provinces. This does not mean that the provinces are more strait-
laced, but simply that in many provincial towns there is only one
theatre for all classes and all tastes, whereas in London there
are separate theatres for separate sections of playgoers; so
that, for example, Sir Herbert Beerbohm Tree can conduct His
Majesty's Theatre without the slightest regard to the tastes of
the frequenters of the Gaiety Theatre; and Mr. George Edwardes
can conduct the Gaiety Theatre without catering in any way for
lovers of Shakespear. Thus the farcical comedy which has
scandalized the critics in London by the libertinage of its jests
is played to the respectable dress circle of Northampton
with these same jests slurred over so as to be imperceptible by
even the most prurient spectator. The public, in short, takes
care that nobody shall outrage it.

But the public also takes care that nobody shall starve it, or
regulate its dramatic diet as a schoolmistress regulates the
reading of her pupils. Even when it wishes to be debauched, no
censor can--or at least no censor does--stand out against it. If
a play is irresistibly amusing, it gets licensed no matter what
its moral aspect may be. A brilliant instance is the Divorcons of
the late Victorien Sardou, which may not have been the naughtiest
play of the 19th century, but was certainly the very naughtiest
that any English manager in his senses would have ventured to
produce. Nevertheless, being a very amusing play, it passed the
licenser with the exception of a reference to impotence as a
ground for divorce which no English actress would have ventured
on in any case. Within the last few months a very amusing comedy
with a strongly polygamous moral was found irresistible by the
Lord Chamberlain. Plenty of fun and a happy ending will get