§ EARL FITZHARDINGEpresented two petitions—one from Mr. Webster, lessee and manager of "the Little Theatre in the Haymarket," and the other from the performers of the Lyceum Theatre, signed by about 110 persons. The petitioners represented that the patronage bestowed upon foreign theatrical entertainments in London was injurious to English actors, and crushed all the efforts to support the national drama of this country. The petitioners stated that they wished to raise no objection to the Italian Opera, so long established, nor to the French Company at the St. James's Theatre; but the petitioners stated that recently, in addition to these, there had been another Italian opera opened, served entirely by foreign artists, and a troop of French equestrians had been performing at Drury-lane Theatre; and they found it now announced that Drury-lane Theatre was again let to a French company, from the Theâtre Historique, Paris, for the performance of melodrame. He (Earl Fitzhardinge) by no means advocated protection to particular classes in regard to amusements, any more than in regard to the necessaries of life; but an actor was probably rather more entitled to consideration in this respect than any other class. He could not, like a painter or author, dispose of the produce of his talent; he could only exercise it in his own person. But, though disposed to a certain extent to sympathise with the petitioners, no person could deprecate more strongly than himself the infamous—he could use no milder term—the infamous attempt of certain individuals to put down the present performances at Drury-lane Theatre. He was happy to say, on the part of the respectable members of the dramatic profession, that they repudiated it as strongly as any men could do, and were no parties to it. He could state that on the authority of Mr. Webster, than whom a more respectable and talented member of that profession did not exist. He (Earl Fitzhardinge) told a deputation that waited on him on the previous day, that if he thought the profession would lend themselves to so barbarous a practice he would not present this petition. Mr. Webster's petition stated—
That the circumstance of Drury-lane and Covent-garden Theatres being open for foreign, and not English performance, tended to pervert and vitiate the taste of the public, and to distract them from the love and patronage of the English drama.716 It represented—That Her Majesty's Italian Theatre in the Haymarket, and the French Theatre in St. James's, were known to be more than adequate for the wants of the nobility, gentry, and the public, who patronised foreign performances;and it prayed the House—.To consider the propriety of the adoption of some measure for restricting foreign performances to two theatres in the metropolis, in order that the apparently inevitable downfall of the higher order of British drama as an art, in writing and in acting, might be averted, and that the English theatres, which were entirely matters of private speculation at present, unsupported by patronage or protection, might be enabled to continue to Support the numerous performers, mechanics, and others, dependent upon, connected with, and living by those establishments.The other petition prayed for some enactment to restrict the number of foreign theatres in the metropolis to those already established.
§ LORD BEAUMONTthought the petitions appeared to be conceived in a most illiberal spirit. The petitioners seemed to act exactly like the dog in the manger; they were not able themselves, by their talents and attractions, to fill the theatre, and they wished to keep the doors of it shut against those who were willing to try whether they could. There ought to be no interference of the Legislature beyond what was necessary for the protection of morals; the principle of free trade ought to be allowed to operate, and talent to have a clear stage and fair play.
LORD BROUGHAMhad been applied to to support the prayer of these petitions, but he really could not. Would it be any benefit to English workmen to have the theatre shut up? He must take that opportunity of expressing the disgust with which he had read accounts of scenes which did such discredit to the good sense as well as to the justice and peaceable conduct of the frequenters of our theatres. Nothing could more tend to injure our countrymen abroad; we should have this quoted as a sort of bad justification of, or set-off against, the ill-treatment of English workmen there.
§ THE DUKE of CLEVELANDwas sorry to find the name of an eminent actor, such as Mr. Webster really was, appended to one of these petitions; though the English drama had been at a low ebb of late years, his theatre had been generally full. If Drury-lane Theatre could be filled by English artists, there might be some ground for the complaint that it was let to French; but it had been attempted in vain, to the 717 ruin of many who had made the effort. No English company being ready to take it, why should Mr. Webster complain of its being let to a French company? If they did not give satisfaction, the undertaking would soon wear itself out. The noble Duke condemned the conduct of those who had interrupted the performances at Drury-lane Theatre, and expressed his regret that these petitions were presented, and his wish that the noble Earl would withdraw them.
§ EARL SPENCERwas understood to intimate his satisfaction in observing the expression of opinion on the subject elicited from the House. With regard to the outrages which had occurred, he felt as strongly as any noble Lord who had spoken; but it was not in his power as Lord Chamberlain to interfere with them. He left them to the police; and he believed that the magistrates had taken the proper course.
§ EARL FITZHARDINGEwished to state that, in consequence of what he saw in the Times that day, with reference to an actor who had been charged at Bow-street with most scandalous conduct, he had written a note to Mr. Webster expressing his strong opinion that the conduct of the person in question, and of others who engaged in these riots, was most prejudicial to the cause of the English performers.
§ LORD BEAUMONTsaid, that he had been to the Haymarket and Lyceum Theatres, and had seen at both those houses plays which were translated from the French. Now, if the choice lay between a bad translation of a French piece, and the same piece in the original, he would prefer the latter.
Petitions to lie on the table.