Los Angeles herald., 1909-10-19

name. Then he would coolly inform the
senate that all these purchases had
been made to prevent the land in ques
ton falling into the hands of dishonest
men who would profit by such an op-
portunity to line their own pockets.
And he would supplement this revela
tion with the pledge, on behalf of him
self and his colleagues that they all
would turn over every inch of this
property to the government, at exactly
what they paid for 1t, the moment the
bill for the naval site became a law.
The audacity and the practical
shrewdness of the ruse took the con-
niving clique by surprise. The leader
capitulated, making the somewhat
lame excuse that he always loved a
fighter anyhow, 1t was a necessary
affection, but the gentleman from Mis-
sissippi received it as a courtly COM
pliment. The day was saved and the
senate brought face to face with
sort of honor.
So rapidly did the climax of the last
act arrive at the Mason last night
that one had difficulty in following the
intricacieS OF the action. This is the
principal structural fault of the play
the fact that the merits of the strug-
gle at times are drowned in the din
OF controversy. II duuS u our
est to know that Senator Langdon him
self does not precisely know which
side he is on or how he is going to
win, but it also augments our anxiety.
We are worried because we can't see
the real issue at stake, and we cannot
avoid the secret thought that the sem
ator is taking a long chance and that
next time he will take the trouble to
study the question before he tries to
solve 1t.
Yet the play rings true throughout
1t hits the mark by curious instinct,
even as Bud Haines went straight to
the point when he brushed away the
cobWebs of misunderstanding and
squared himself with the senator. And
the amazing ease of the denouement
is a real triumph in constructive
stagecraft, although we might havo
been prepared for it to advantage by
a hint of the victor's intention. A
playwright has no right to build a
puzzle, even if the answer is the cor
rect one We need not see the end
from the beginning, but we should be
able to see the beginning from the
end There should be logical prepara-
tion, even if covertly done, which shall
unconsciously sway our minds in the
direction of the intended outcome.
Some of the acting was very good,
and some very commonplace. James
Lackaye embodied the bluff and court
ly Mississippian to the life His
southern drawl was delightful, but
sometimes 1t blurred his utterance TO
a degree. Mr.. Lackaye could have
emphasized the blow of the family
treason in the third act with better
vigor of tone and gesture, but he con-
veyed the delicate scorn with which
Langdon countered his foes brusque
attack very ably. Mr.. Searle had a
frequently over-theatric newspaper
man to portray, and at moments he
let the character get away from him.
A reporter may lose his head, but he
seldom raises his voice when inter
viewing a senator. The character is a
fine one. Every newspaper man will
admire it, and every newspaper man
will know at heart that it is not quite
true to life. Haines is an idealist.
Very good. So are nine out of every
ten newspaper men-at heart. But
they harbor their ideals with q glori-
Gus and guilty secrecy. They do not
bawl them about hotel lobbies to the
best fellow in the world, on a short
acquaintance. Bud Haines is too
ebullient and oratorical for reporter.
He had never made the acquaintance
of the copy desk, that is sure. He was
not a space writer.
The principal fault of several of the
supporting characters was their tend
ency to talk too fast and too indistinct-
ly. Mr. Sparks marred one of his big
speeches by this needless shouting of
his lines. He should learn the stage
knack of getting mad articulately. 1t
is seldom possible in life; it must al
ways be done in a play.
With the exception of Miss Barrett
and Miss Wise, none of the woman
players had characters of particular
distinction. 1t is a mans play; the
women, in the main, are either prizes
or decorations. Miss Harper fitted her
part physically, but she should master
her lines. One Is at a loss for an ex-
cuse for her stumbling and stammering
last night.
Mr.. Harvey played the chief conspir-
ator fairly well. The character is over
drawn. No tool of the system is
quite so rash and impulsive. Their
craft is less human, more of the order
of Mr. De Forests suave and faithless
Stevens. Mr.. Norton and Mr. Kennedy
were acceptable in two incidental roles
made very material to the import of
the action by the art of the play
wrights.
The principal defect of the play is in