The times., 1898-10-23

There is no organ In the body lazier
than the brain. and this may account
for the condemnation that has followed
THE Conquerors" all over the country
Certainly it cannot be fairly alleged
that the nations reviewers have so little
appreciation of real dramatic strength
and skill as to have spoken against the
play from out their own mouths, and
had the charge been made, a glance at
the articles themselves would disprove
it. Every criticism far published
upon Paul Potter's work has been little
more than a rehash of those printed in
New York. The provincial writer's have
simply not taken the trouble to give the
piece more than a moments thought.
They have gone to the theater deter
mined to see something disreputabe
and they have seen it. One need not add
that they would probably not have no.
ticed the moral difference had shore
Acres" been suddenly substituted for
the presentation billed.
The man who can insist that the stage
would be better of without The Con-
querors might, with equal readiness.
demand that the Venus di Medici or the
Greek Slave be enveloped in a red fian-
mel petticoat. Art cannot be cognizant
of practical details or morality. and the
end in such a case must justify the
means. One might consistently object
to seeing a sensual dob of a nude wo-
man. but he who refuses admiration to
any one of the masterpieces on grounds
of that sort would be deemed mere
fanatic When London Sleeps" might
ins ir he cria1 dQygn hv the neon
who could not help acknowledging the
force and power of 1.-The Conquerors."
In one art has been sacrificed to the pro-
prieties, and in the other the proprieties
have been sacrificed to art.
Not that Paul Potter's drama really de-
serves all the morbid condemnation 1t has
received from any point of view. Some
of the best literature we have describes
scenes and incidents far less decent than
anything shown during the four acts of
the Empire Company's vehicle Prejudice
aside, there have been written before
many offerings of far more prurient aims
than could be ascribed to 1.-The Conquer
ors" One of them is Camille and an
other is Carmen and a third Is Tess
of the D'Urbervilles. Perhaps no one of
these stated what it implied so clearly as
does Mr.. Potter's production but one who
attended their presentations for the same
purpose that most people so to see THE
Conquerors" and with the same intent
would have had no difficulty in extracting
that for which he was searching. The
best things in books and art hinge on
the very conditions existing in the play
under consideration. The dinner party
of the first act has been equaled In IL
cense by many farces and musical come
dies on the road, while the very scenes on
which the second hangs have been
brought into use with less abili-
ty by nearly every melodramatic
writer of the day. Take out of
this act two lines delivered by Mr..
Faversham and one that comes from
Mr.. Osbourne and the assaults made up
on Miss Millward might merely have been
for the purpose of murder. Outside of
these bits there Is nothing in THE Con-
querors'' but inherent strength and dra-
matte quality. True. Mr.. Frohman pro-
badly had neither of these virtues in mind
when he purchased the manuscript. but
that they are there cannot be doubted.
No person who went to the National last
week to see the Empire Theater Stock
Company found in its vehicle any sug-
gestion of filth that he had not in mind
when he determined upon going.
The physical conditions of the play
upon which so much stress has been laid
no longer exist. There are no lines to
hint that the heroine is unaware as to
whether the attack upon her has failed
in its result or not. and if any determine
tion is. therefore. reached by the audience
it must be by mere inference. Probably
in catering to public that is all too ready
to condemn before understanding, Mr.