booths greatest effort, actors
and critics are alike divided. The latter
praise his Hamlet as being the one in
comparable portrait Of "the melancholy
Dane," but there are few old play
goers who cannot very we'll forget Mac
ready and Charles Fechter. My idea of
Booth is the actors' idea, that is to say,
the p,epon derance of the dramatic pro-
fession, who incline to the belief that
his Iago is Mr. Booths masterpiece.
OF course his Italian face (for there was,
80 years ago, a marked resemblance be-
tween him and the portraits of Napoleon
Bonapsrte in the days of the First Con-
sulate) contributed largely to that re-
suit. have seen many lagos and
among them Mr.. Brooke, whom I firmly