458 The Dramatic Monopoly. [APRIL, 



LONDON itself, to be treated with so singular and senseless an indignity ? 

 In what are the hopes of the rising generation of authors to consist, un- 

 less in the right of having their dramas represented wherever it is the 

 interest of the management to encourage them ? The most popular pro- 

 duction of the present season is, " The Rent Day :" what was the real 

 stimulus to the writing of this fine specimen of the slandered dramatic 

 genius of the age ? That it could not be subject to individual caprice, 

 being of a class acceptable at every theatre in London. Let as much be 

 done for plays of more pretension, and we may find the modern drama 

 in a higher form, though it may be difficult to build it of much nobler 

 materials, either as to character or feeling.* 



The strong hold of the enemy is his barrier of so-called vested rights, 

 a defence which has served for every abuse within the memory of man. 

 Large, indeed immense, sums of money have been laid out, the most 

 unsparing profusion has been exercised in the hope that a monopoly 

 created by patent, and recognised by acts of parliament, would be per- 

 petual. This is their case ; let us examine it in every part. Of the 

 enormous sums, almost incredible ! expended upon the building, fitting 

 and decorating of the two theatres, how large a portion will their pro- 

 prietors allow to be irrecoverably lost? The money has been paid 

 doubtless, but what is the actual sum for which the earnings of authors 

 and actors are now mortgaged by the monopolists to their creditors ? 

 Does the present rent of the theatre royal Drury Lane equal the sum 

 necessary, expenses deducted, for its effectual annual assurance against 

 loss by fire alone ? What is the actual value of any share in it divested 

 of the privilege of admission ? Is it more than nominal ? Plain answers 

 to these questions will, we apprehend, prove quite sufficient to satisfy 

 the candid, that this vested interest is but a shadow. Look at the other 

 house. Without the payment of any rent, have not its proprietors, 

 during the present season, been obliged to come to a compromise with 

 the performers ? During the first season of Miss Fanny Kemble's acting, 

 when the receipts were avowedly prosperous, (as in the case of Drury 

 Lane,) would the profits have paid insurance ? We put them to their 

 answer. Let the " Metropolitan" defend them upon this ground. True, 

 in any other case their financial affairs would be their own, their mis- 

 fortunes even sacred in our eyes, but when they set up a claim of com- 

 pensation for vested rights, it is' the duty of those who write upon the 

 subject to examine their value, and if that be comprised in a single 

 cypher, the simplest arithmetic is the best answer. 



If we are to argue the vested patent rights upon principle, they are 

 not for an instant tenable ground. They were granted in a spirit op- 

 posed to the English statute law against monopolies, passed in the time 

 of James the First. Their origin is in every way corrupt, an exercise of 

 arbitrary power, a reward for the basest kind of services. The condi- 



One clause is absolutely necessary in any bill that may be brought in upon 

 the subject, namely, that the licenses, granted by whatever authority they may 

 be, should be for no less term than a year, subject, of course, to forfeiture, in case 

 of their misuse. Without this, the monopoly must virtually continue. The same 

 arrangement of seasons between the parties interested, so as effectually to destroy 

 useful competition will be left, and both the actors and the public must be the suf- 

 ferers by the grievance. The utmost care should be taken to uphold the principle 

 of free-trade in the enactment, and its preamble should enforce this as a land mark 

 for lawyers who may expound, and legislators who may amend the statute. 



