Year: 1867

It is sometimes represented to us that frank
and searching criticism of the theaters IS
both urwarranted and injudiciOus. Many per-
sons, lsO-disintercsted observers, who have no
connection with either the Press or the Theaters
entertain the opinion that if a newspaper re-
ceives the paid advertisement of tbeater, or
kindred establishment, it thereby becomes
bound TO praise, and certainly to refrain from
ccnsure of, the plays, the acting, the singing,
or whatever else may be presented by its ad-
vertiser as an attraction for public patronage.
These persons as matter Of course, habitually
question tho integrity of the Press. They dis
play, we think both ignorance and discourtesy
in holding this opinion; but that does not
prevent them from holding it. Advertisers,
too occasionally start up, who appear to think
that newspaper owes no duty excepting TO
themselves. In short, the relation properly
subsisting between the Press and the Theaters
is not rs clearly understood as it ought to be.


Mercantile prosperity is always an important
consideration. No one disputes that. But
there is another consideration of vastly more
Importance one, indeed, upon which mercan-
tile prosperity in great measure depends-and
that is integrity. We take an cxacting view of



the Journalist. Neither Theater nor Press can
properly be considered as merely shop. The
theatrical manager who thinks Of nothing but
his treasury takes q very narrow view of his
duty. The journalist who docs not look beyond
the m0ney-bag has no proper sense of the re-
'spOnsibility of the Press TO the age wherein it
lives and labors. Whoever assumes to inter
pret an art or to WELD an intellectual influence
owes a distinct obligation to society. That OBJ
legation is to foster, sustain and stimulate to
lusty growth, all manner Of ideas and institu-
tions that are clearly conducive to the welfare
and happiness of mankind. The Drama, we
think, is an institution that ought to be deye-
Oped in our midst TO the highest point of eX
cellcnce. Upon this point we suppose there
can be no doubt, and need be no argument.
The question then is, both for manager and
Journalist, how can this distinct professional
duty be best perfounedP


There is, so far as the Press is concerned,
but one way, and that is by speaking the truth.
II may be proper, indeed, and necessary, that
the journalist exercise discretion as to the
time and the manner in which the truth is
spoken but as to the duty of truthful criti-
cism, there is no question of discretion or OF
anything else. That which is good should be
promptly and heartily recognized and COM
mendcd. That which is positively bad should
he clearly exposed and condemned, These are
the simple principles which govern us in criticism
We do not censure because we like to do so /;
and-though we are glad at all times to in
crease our mercantile prosperity-we do not
praise FOX the sake of advertisements And
such we take to be the critical policy of all
newspapers that arc conducted with proper
sense as we'll of the requirements of the Drama
as Of the duty and dignity Of Journalism.


There is but one ground whereon the Press
and the Theaters can work together in perfect
harmony. That is, the support of the Drama
as an institution for the amusement and in
stnlction, and thus for the education of society
With the Theaters as mere places OF business
the Press has no more concern than it has with
so many dry goods stores. For selfish means
it may wish them to succeed in business, and
may in some sort try TO help them But that
is an affair of the countng-room. With the
ThcateTs ms cOnseryatories of the Drama on the
other hand, the Press has direct and vital con-
Germ. This is plain matter of duty. The same
voice of duty that enjoins the manager of n
thcatcr to uphold the Drama as an art, which
no has assumed to represent, also enjoins fhe
critical Journalist to aid that manager with all
the power that the Press possesses. Good
theaterS have no reason to dread journalism
Talenb and integrity blunt the claws of the
critic.