Drury-Lane Theatre.
The Times, 1824-11-08T00:00:00

The comic opera of 77Te M1aid of tha Mill was repreented on Saturday evening, it# a very uensatisfactory manner. It has been almost entirely denuded of the original music, the conjoint work of' some of the mnost eminent composers who flourished at the period wben it first appeared, (an alteration which is amy thing but an im- provement); and the taient ef' this house, either in the vocal or the acting department, is not sufficiently vigorous to give due efFect to the extensive range of characters. serious and comic, which the opera comprisse Mrs. Bedford is a very handsome, nmodest.look. ing PaPv. We can, however, afford her but little praise beyond that whfch iS due to her manner and appearance. Her beauty an-d the meek gentleness of hier mien are every way worthy of the cha_ racter: but her acting is not distinguished by fine feeling; it does not redeem thepromnsewbicaherappearance holds forth; and her Ringing is not calculated eDocharm Tissintoaforgetflness of thatdefect. IH the former, she scarcely rises to, and in the latter she soars not much above, mediocrity. Except in the concerted pieces, lhe did not attempt any oef the original music. We were surprised at her omission 6f the exquisite air-" In love to pine and languish," the composition of the Elector of Saxony. Instead of it she gave us "Why, with tears." (from the opera of Lionel and Clafisre),-.a pleasing composition undoubtedly, but by no means equal to that for which it was substituted. Her execution of this and of two or, three other songs was aeeable; but her taents did not excite those strong emotions which it is only i; the power of genius to create. Lord Aimrnorth was personated by Mlr. Morn. There is no character in English opera that more emphaticallv demands the union, very rarely seen, of the talents of a good aEtor with those of an excellent singer. Mr. Horncannotclaim any veryembarraxsing portion of praise as an actor; asavocalist,hin greatknowledgeof music enables him to do a good deal with a very indifferent voice. He got through the character moderately well. He also rejected the old songs, and introduced three of the worn-out common-places of the day. M r. Bedford's Giles. though rather obstreDerous, had merit. He has not yet learned the due modulation of his tones, which are, in consequence, sometimes harsh and discordant. He sang with considerable vivacity, and was encared in one of his airs, and much applauded in all. We know not what dialect he gave to honest Giles, but we are sure he cannot change It fer a worse. 5lr. Knight's Ralph. was equal to any of his perforinances: it was excellent. We oaght to thank Messrs. Bedford and Knight for not adding to the introductions of the evening. 'What they sang belonged strict- ly to their respective characters; and they certainly lost no. thing by adhering to the original. Mrs. Waylett, vwho has been recently transplanted fromu one of the mrinor houses to this theatre, played the part of Fanny; and played it e.esed- ingly well. We ds not recollect to have seen the Gipsv's quarre with Ralph mnanaged with half so much truth and sirit on any jireceding occasions. The applauss it produced vwas loud and li- beraL Miss Povey appearedl as T'heados; but as her swain, Mer- vin, wvas enacted by Mer. 5ercer, who cannot sing, she had almest wnre, so far as her vocal abilities were cobeerned. Mr. Gattie's Sir Harry Sycamore WRs very indiff'erent-.4brced and affected, wlthoat one avtom of ttue nataal humour. Mrs. Harlewe, as his lady, played very respectbly. DRURY-.LA4NE THEA TRE.