The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1900-05-01
PROVIDENCE OPERA HOUSE.

Reginald Mainwaring. Jr.. ........,....
Sir Tlhecopihiilus Observation-Disclosures Kembis
Algernon Sweeting .:........y. l.. Mackay
Christopher BuIstrode. Stantey Brett
Onesimus Bulstrode. ...Joseph Maylon
..,....................... Fannie Brough
Countess Lodoiska. -. Margaret Robinson
Mrs ary Reginald Mainwaripr fr Al'eyne
....,r.................. ..Elialins Terriss
1t is likely that few people in the
audience at the Providence opera house
last evening had much Of an idea of
what they were going to see in MY
Daughter r-in-Law."
But II the announcements OF a Froh-
man farce did not necessarily assure
novelty, since Frohman farces have
been the rule rather than the excep-
tion for a number OF seasons the prom
ise of an all-English company OF come
dams suggested newness and corre-
spending pleasurable anticipations of
something different, no matter how
different.
So the audience was in a receptive.
not TO say inquiring mood 10 see what
would come out of IL.
What came out OF 4 was an evenings
entertainment that was so fresh, SO
Jolly, so novel and SO finished that
PROBABLY Few audiences during the
whole season have better enjoyed them
selves.
MY Daughter-in-Law" seems TO be
a French farce. But II is less grievous
in its suggestiyeness than most French
farces even after they have been re-
modelled for British and American con-
sumption. The point is that the theme
or this farce does not depend on do
nestle entanglements, although one
such that IL quite unsupported figures
as an incident.
MY Daughter-iE-Law's" mother-in-
law is devoted to- her son and is not
satisfied with the choice he made for a
wife. Therefore she seeks to find faults
In ner daughter-in-law to bring about
an estrangement that shall result I'm
divorce and enable her son To marry
the girl OF his mothers choice.
This sounds serious, but. as a mat
ter OF fact, II Is not BIT serious in
My Daughter-in-La Law"
There are three acts and they are
all uproarfously comical. each in a diff
ferent way and all in n quite novel way.
The success Of the authors In securing
new motives and new situations is in
deed something astonishing when one
contemplates the thousands of farces
In existence.
The first act introduces all the char
acters There are ten OF them. And
every one IL distinctly individualized so
that from the lesser parts TO the lead
ing people you are likely TO remember
them all quite distinctly.
The curtain on the first act finds nine
OF the characters assembled for dinner
in the apartments of Mr.. and Mrs.
Mainwaring, Sr. But the mother and
her daughter-in-law fall into one OF the
bitter quarrels that invariably mark
their meetings, 30 that the latter sum-
marily leaves the company TO retire to
her own apartments on the floor below.
Here, I'm the second act. her husband
follows her To beseech her to reJoin
his mothers guests. But he sits down
to dine with his wife instead and as
the act proceeds, one after the other OF
the people upstairs joins the young
couple downstairs. including the
mother -in-law herself Nothing In
than the gradual assembling of the
guests who were upstairs in the apart
ments downstairs.
In the third act IL appears that the
mother has been led into trap by her
daughter-in-law. arranged by her to
forever dispel the mo.ner's delusion as
to any entanglements entered into by
her. Through "a servant who is in the
secret service OF the mother TO spy up
on her daughter-in-law the mother
learns OF supposed clandestine meet
ing in prospect between her daughter
ln-law and a young man of the play,
and sets forth to secure the proof TO
demonstrate 10 her son the faith
lessness OF his wife.
Instead she discovers her own hus-
band paying court To the woman whom
she has selected for her sons wife, who
is an adventures.
This denouemens was Of course, quite
A. .afs n I..t n. L..
law as il was 10 the mother.
The effect is not the less convincing.
however. TO the mother-in-law that she
has been on the wrong track, and the
audience is made to understand at the
last curtain that the young couple will
In the future be feft In peace to pur-
sue a. happy domestic existence.
The farce is exceedingly jovial. It's
dialogue Is bright. its situations COM
zeal, without undue extravaganza. and
IL is acted with extraordinary spirit
and rare good humor.
The characters are all strongly con-
trasting and all diverting.
The adventures affords only the
merest touch OF seriousness 10 the pre-
va'ling element Of comicality. Main
warirg. Sr. Is fat. Jolly and careless
i'm his henpecked existence. Mainwar-
ing, Jr., IS IN "A torment OF distraction
between affection for his fond mamma
ing wife. The latter wins him by taxi
ing n firm IL loving. stand even before
his mother surrenders him TO her.
Another mighty funny part is that
OF an alderman OF the city OF London
who has acquired dyspepsia through
eating too steadily OF official dinners.
and his distress takes the form OF sud-
den and ill-tlmed outbursts of swear
ing. There IL an art critic who il SD
near-sighted that he can haTdly see,
and musical critic who Is deaf. There
is a private secretary Of Mainwaring,
Sr.. who is learning diplomacy and Is
amazingly guleless. There is the pry-
ing servant who contributes i'm an inn
portant way to the complications. even
IL the part is not prominent Last and
best OF all there are the mother and
the daughter-in- law. she former one OF
the most genuinely funny parts that
modern farce has provided. and the
hitter q winsome creation that is long
to be remembered
Of Miss Ellaline Terriss. who takes
the part II the daughter-in-law. IL IS
III ..t,fs 81. Il.