The Brunswick times. [volume] (Brunswick, Ga.) 188?-1900, 1897-04-11

Cue real IrOlC, Which could not be OBJ
tanned at that time-February. He in
sisted that he could not eat the sweets.
August Belmont had fine dollhouse on
Long Island, and he came to the rescue.
His gardener sent me about ten of the
precious berries. These were mixed in
with the bogus ones, one each night,
and Mr.. Booth was satisfied.
Booths theater opened Feb. 3, 1869,
and ceased to exist as place of amuse-
ment April 80, 1883. Between these
dates the idol of the American stage
had demonstrated, at an expense of hun
dreds Of thousands of dollars, that New
York would not support house devoted
to elaborate productions of the best and
most serious forms of the drama The
failure had great and depressing effect
upon his naturally hopeful nature, and
most men would have been soured. But
he took it philosophically and used to
aver that he had simply made his ex-
pertinent few years too soon and that
the people were all right, or would be
in time.
Barrett's Genius.
Lawrence Barrett's perception in dis
covering the merit of a suggestion made
by business friend that he and Booth
in joint starring tour would coin
money enabled the latter to recoup his
wasted fortune. So that at the time of
his death he left an estate valued, l
think, at something over 5000, 900. But
had it not been for that fortunate stroke
l fear that there would have been very
little for his heirs to divide. Booth is
gone. The theater which should have
been monument to his name and fame
is now bonnet and ribbon emporium,
and few people who pass the spot daily
know that it was there that the most
ambitious undertaking ever attempted
in the dramatic world in this country
was born-and died.
Speaking of this theater and Law
renee Barrett in almost the same breath
recalls to mind the pet scheme of this
actor, who will probably never be given
the exact place which is his due in the
American theatrical world. Not that I
wish to disparage Mr.. Barrett's abilities
in the slightest, but because of the un-
evenness Of his work in different roles
Barrett was either considered a great
performer or very poor one. There
was no middle ground on which his adj
mirers and detractors ever seemed to be
able to meet. He was either liked very
much, Or not at all.
Barrett was one of the most interest
TtCr anH T,o0111ior fho A ~
stage has ever known. An almost uner-
ring critic of the ability of others, he
was unable to gauge his own powers
with any degree of accuracy. This short
coming it was which caused SO many
failures. Barrett's career was a long
and honorable one, but there are very
few persons outside of those connected
with the stage who know what wide
scope he gave himself in the selection
of plays, or how much money he spent
on several which served no other pur-
pose than to deplete his exchequer and
crafty within.
Barrett's Personality.
"Rienzi" was perhaps the most dis
astrous production ever made by Mr..
Barrett. The first performance was
given in Washington. The piece had
been rewritten by that talented but err
ratio fellow, Steele Mackaye, and it was
expected to create sensation. Barrett
spent money like water. One robe worn
by him cost more than $500. There
were two tons of scenery and properties,
and the total expense of the production
was in excess of $35, 900, to say nothing
of an enormous salary list.
Most persons are not aware of the
fact that Barrett was much more of a
scholar than Booth. He was really a
bookworm, and he was as greatly Booth s
superior as student as Booth was his
superior as an actor. Cassius in Julius
Caesar" has always been considered
Barrett's masterpiece, and it is certain
that the modern stage has never seen a
better impersonation Of the clean and
hungry" one, but l always preferred
him in Yorick Love-" for the reason
that during long professional connec-
ton with him never saw him give a
performance of that play which could
not justly be denominated great"
AS man Barrett was above reproach.
He was tender and considerate of the
feelings Of those with whom he was as
ISOLATED unless he suspected disloyalty.
Then he was about as unreasonable a
man as ever knew. 1t must be admit
ted, too, that he was rather intolerant
of criticism, and resented the right of
members of his company to compare
Ss<r58S5 yS9M
ESs - 10