662 Theatrical Review. 



deemed supererogatory. But when a man, who has a reputation as 

 a dramatic writer and whose past works justly claim for him the 

 respect of the public, tries to foist on us as productions worthy of his 

 talent the abortive attempts of his earlier days, he must expect that 

 they will be rejected. It is true, that the piece has been revised and 

 improved; but the result of such revision is a patchiness discernible 

 even by persons of very moderate perceptive powers. Let Mr. 

 Knowles sit down once more and address himself to the business of 

 writing- another "Hunchback" or another "Virginius." In these 

 poverty-stricken times we cannot spare him ; and he must show us 

 that he can do something worthy of his first reputation : but no more 

 " Wrecker's Daughter" or "Brian Boroihme." Above all, Mr. 

 Knowles must doff the buskin ; for, to be candid with him, as a 

 great actor was not many months back, he knows no more of acting 

 than he does of rope-dancing. If he will murder Shakspeare, let 

 him : the writer of " Julius Caesar" knows not death. But let him 

 not murder his own productions. If he had followed a friend's advice 

 with respect to the " Wrecker's Daughter" and not acted, the play 

 would most probably have been saved. Mr. Knowles has altogether 

 mistaken his metier. 



May 1st. The production of a new tragedy is now little more than 

 a nine-days' wonder. They " come like shadows, so depart," and 

 leave no permanent impression on the memory. Mr. Macready paid 

 his friend Mr. Browning the compliment of producing his tragedy of 

 " Strafford" for his own benefit, and of personating the chief character 

 of that drama. As a literary production, we cannot upon sound prin- 

 ciples of criticism give it any thing beyond a very qualified praise ; 

 for we will never consent to the substitution of unfinished sentences 

 and unmeaning repetitions for the plain-spoken expression of the 

 feelings. The quid-nuncs among the theatrical critics most violently 

 assailed Mr. Serjeant Talfourd for not producing a good acting play: 

 will they venture to say that Mr. Browning's is a good acting play ? 

 Away with the silly distinction. Look at Shakspeare's any or all 

 of them, are they not excellent both in the closet and on the stage : 



not award the same praise to the " Rienzi" of Miss Mitford and to 

 the "Hunchback" of Knowles? The same eloge justice permits us 

 not to give to " Strafford." As a reading play, it is altogether des- 

 titute of poetry, indeed the book will be searched in vain for a 

 poetic figure. But the baldness and prosaic character of the produc- 

 tion are not the only faults with which it is chargeable. The cha- 

 racter of the political renegade has been entirely mistaken by Mr. 

 Browning ; who has sunk the heroic pride and noble intrepidity of 

 this bad but great man into a fawning fondness, a fretful, peevish, 

 drivelling weakness of morale. The " Wentworth" of Mr. Browning 

 is not the historic personage ; and with regard to the language of his 

 part, what person would take Mr. Browning's " Wentworth" to be 

 what history says he was, " one of the greatest masters of persuasion 

 that age or any other produced ? " Why look even at the Strafford 

 of Vandyke ; could the stern aristocrat on that painter's canvass con- 



