The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — 1840-10-16 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

TIIOS. STUART, of the Theatre-Royal, Liverpool. Mr. Stuart, the author of this pamphlet, is well qualified, by his intelligence no less than by his profession, to judge between the acting version of Richard 111. and the tragedy as written. Ile has consequently produced arguments which, whilst they interest, carry conviction to the mind. The opening paragraph affords at once a view of his opinions, and of the general style of the work : " In the year 1700 Colley Cibber, the vainest possessor of the vain title of laureate ever known, not satisfied with the master tragedy of Shakspere, perpetrated a most daring assault on the bard of Avon, in the mutilation of this. and others of his noble dramas—mixing up the sterling ore of our mighty poet with his own base metal, for the construction of a new tragedy of Richard the Third • and, to the condemnation of every actor's taste, from Sandford, the fop laureate's Gloster, down to the present period, including, such ' artists as Garrick, Cooke, Kemble, and Kean, no effort has hitherto been made to restore the original. Satisfied with the outrageous points and the melodramatic ravings of Cibber's alteration, and the starts, jumps, screams, attitudes, and other tricks necessary to make it effective, the British audience even has forborne its just right of demand for the wit, pathos, and sublimity of the original. No character in Cibber's play stands out of the canvas, save Gloster, and he s bereft of most of those traits which, in the original play, impart a grandeur to the terrible ambition which led to so many crimes. Cibber's play is crowded with clap-trap and stage effect. but loses the picture which Shakspere has drawn, of a man, stained with guilt of the deepest dye, for ambition's sake ; a murderer and a hypocrite, but nevertheless a powerful and warlike monarch ; daring, and opposite to every danger, both of body and conscience, in obtaining and protecting a crown, and justly falling, at last, after his career of crime and ambition is fulfilled. Upon no occasion has Shakspers made him depart from the deep policy, which so powerfully distinguished his real character ; whereas Cibber's hero is made up of a series of outbreaks, and noisy ebullitions of boisterous rage, qualifying him more for a strait waistcoat and an asylum, than for  The supreme seat—the throne majestical— The sceptred office of his ancestors.' " The subsequent pages are devoted to a comparison between the two versions, in which great historical knowledge, and a complete appreciation of the manifold beauties of the original, are strongly developed. We have, however, to allege something like inconsistency in Mr. Stuart. In the above quotation he justly ohserves, that " no effort has hitherto been made to restore the original." Unwilling—or, what we hope is more probable, from circumstances, unable—to make that effort himself, he has advertised another play for his benefit on Monday next ! Thus a golden opportunity is lost to himself of acquiring both profit and fame, and to the public of rightly deciding the controversy. In conclusion, we strongly recommend all admirers of Shakspere (and who is not ?) to add this production to their collections: