The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-01-27
OBJECTED TO SATURDAY SHOW
END OF THE WEEK PERFORM
ANCES BITTERLY OPPOSED.


fOrmances First GRANTED by City
Council In 1SO2-Raised "A Storm OF
Opposition, and Led to Warm
Newspaper ContrOVersy-PersOn
Allure Entered Largely Into the
Arguments Council Refused 10
Reconsider.
Owing to the discussion whether Savan-
nah ought to have public Sunday con-
certs, and their probable effect on the
morals Of the people. it may not be IN
interesting to quote another and similar
case that occurred in Savannah during
its early history.
The question then discussed, with con-
siderable acrimony and by persons of
widely divergent views was whether or
not theatrical performances should be al
lowed on Saturday nights" The City
Council decided on Dec. 49, 1892. that such
performances were permissible, and the
decision Immediately brought forth
string Of adverse criticisms from the
then so-called conservative part of the
citys population. Nor was the matter
made an issue between the rival morn
ing newspapers of that time, the Repub
lean, and the Columbian Museum and
Savannah Advertiser, in which each cud
gelled the other editorially, and opened
its columns to those. who embracing
either side of the question, dashed with
bitter invective the lagitious ucentious-
ness Of the age, or pleaded for what they
bought to be broader minded and more
progressive state of affairs. Nor were
there those that hesitated to impute 20
the conservatives hypocrisy of the vilest
sort as the following from the Republi-
can of Wednesday, Jan. s. will show:
Real piety ever was and ever will be
respected. No man ever suffered in the
estimation of his neighbor for feelfng his
obligations to his God. But hypocrisy
is in every shape detestable.
The public win recollect that the Mu-
scum has for many months teemed with
anxieties about religion and was partic
ularly hostile of late to the privilege given
for performances at the Theater Satur-
day nights. For our part, we know not
what political right existed for the pro-
hibition, or what command forbids play
ing on those evenings. Wiling to leave
the encouragement or d'scourageme of
the playhouse to our fellow citizens, we
have ever decidedly approved the couduc,
of the majority of Aldermen on this &C.
casion.
THE public remembering the Museum
ealied on them to exercise their indigna-
ion against the practice, win know besl
what to say when they learn that Fran
CTS Stebbins, principal of the Museum
was at the play Saturday night last. and
'ould not pass the evenings entertain,
ment without quarreling with a boy.
For ourselves we are not disappointed
IN the man. We ever believed those who
make the loudest noise about religion have
the least of it,"
Such an attack could not be passed un-
noticed and in the next issue of the
Museum its editors, presume bly, Francis
Stebbirs, takes up tie cudge's in his own
defense. Af.er printing in full the edi-
torial of the Republican he says: Here
the inflated doers of the r publican.
single out one of the editors of this paper
as the object of their spleen A very
hatterlng partiality. But they must GER
tainly be in a ve-y d o7ping and Ian
gushing condition indie d, to feel the
necessity of cal to their aid a cir
cumstance of this nature; or the person
whom they thus notice must be of no
very inconsiderable Consequence in their
estimation, to be thus particularly no.
ticed.
ut is true that it is the Characteristic
of this paper to be found in the support
or order and good government, and it con
sequently is the advocate of virtue and
religion. Although it is not the happy
lot of either of the editors of this paper
to feel themselves qualified to become the
public professors of religion, ii is, never
theless. a rich consolation to them that
they have never been the apostles OF
Paine's Age Of Reason; a reflection which
they trust will ever be grateful to their
remembrance.
GAS yet. the editors of this paper do
not feel the conscientious scruples that
many others have experienced and which
prevent numbers from attending places
of public amusement-and their hostility
to the permission given for performing al
the Theater Saturday nights amounted to
a jealous wish that the feelings of a very
respectable part of the community might
not be injured by such an indulgence
The editor went on 10 say IN carefully
chosen words that he would go to thu
theater or stay away just as he saw fl.
The ti.es OF the Republican are not at
hand, but that paper must have replied
to this attack. for in the next issue of the
Museum its editor devoted a column to
personal abuse of the editor of the Re