rection which she herself had provoked, was responsible for the ensuing conditions in which the dwellings, the fields and the factories of non-combatant, law-abiding citizens of the United States were given to the flames by both the contending parties. This decision, followed, as it was, by the forcible expulsion of Spain from Cuba and the exaction of indemnity by the United States for the injuries and losses so suffered by its citizens during the insurrection, is binding on the Commission and on all concerned; and whether the United States was justified in thus intervening, or, in the language of the Supreme Court, was "acting like a highwayman, depends upon the moral justification for the war, an inquiry into which neither neutrals nor the courts of the belligerents can enter."

For the Commission to say that the avowed reasons for which the United States intervened by force of arms, and expelled Spain from Cuba, and afterwards exacted indemnity for individual injuries and losses, were false or mistaken, that Spain was not responsible for the insurrection, that devastation and "reconcentration" as practised by General Weyler were legitimate war measures, and hence that the United States is not bound to keep the covenant of the treaty and adjudicate and settle these claims of her citizens in good faith, is for the creature to condemn and dishonor its creator and to defeat the purpose for which, and for which alone, it was brought into being.

What can be done to prevent such a national injustice and disgrace? Congress should grant an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, and thus secure such a judicial construction of article VII of the Treaty of Peace as its importance demands; or it should transfer the cases as they now stand to the Court of Claims, free from any decision or opinion of the Commission, and give the claimants and the country the benefit of the learning, experience and impartiality of an established, competent and responsible tribunal.

CRAMMOND Kennedy.

FINANCING THE NATIONAL THEATRE.

BY JAMES S. METCALFE.

SIX million dollars is the sum required sufficiently to endow a National Theatre and its dependent institutions. But, before explaining why this is the amount required, and before going into a consideration of how it may be obtained, it will be well to discuss briefly the necessity for such a theatre, and to determine whether it is a practicable idea or only a dream of visionary enthusiasts.

The objects of this endowment would be:

1. To construct in New York a theatre-building which shall be (a) an architectural ornament to the city; (b) safe; (c) comfortable; and which (d) shall possess on its stage all the modern accessories for the perfect presentation of any play;

2. Gradually to form and perfect the best and most thoroughly trained company of English-speaking actors in the world;

3. To acquire gradually a repertory of the standard plays in English, both classic and modern, and to present them in the best manner and with the nearest possible approach to artistic perfection;

4. To encourage American literature by giving production to adequate plays by American authors;

5. To choose, under scholarly advice, the best standard of pronunciation of our language, so that the usage of the National Theatre shall be a recognized authority and the preserver of pure speech;

6. To establish, in connection with the theatre, a conservatory, in which shall be taught the elements of acting, including elocution, pantomime, fencing, dancing and kindred necessities of the art;

7. To establish, in connection with the theatre, a library which

shall not only be of value to the theatre in making correct standards in details of scene and costume, but which shall be available for American dramatists and writers on dramatic subjects;

8. To set a correct and artistic standard which shall be a continual incentive to the improvement of dramatic art in America. Taking these objects seriatim, the first represents conditions which should be characteristic of every theatre, but unfortunately are not; for a National Theatre they would be necessities. It would be fitting to a permanent and representative theatre that it should, both inside and out, be impressive and exemplify the best-not necessarily the most elaborate or costly-architectural art of our day. Safety and comfort would be essentials, and its stage would also, of necessity, be equipped and arranged for perfection in the smallest detail work, as well as for the greatest impressiveness in spectacle.

The next object, the forming of a perfect company, opens up a wide vista of argument, and includes the further object of the establishment of a conservatory, teaching all the things which aid in the art of expression, such as elocution, pantomime, dancing and fencing. The formation of the first company of the National Theatre would have to be from present acting material and in competition with the purely commercial theatres. These last would, of course, hold out higher inducements to actors in the way of immediate pecuniary return. On the other hand, the National Theatre, with its permanency, its higher ideals, its standard of fair-dealing and its rewards based only on artistic accomplishment, would hold out inducements which would win the allegiance and the loyalty of true artists and actors of the better class. Later on, the company would be recruited from the theatre's own conservatory. Maintained by the endowment, this conservatory would be under no obligation to accept pupils from mercenary motives. It would extend its training to persons with the natural qualifications and dramatic instinct, many of whom are now debarred from acquiring the education which would make them finished actors instead of the half-equipped performers we so often see. It cannot be doubted that a company so recruited would go on and on toward a higher degree of excellence, until the object of having in America "the best and most thoroughly trained company of English-speaking actors in the world" would eventually be attained.

The repertory of the National Theatre would at first naturally be drawn from the existing stores of classic and semi-classic plays. In some quarters, a fear has been expressed that the stage of the National Theatre would be given over exclusively to Ibsen, Maeterlinck, Hauptmann, D'Annunzio and other modern writers who have a limited following of enthusiasts. With Shakespeare and the classics to draw on, and besides these a long line of minor dramatic writers reaching down to our own time, it is not to be believed that a rational management of a National Theatre would give over its facilities completely, or even to any great extent, to the adherents of any one class of writers.

Dreariness and unattractiveness are also prophesied as likely to characterize the repertory of the National Theatre, with its artistic ambitions. This is as much as to say that what is artistic and of high merit would necessarily be disagreeable. It must be confessed that, if the National Theatre is expected to present plays which will compete with the horse-play, evanescent jokes and frequent lubricity of some commercial theatres, the expectation would be disappointed. Outside of scholarly tragedy, which would interest from the perfection and impressiveness of its presentation, there are unlimited stores of lighter dramas and comedies, many of them of contemporary interest, which are worthy of the highest artistic effort, and which would fall well within the province of a National Theatre.

The life, manners, tragedy and humor of our own time would find their way to the stage of the National Theatre through another avowed object of its proponents. The encouragement of the American author, of course as a subsidiary and by no means exclusive idea, should at times bring to its boards fresh material of rapidly increasing excellence. The commercial manager is debarred, by the great cost of their production, from making experiments with plays by authors untried in dramatic writing. Although this is the most remunerative field of literary work, our best writers do not enter it because of their fear that they cannot answer the demand of the commercial manager for material which shall surely appeal to the great multitude. The writer who is dependent on his pen, and who has a fixed market for his wares, is not tempted to work on the chance of satisfying such a demand.

The National Theatre would naturally require a technical library for the use of its own stage-managers, artists, designers,

costumers and pupils. There can be little doubt that this would in time grow to become an institution of great value to every one in America working for, or interested in, dramatic art. Its value is so obvious, and its support would come from so many sources, that it could not help growing into an institution of large importance. In fact, it would seem that to-day a public dramatic library could be easily and successfully established as a separate enterprise, later on to be connected with the National Theatre when the latter shall have become a fact instead of a hope.

Two objects remain for comment, and it is a question which is the more important; these are, first, the creation in the National Theatre of a standard of acting and theatrical production which shall be the highest possible, and by example raise the standard of every other theatre in America; next, the insistence in the National Theatre on such purity of pronunciation and diction in the use of our language that its usage shall be authoritative and preserve our language from the corruptions which assail it on every side. The stage stands for so much in the teaching of speech and manners by example that it seems a high duty of the American people to establish for it the highest possible standard. As a teacher in these things it certainly ranks above the churches, and almost as certainly above the schools, with their varied standards. It is doing its work every week of the year and almost every day of the week. It should have a fixed standard, derived from the very best authorities. If we leave this tremendous influence in the hands of the ignorant and the uncultured, we are neglecting a most potent instrument of national culture and improvement to let it become an influence against, instead of for, refinement and good manners.

The above shows in brief detail what a National Theatre seeks to accomplish. Broadly speaking, does there exist any necessity for providing the six million dollars which shall make the National Theatre an actuality? To any one acquainted with the tendencies of the commercial theatre, there can be but one reply: that it is a vital necessity in the life of the American people; that nowhere else can a sum so small, compared with other expenditures for educational purposes, be used with the promise of securing such far-reaching benefits. Naturally, only a small proportion of our great population would ever witness its performances, but its influence would be felt in every theatre in the country, and from