New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-11-13

mood changes when his face lights up with
recognition Of Bannister. the companion Of
pioneering days of adventure; and he is again
the man of action, rejoicing In memories OF the
old free life when he was man among men,
There are tender passages when he Is trying to
recall his wife TO sense OF duty to her child
and 10 love for him. and there are sudden gusts
of wrath and contempt when he IS confronted
with his mercenary father-in-law and with
his xvife'S lover With all this fine variety of
NAV Mr. BourchIer held himself on the open
ing night closely in reserve for the furious out
burst of defamation in the third act, when the
audience was thrilled with splendid exhibition
Of passionate force. 1t was a remarkable I'm
personation of character. with many subtle
touches and much ingenious byplay. Miss Vio-
let Vznbrugh as Lady Alethea, acted with al
most equal variety and power She was the
high bred strong willed woman, who really loved
her husband, yet could not consent to be doni-
mated by his will; and while she gambled, Cos
slipped and firted from force of habit and social
environment she not carried away by ex-
element into wrongdong. Her husbands fiery
defamation challenge to combat, and she
met II with passionate intensity and indomitaois
courage 1t strong scene. with the won-
ans emotions, nerves and pride ptted against
sheer masculine force; and when 1t ended even
cynical spectators were convinced that the nne
old art of acting had not yet passed away from
the London playhouse.
While this struggle between husband and wife
provided the chief situation and the main motive
of the play, there abundance OF fnaterlal
for character sketches and acting. The impov-
erished and demoralized marquis was constantly
on the stage and Mr. Clarence succeeded in
irnparting reality to him by many small touches,
resisting the temptations Of social cartcature.
Miss Muriel Beaumont's impersonation of the
heartess but good natured Lady Lucy Deren-
ham full of grace and charm. The charac-
ter Of Bannster instead of being unnecessary
served several useful purposes. 1t helped in the
general exposition of the aspects of smart so
ciety; it enabled the Australian to renew his
youth in the presence of his old friend; and 1t
provided a most effective contrast. Frobisher
disenchanted by personal experience IN Vanity
Fair was gloomy and austere, whereas Bannis-
ter. hardly accustomed to his wealth, and fas-
cinated by the glamour of the world Of rank and
fashion was genial and credulous The part
was admirably played by Mr.. Sydney Valentine.
The minor figures in a cast of twenty-one play
ers all good in their way. but one OF them,
at least, was sacrificed to general effect This
was Lady Westerly who clearly meant by
the author to have a strong individuality and
determining force. Whenever an actor-manager
is bent upon magnfying his own part, minor
characters are weakened for the sake of having
neutral background against which he can
stand out. This process is ordinarily 1ustihed
on the ground that the force of play is i'm
paired when there are too many digressions and
episodes. and the dramatst is trying to do too
many things. In a play like Mr.. Sutro's. in
which every character is definitely suggested
as is done in the best old English comedies.
neutral background is not required.
THE Walls of Jericho is q workmanlike play
which entertains an audience without exciting
thoughtless laughter. It reflects social life as
Thackeray knew 1t in his day, rather than the
Vanity Fair Of King Edwards reign. It's satire
is as old fashioned its plot The doors of
drawing room and bouGoir are opened. and wom-
en- are seen at the bridge table. playing for high
stakes and peering into another's hand;
noble marquis is discovered sponging on his SON
in-law. when he is enmeshed in company pro-
noting schemes; there is tainted scandal in the
air: women are marrying for money and firt-
ing with men from sheer love Of excitement;
and rakes are making mad love to other mems
wives All these things were done when Thack-
cray wrote Vanity Fair" and Mr.. sutro has
portrayed them anew in his West End Jericho
with remarkable force and directness. What
the playwright has not satirized is the charac-
terstic folly OF smart society Of the day The
snobbish spirit OF exclusiveness; the worship of
rank and fashion; the 1argon or bridge slang
and inane nicknames; the vulgar display Of
wealth and luxurious living. and the idolatrous
love of smartness itself are among the foibles of
the rich and privileged classes. which need to
be laughed down with keen yet good natured
satire; and effectively this may be done by
playwright novelist. it remains true that
simplicity OF manners. tactful consideration of
the feelings Of Others charm OF conversation
and intellectual dignity the highest and
commonest qualities in what is in reality tho
best society The satire of this play falls short
of the characteristic vegaries of what is known
as smartness, and hence it will not be resented
by those within the charmed circle. The trum-
pets may sound and the Joshua may shout
but the walls OF Jericho will not fall. NE