PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
Volume 107, December 15, 1895.
edited by Sir Francis Burnand
DE GUSTIBUS.
"See 'er, as just parst us? That's Miss Selina Devereux,as sings at the North London Tivoli. She's the pootiestGal in Camden Town, that little Tart is!"
"Git along with yer! She's got a Chest like a Shillin'Rabbit!"
A TREE WITH VARIEGATED LEAVES.
The following communications have found their way into theEditor's box at 85, Fleet Street, and are published that their writersmay claim them. As most of the signatures were more or lessillegible, it has been considered advisable to suppress them, toprevent the possibility of mistakes. The only exception that hasbeen made to this rule is in the case of the last letter, whereinseemingly is summed up the moral of the controversy.
Communication No. 1, dated Tuesday.
Is it not time, considering that there is nothing of particularinterest attracting public attention, that a protest should be raisedagainst the "Society" plays which occupy the stages of some of ourbest theatres? You see I pave the way to my gentle reproof by butteringup vested interests. To do this the better, I will say somethingnice about "our most capable actors," and write "I rememberBuckstone, and Sothern, the Bancrofts, and, aye, Mr.Treehimself." This will prove that there is no malice in my suggestions.
Let me describe the piece to which, in the dead season of the year,I object. The plot is centred in the love for each other of apartially-reclaimedlady and an opium-drinking gentleman; I mightuse stronger expressions, but I know your paper is intended for thefamily rather than the dress-circle, and my language is thereforemodulated to meet the modest requirements of the case. Take itfrom me, Sir, that the story of these two individuals is nauseous anddegrading. I say that its unravelling should not be foisted on thepublic in a modern play. But that you may not consider my impressionslibellous, I add that the piece is finely staged, and in partswell written. For all that, I cannot imagine why the manager, withhis lofty ideas of the function of a theatre as a medium of education,has permitted himself to produce it. And if that observation doesnot draw the manager in question, my name is not X. Y. Z.
Communication No. 2, dated Wednesday.
Your anonymous contributor "of London" (mark the sarcasm!)was right in imagining that I would be drawn. I consider it myduty to Mr. Henry Arthur Jones to say something about his"accustomed combative geniality," and to Mr. Haddon Chambers torefer to his "cheery stoicism." I will also allude to Mr. Pinero, butas he is not writing for my theatre just now, merely record my convictionthat he will be able to survive the sneers against The SecondMrs. Tanqueray—"a play which has made a deep and lasting impressionon the thinking public." And when I write "lasting,"I am the more obliging, as I assume the rôle of a prophet. It will be"lasting," I am sure. The "thinking public," of course, are thoseadmirable and intellectu