552 Things Theatrical. QNov. 



the rent for it. We can only hope that these negotiations -will terminate 

 amicably, and soon also. 



Our theatrical coup d'oetl must close smilingly. There is strong expec- 

 tation that the Duke of Devonshire, being Lord Chamberlain, will pay 

 some attention to his office, and patronize the theatres, instead of drawing 

 away their fashionable audiences, to the most stupid and useless of all 

 amusements — his Thursday night routs. The five hundred pounds that 

 each of those fooleries costs him, would do great things in reviving the 

 stage. Let him make the experiment for once, or resign. The stage 

 wants not his money, but his influence Another piece of good news is, 

 that the combatants in the Chancery suit are now likely to draw together. 

 Henry Harris, the principal proprietor of Covent Garden theatre, stiU 

 remains at his chateau, at Samure, situated between Boulogne and Calais. 

 His representative, however, has, we understand, most laudably agreed 

 to lend a helping hand to steer the state vessel of Covent Garden 

 safely into port. We shall be glad to see both parties yet come off with 

 flying colours. 



NOTES OF THE MONTH ON AFFAIRS IN GENERAL. 



The committee have at length made their report on the Nash palace, 

 and a pleasant affair it turns out to be. First, let us look at the differ- 

 ence between the original estimate and the actual cost — no, the cost up 

 to this time, when the palace is still little more than a shell, and when 

 there is not a room fit to put a bed in, nor a bed to put in it. — " A 

 concise view of what ' the alterations and additions' were to cost — have 

 cost — and will cost, must be worth something as a curiosity. It appears, 

 then, that these were estimated at 252,690/. in 1826; that in May, 1829, 

 the estimate had been increased to 496,169/., being nearly double the 

 original amount ; but that it has since been ascertained that the expense 

 will not be less than 613,266/., to which 31,177^- is to be added for 

 gilding and ornamental painting, as contemplated by IMr. Nash ; and, 

 in addition to all this, a further outlay will be necessary, before it can 

 be used for purposes of state." This was a gallant architectural rise ; 

 from a quarter of a million to nearly three times the amount, and the 

 building still utterly uninhabitable. So much for the estimate. 



But then another point comes out in the report. IVIr. Nash seems to 

 have been not simply the architect, but the dealer ; not merely the per- 

 sonage who pointed out what the workmen were to do with the materials, 

 but where they were to get them. — " It appears in evidence, that 

 different tradesmen employed at Buckingham palace purchased of Mr. 

 Nash certain quantities of materials, for which they paid (for reasons by 

 them assigned) in some instances a higher price to Mr. Nash than to 

 other persons from whom they obtained like quantities of similar mate- 

 rials. The Surveyor-General, in his letter to the Treasury, of the 26th 

 of January, 1826, says — 'There is another circumstance connected with 

 this business, which, in my opinion, is highly objectionable — namely, that 

 of the architect himself supplying the tradesmen with materials used in 

 these buildings : upon the impropriety and bad tendency of this, there 

 will, I am certain, upon inquii-y, be found but one sentiment.' " 



The productiveness of this mode of dealing, of course, gives a good 

 idea of the architect's talent for business. But, independently of his 



