THE DRAMA.

To the Editor of the Sydney Gazette.

" Difficile est propriè communia dicere." 

SIR,

It is asserted that the great business of plays is to recommend virtue and to discountenance vice; to shew the uncertainly of human greatness, and the unhappy conclusions of violence and injustice. This design, however, I fearlessly assert has never yet been accomplished. The works of those who have written for the stage, and who are the most respectable as moralists and poets, have such an intermixture of virtuous and immoral sentiments, as almost to preclude the possibility of a virtuous mind reading them, without being contaminated with the vice they contain. Nor is it any thing but a sorry attempt to support a bad cause, that argues the necessity of depicting vice in order to make it appear odious, and virtue lovely, For in the majority of plays, which I have read, the vicious commonly succeed infinitely better than the virtuous, and immoral designs and practices have led to their success. The Greek writers may be considered as the fathers of that class of works concerning which I write. And it is only just to observe, that a reader can scarcely peruse a page of Euripides, without becoming wiser and better. The same remark extends, with some, limitation, to the writings of Æchylus, and Sophocles. But, in every succeeding age, stage entertainments deteriorated till they received a finished character from the infidel and immoral pen of Dryden, and some other writers of inferior note since his time, who only succeeded with the mob of the people, when the success of vice was the subject of their theme. I shall briefly make a reference to the principal writers for illustration of these general statements.

The tendency which the stage has to promote immodesty of course will be a subject of dispute between the patrons and enemies of the stage. In the " Country Wife," the immodesty of Mrs. Pinchwife, Horner, and Lady Fidget, is glaring: nor is the character of Widow Blackacre and Oliver, in the " Plain Dealer," less exceptionable. Jacintha, Elvira, Dalinda, and Lady Pliant, in the " Mock Astrologer," " Spanish Friar," " Love Triumphant," and "Double Dealer," exceedingly forget themselves; and almost all the characters in the "Old Bachelor," are foully and detestably immodest. This may be called the abuse of the stage; but they are facts to which I appeal, and are improper subjects to be rehearsed, acted, or read by the youth of either sex, as destructive of modesty, decency, good behaviour, and religion. In the whole of the plays of Plautus and Terence, my memory cannot call to mind a single passage so cruel, improper, and out of character, as the Ophelia of Shakspeare, in Hamlet. He keeps her alive to sully her reputation. Neither Plautus, Terence, nor yet Aristophanes, ever made a lord, knight, or alderman a cuckold. How different our modern stage!

The profanity of the stage will only be considered by some as an abuse of its power. Some of the plays I have mentioned are particularly scandalous on account of the frequent oaths by which the verses are disfigured. And it would almost appear as if the object which the writer had in view, was to lecture the profane of mankind on the art of swearing in verse. Shakspeare is far from being free from this fault. I call it a fault in him, because his characters swear where there is no occasion, either in their passion or circumstances. Dryden is notoriously profane; and that he may use the name of the Deity to suit his cadence, and variety to his oaths, substitutes the cockney'd Gad for God. Ben Jonson, Beaumont, and Fletcher are far less profane than either of the former; and their profane characters are always of the lowest cast of society. The impiety of the "Mock Astrologer" may be considered as proverbial. The first scene is in a chapel —the language full of ribaldry, blasphemy, and uncleanliness— and, for its object, it appears to aim at bringing religion into contempt, by making our character " a drudge of poor Providence"— persuading another that "Heaven is all eyes but no tongue"—and by informing one of the devils, that happened to sneeze, that "he had got cold by being too long out of the fire." I shall pass over the profane use which the stage makes of the Scripture, though I have marked many, and briefly notice an exposition in " Love Triumphant," of that sentence in the matrimonial service—for better for worse, is "for virgin for whore." Not being a professed lawyer, I cannot tell what Acts of Parliament are obsolete; but I apprehend, the Act passed by James against swearing in playhouses,and that which imposes a heavy penalty for depraving the Book of Common Prayer, are applicable to the plays in question, and to many others, the mere enumeration of which would be too long for your Gazette.

How great soever the moral advantages of a theatre might be, unless they would promote industrious and chaste habits, the disadvantages that would result therefrom, would be insuperable. It it can be shewn that the representation that the stage gives of vice, makes vicious men virtuous; makes the dissolute, continent; confirms young men in decent, and young Women in modest behaviour ;—if the stage will lessen the prevalence of seduction, and leave an affectionate mother in honorable possession of her daughter, and the husband of his wife,—if it will cause one seducer to relent, and bring the seduced a repentant to her parents, as the wife of her betrayer:—if it will make the magistrate more conscientiously regard the inviolability of his bath, to administer justice without respect of persons; in fine, add to the political welfare of the Colony, then I shall become an advocate for stage entertainments. But, till this is made to appear, I shall contend, with a multitude of facts before my mind, that while the stage gratifies a few, it debases the minds and habits of thousands. An attendance on the stage, has done more to fill our gaols, and populate our Colony, than almost any other crime. The stage procreates inattention to business, drunkenness, gaming, bankruptcy—loosens the strongest family ties, and frequently dissevers them for ever. I am, fully of opinion, that, as in the " Beggar's Opera," so in the best of plays, "there is such a labefacation of all principle, as may be injurious to morality," and as Wilberforce contends, "that the political and moral state of the country depends on religion," I contend that the stage, being subversive of the principles of morality and religion; and, moreover, lending to the commission of crime, a theatre should not be allowed, at it is better, to prevent than to punish vice. 

But I fear I have trespassed too much upon your columns, as it is a virtue rarely to he found among writers,to know when to stop. Yours, &c

CESTRIA.

 The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser 9 December 1824,