the following words of our patent: "We have thought fit hereby to declare that from henceforth no representation be admitted on the Stage, whereby the Christian religion in general, and more especially the Church of England, may in any manner suffer reproach, and we do hereby strictly inhibit all and every degree of abuse or misrepresentations of sacred characters, which may in any degree tend to expose religion or bring it into any contempt. And that no such character be introduced or placed in any other light than such as may increase the just esteem of those who answer the end of their sacred function."

The introduction into a play of scriptural expressions, and terms usually applied to sacred purposes, has also been enumerated amongst the irreligious tendencies of the Stage. This must be considered as a part of the exclusive doctrine which denies the propriety of discussing religious matters at all. The use of inappropriate language is equally an error in taste and a fault in composition; yet I apprehend any attempt to establish a special vocabulary for particular occasions would be found not only difficult but impracticable. On this point also, as well as on many others connected with this prolific subject, pious men hold different opinions. What one objects to, another recommends. It is not, in fact, the matter, but rather the manner in which it is applied that induces these opposite judgments. Dr. Watts, as

we have seen, points out the advantage of sacred subjects for dramatic purposes, and Dr. Knox strongly recommends the study of scriptural language for theatrical composition. The poet,"

says he, "who means to produce a Tragedy, which shall be able to stand its ground even after the first nine nights, without the aid of puffing, and without filling the pit and boxes with orders, should sometimes go to the same fountain and drink the waters of poetical inspiration, of which Sterne drank so copiously. He will improve greatly by studying the language and histories of Joseph, Saul and Jonathan, of Ruth, of Job, of the Psalms, of Isaiah, of Jeremiah, of many single passages, every where interspersed, and of the parables of the New Testament."*

Let those who are inclined to condemn the Stage on prejudiced or imperfect statements, pause and weigh deliberately the evidences on both sides, before they form their opinions. Let them look at the Theatre with reference to its general tendencies and comparative effects, and amongst the latter, let it not be forgotten that an extensive theatrical establishment supports many industrious families in various grades of life, and circulates annually a large sum of money. money. It is It is easy to pick out an objectionable sentence here, and to extract an offensive passage there-to say, in this line vice

* Knox's Essays, vol. ii. No. 154.

is recommended; in that, decency is violated; and in a third, religion is forgotten. Judged by such a test as this, nothing emanating from man could escape condemnation; but this mode of dissecting a very complicated institution, and demanding a judgment of the whole, by a sort of microscopic examination of a few minutely separated particles, must by all reasonable minds be rejected at once as equally unjust and absurd. It is precisely, as Dr. Johnson says, "like the pedant in Hierocles, who, when he offered his house for sale, carried a brick in his pocket as a specimen.

In

The clerical gentlemen who have written against the Stage, have neither restricted their censure nor qualified their opinions when speaking of the character and profession of the actor. Many have even expressed their charitable feelings towards us in terms of unmitigated abuse.† what portion of the sacred doctrine they find the texts which justify this proceeding, they have not condescended to inform us, nor how they reconcile a harsh condemnation of their neighbour's conduct with the mild command of our Saviour to "judge not, that ye be not judged;" or the express instruction of the apostle, "to speak evil of no man."||

*Preface to Shakspeare.

See the writings of Mr. Law, Drs. Witherspoon and Styles, and Mr. James, passim.

St. Matthew, vii.

Titus, iii. 2.

Our reverend antagonists appear to regard an actor as a distinct class of the genus humanum. Such is their pious dread of contamination that they would almost as soon associate with a pickpocket; they shrink from our contact, and regard us with the same social feelings that the world in general extends to a mad dog.* Dr. Bennett is not quite so unmeasured in language as his predecessors, but he goes a tolerable length in censure when he called us "administrators of moral poison,' and says, 66 although some performers may be, and I doubt not are, amiable and respectable in their private conduct, yet it is notorious, that the majority are of a widely different character." Also, when he observes, "there is a heavy, moral responsibility incurred by those who encourage a number of individuals in a mode of life incompatible with a pious course;" and when he asks, "how can you excuse yourselves to your own consciences, or to the Judge of all the earth, for the employment of your influence and money in retaining a number of your fellow immortals in a way of life

* This reminds me of what happened in Palermo, in the year 1811, when the first British garrison occupied that capital. The people had been taught to consider us ogres as well as heretics. When we walked through the streets, they locked up the children, and if we went into a shop to make a purchase, they peeped into our gloves to see if we had the usual number of fingers, and lifted up the skirts of our coats, to ascertain whether or not we had tails.

Y

that you know is likely to lead to their eternal ruin ?"-" Common philanthropy requires you to give up a recreation which can be enjoyed only by the sacrifice of the bodies and souls of human victims." It is a serious thing in a preacher to tell his listeners, that a large body of their fellow-creatures, because they follow a particular profession, are notoriously profligate and disreputable. It is impossible that he should have formed this judgment on his own individual knowledge and observation; he could have no opportunity of doing so; and whether it is becoming in a Christian minister to propagate vituperation on hearsay evidence and exploded prejudices, I leave others to determine. There are objectionable members in every profession, but no rational mind would condemn a whole body because a few individuals have disgraced it. Let actors be taken collectively, and I believe that their lives are much on a par with those of their neighbours; and if they are as good, they are to a certain extent better, as living under the eye of the public, considered as general property, and their minutest actions made the frequent subject of comment and conversation, it becomes so much the more difficult for them to escape censure. This very publicity is also to a certain extent a guarantee of respectable conduct. People are naturally more inclined to do wrong when not likely to be discovered; but the notoriety which destroys concealment is a salutary check on vice. "If the