CHAPTER XIX.

Cause of the Decline of the Drama, and Remedies proposed.

IN a former chapter we have recommended the interference of the state in the regulation of the theatre. The more we reflect upon the subject, the more we are convinced of the propriety, utility, and necessity, of the measure. It is a great and powerful engine for good or ill; and though its general tendency may have been favourable to civilization and morals, evils have attended, and do attend it. In Germany, where it is altogether under the direction and control of the government, one of these evils is unknown; and where it is under the supervision and partial direction of the rulers, it is in its worst form avoided, as in France. The evil we mean, and shall protest against, is that which arises from the English and American regulation of theatres, which allots a distinct portion of the proscenium to those unfortunate females who have been the victims of seduction. In Germany, the

theatre is the prince's; it is directed by a literary man in his service. The director and players are paid by the government, and, being chosen for talents and moral conduct, are honoured by the prince and his court. Here the theatre is the peo

ple's, as all things are; and the representatives and guardians of the people ought to prevent the misuse and perversion of it in any way. The directors ought to be controlled to their own and the public good by the official servants of the public, and, in the particular abuse above mentioned, the prohibition of the immoral display would remove a just stigma from the theatre, and would further the views of managers by increasing their receipts.

In France, the theatres are under strict control, and some of them are supported by the government. The abominable regulation which causes this evil is there unknown, and the evil is unknown. It is not practicable to exclude the impure and the vicious from public resorts, neither is it to be wished. If the drama is such as a good government ought to permit, its influence cannot be ill on the immoral auditor, and may be good. But no separate place should be set apart, to present to the gaze of the matron and virgin the unabashed votaries of vice, and to tempt the yet unsullied youth, by the example of the false face which depravity assumes for the purpose of enticing to guilt.

We would not propose that our countrymen should take any European mode of government for a model; or that the theatres of America should be regulated according to the usages of Germany and France; but we do hope that what is good will be adopted from the laws and customs of every country, as far as it can be adapted to our

DECLINE OF THE DRAMA.

409

republican institutions. In France the audience see no display of the nature we have mentioned. It is only in England and America that the nuisance exists. If a regulation was enforced, that no female should come to a theatre unattended by a protector of the other sex, except such whose standing in society is a passport to every place, the evil would be effectually remedied. The moral would not be deterred from a rational amusement, and the public and the manager would both be benefited.

The improper, indecent, and scandalous practice of setting apart a portion of the boxes for this most disgusting display of shameless vice, has no connexion with the question of the utility of theatres. The prostitution of the pencil, the graver, or that mighty engine, the press, to the purposes of vice, immorality, or irreligion, might with equal propriety be charged against those modes of ameliorating or instructing society.

It is to be lamented that when the people of Massachusetts introduced the theatre in their capital, having the experience of the world before them, they had not set an example to their fellowcitizens, by purifying the dramatic establishment and abolishing this evil. They appear to have noticed it, but, instead of remedying, they, if possible, made it worse. The Federal Street theatre provided a separate entrance for those who came for the express purpose of alluring to vice. The

boxes displayed the same row of miserable victims, decked in smiles and borrowed finery, and the entrance could only, by its separation from those appropriated to the residue of the audience, become a screen inviting to secret guilt. The new theatre of Philadelphia gave an opportunity for reform, as did that of New-York; but these opportunities were neglected, and those who wished to support, as a mode of improvement, the representation of good dramatic works, have been driven from the boxes by the spectacle presented, not on the stage, but on seats placed opposite to them, and attracting their attention from the stage.

Since writing the above, we have seen the English theatre charged by an English writer with "disgraceful arrangements, which would not be endured in the most dissolute capital of the Continent, and which seem intended to justify the severe denunciations of those who entertain religious scruples about the stage." The same writer says: "We venture to hope, that one theatre will break the unholy association with open vice and immorality, by imitating the stricter police of the Continental theatres."

We will venture to hope that, not only one theatre, but all will break this unholy alliance. There is the more reason to hope, from the conviction that, as a mere money-making speculation, it would be found for the interest of all concerned. But if managers will not so regulate the police of

DECLINE OF THE DRAMA.

411

the theatre, we hope that grand juries or legislative bodies will take the regulation into their hands.

Our forefathers, both in America and England, saw the noblest efforts of the mind of man, when presented by the stage, accompanied by meanness in theatres and decorations, and frequently by mediocrity in the performers who gave them utterance. We see splendid theatres, excellent performers, beautiful scenery, classical decorations, and appropriate dresses, but the plays brought out as meagre, mean, and despicable as the barns and sail-lofts which formerly echoed with the inspirations of Shakspeare, or the laughter excited by the wit of Congreve. Have not the dimensions of theatres been one cause of the degradation of the Drama? We can hardly conceive that the perfection of the painter and the player has caused the deterioration of the dramatist — unless, that dramatists have been induced to write plays to suit the ability or whim of the player, and relied on his support instead of their own resources-or, that managers have thought it cheaper or more profitable to display gilding and paint, accompanied by the inanity of a playwright hired by the week, than the effusions of a poet, whose words could not be heard from a stage removed beyond the sound of human voice. The huge house requires an exertion of the actor's voice which destroys its melody, and renders variety of intonation impossible. The expression of the actor's face