New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1918-09-08

tors, made it known that he had resigned
as administrative director and would as
sumo the general management of a Chicago
company, the plans of which he had con-
ceived and perfected. In this company the
leading stockholders of the Metropolitan
Opera Company were interested and though
1t was independent, it was to cooperate with
the New York organization His letter was
dated March 80, and to it the executive
committee made public answer, lauding Mr..
DlppePs services to the company and max
ing a declaration plainly designed to allav
any apprehensons which opera patrons
might feel concerning the future of the
German repertory. The declaration ran:
"lnasmuch as certain statements have
been published insinuating that your resig-
nation Is due to dissatisfaction on the part
OF the board because of the so-called lex
pansion' policy, it is but just that we
should give an emphatic ard official denial
to SUCH statements The expansion policy
had to be tried and tested Whether a con-
trary policy would have produced materially
better results IS meter of speculation and
cannot be a matter OF certainty We gladly
bear witness to the fact that you have been
a large factor in bringing about the very
gratifying increase in interest and apprecia-
ton which the patrons of the Metropolitan
Opera House have demonstrated in the
Wagnerian performances during the last
two seasons as compared with preceding
years. No deterioration will be permitted
Of the standard which now prevails. The
eclectic taste OF Mr. Gatti- Casazza who was
foremost in the fight for the introduction
of the Wagner operas in italy, the common
devotion and enthusiasm OF Messrs. Tosca.
mini and Hertz for German art are ample
warrant for this statement quite apart from
the fact that it would be nothing short Of
folly, meeting with the instant and deter.
mined disapproval Of our board no less than
OF the public, to deviate from those tradi.
tons of internationalism in art which hava
made the Metropolitan opera what it iN"
At this time Hammerstein was LOSING
money on his operate undertakings at the
rate Of about $4,000 a week. Three years
later he testified in a court Of law that the
last fourteen weeks Of the season in Phila-
delphia had cost him $4,000. There was
then strike of the employees of the street
trolley lines in that city, and the general
attendance at the opera shrunk SO greatly
as to be practically negligible. On one oc
casion the box Office receipts were only s157.
Mr., Hammerstein suspended the perform
oii~oo 01i. CtoteSDuIy ndQ brought MN the
100000 which he demanded as loan in the
first season. Mr.. Stotesbury had loaned him
also 100000 on the security of mortgage
on the Manhattan Opera House in New
York 1t was Mr.. Stotesbury who came to
his rescue in the new emergency. he agreed
to advance him money to liquidate the week
ly payroll Of the opera house if Mr.. Ham
mersteln would reopen it. The representa-
tons were resumed and Mr.. Hammer
stein made public acknowledgement Of
the philosophical generosity of his pa
tron in curtain speech. At the end of
the season it was found that Mr. Stotesburv
had advanced $4,000. This Mr.. Hammer
stein did not repay, and when Me. Stotes-
bury took legal action to recover the money
Mr.. Hammerstein testified that it had not
been loan, but gift; and the newspapers
thought his testimony, which was filled with
denunciations of his patron, vastly divert
ing. Mr.. Hamnerstein was a humorist. and
again "good copy"