both sides. That it should not be assailed in the spirit of narrowness and fanaticism is certain, for that spirit cannot be defended in the plane either of reason or religion. Whether it should be assailed at all depends upon its nature and influence, and if these do not deserve condemnation, it should at least be let alone; and if they are not to be justified, a temperate and truthful exposure is necessary. The "short cut" method of settling such questions is never the best; though to those who read a chain of propositions without examining the separate links it may seem conclusive.

I remember to have seen an argument in favor of the proposition that "all men are now perfectly happy." It was constructed thus: "All men desire to be happy; there never was a man who wished to be miserable. The Creator is the author of this universal desire. He is omnipotent and beneficent, therefore he would not implant this desire without making it absolutely certain that it would be gratified; therefore all men always have been, and now are, perfectly happy." In the same way one might prove that all men are good. All desire to be

happy. None but the good are happy, therefore all desire to be good; "but all that desire to be good are good, therefore all are good." The stern logic of experience contradicts these specious reasonings, and teaches us that we must ever be on our guard against "short cuts" to a conclusion. They may be sound, they may not be.

CHAPTER VI.

HOW THE THEATER IS DEFENDED- -CONTINUED.

T has been eloquently set forth by some that art

IT

is inferior only to religion in its elevating influence upon mankind; that the drama unites poetry, in its highest forms, with painting, and sculpture, and oratory, and music; and that to disparage it is vandalism, and springs from a spirit which would "destroy the sun because of its spots," and "hurl the world back on its path of progress." It is true that the drama blends all the arts in itself; that it is the product and illustration of them all; and that an abstract idea of a dramatic representation may be formed which would ennoble all who should behold it but it is impossible to describe an existing institution by means of "glittering generalities." Painting, statuary, poetry, music, and oratory have all been made to promote licentiousness and irreligion as well as to assist religion. Because the spirit of poetry is allied to that of religion, it does not follow

that Queen Mab, or the Tragedy of Cain, or Don Juan are of a religious tendency; or because Raphael's "Madonna," or Michael Angelo's "Judgment,” are imbued with a devotional spirit, that all of the works of art unearthed at Pompeii are incentives to virtue. These generalities cannot be applied even to religion. Because religion is the friend and saviour of man it does not follow that there have not been religions which were worse than no religion at all; religions so corrupting as to imperil the very existence of society. When we praise religion we must know what religion we praise, and when we eulogize art we must distinguish its noble from its base uses. So that the whole question is open till we determine to what ends the music, and poetry, and oratory, and painting, of the Theater are made to contribute.

In defending the Theater it is said that it is a "school of morals;" that it "holds the mirror up to nature;" that virtue and its rewards, vice and its pains and penalties, are so skillfully, naturally, and truthfully represented, that good impressions are made; and that the evils are incidental and insignificant.

If we examine these statements we see at once that as the Theater deals with moral questions, it must be a" school of morals;" and as its methods of teaching are most impressive, it must be a very influential school. Hence, whether virtue and vice, with their results, are properly represented there, becomes a question of great importance. Nor would we be able to conclude our inquiries if it were found that virtue and vice are represented true to nature; for the vital point would still remain, whether it is beneficial to the moral nature to witness vice naturally delineated.

The foregoing are the principal views held of the stage by those of its friends who are not themselves actors; but there may be some who would indorse the estimate placed upon it by the actor Sothern, who, in a recent English paper, “aggrandizes his profession," at the same time expressing his opinion of the Church and the Press. He says: "The Drama is but an acted novel, and being acted, that is, presented in bodily form and audible speech, appeals even more vividly than mere written description to the masses, who have not the faculty of