Germany its first actress. I have seen Fraülein Fuhr with great satisfaction in the "Maid of Orleans," and as Anna Lise; but the accident of her illness revealed another artist full of grace and gifts and genius. In two years Marie Seebach grew tired of the discipline and the self-suppression of the Burgtheater. She, too, longed to shine by her own light. Laube again refused all concession, and Marie Seebach, following the example of Dawison, threw up her engagement in Vienna, and in 1856 became a most brilliant wandering

star-actress.

Actresses in Germany, whether Royal or public favourites, are sometimes a little troublesome. In Berlin the celebrated Charlotte Von Hagn and Clara Stich (daughter of Frau Crelinger) both claimed the part of Dorothea in a version of Goethe's "Hermann and Dorothea." Both ladies dressed for the part; both appeared at the wings ready and very determined to go on to play the character ; and one lady was with the greatest difficulty restrained from carrying her intention into effect. Juliet played in duett would be a curiosity. Hermann as a guileless bigamist would have been a remarkable dramatic criminal. Embarrassing as the result might have been, it is almost a pity that the two rival ladies were not allowed to try their singular experiment. Of Charlotte von Hagn Devrient says that she possessed the rarest combination of dramatic gifts ever seen on the stage; but she was vain beyond the vanity of an actress, and fell into the exaggerations of style which so often accompany Virtuosenthum. Her feud with the Crelinger family was one of the fiercest of its kind in stage annals.

One or two anecdotes illustrate the marked tendency of German actors to hold themselves above all other characters in a play, and even to lift themselves above any necessary action" which may tend to subordinate their part-or themselves to the exigencies of the drama. Seydelmann, who played the part of Brandon in a German version of "Eugene Aram," has to draw a knife in order to overcome by threats Eugene Aram's reluctance to commit murder. The effect of Brandon's knife is overcome, in the play, by Aram's pistol; and the actor who played Aram was one night completely thrown off his balance by Seydelmann who, as Brandon, also produced a pistol in order that Eugene Aram might not seem to have the better of the great star. Moritz Rott, when playing Santinelli, in "Monaldeschi," removed a certain bell by means of which the Queen in the play had to ring for him. He explained and defended this proceeding by saying angrily that he was not an actor who would answer a bell or play the part of a servant. Charlotte von Ha refused the part of Mariane in "Verirrungen" on the

ground that she would not play parts which other characters had to get the better of.

The Berlin Schauspielhaus still retains two artists who merit a special word of mention: they are Theodor Döring and Frau Frieb-Blumauer. Döring succeeded Seydelmann in some of his parts, and cannot remain much longer on the stage. In character-parts, both serious and comic, he is excellent. A born actor, he plays with life, freshness, geniality, and enjoyment. I have seen him as Mephistopheles, but I think his devil too full of bonhomie, too human. Döring never gives you the terrible feeling of a being of another world, infra-human, and without our stained divinity of nature.

Frau Frieb-Blumauer may be most nearly compared to our Mrs. Glover. When, as is constantly the case, she is acting with Döring, the couple suit each other as Farren and Mrs. Glover did; and the result is delightful. This lady is full of the finest dramatic intuition. and is mistress of all the resources of her art. She is at home equally in a palace and a cottage; in pathos, in character, in humour, she belongs to the first rank of actresses, and I know of nothing now that can be compared with her for truth to nature and for excellence of expression.

Helmerding remains to be mentioned. His gifts and powers. are closely akin to genius. Deep pathos and broad humour, the greatest breadth, clearness, and force of characterisation are his. He plays at one of the private theatres, and appears in strong, broad, popular dramas. He is an idol of the people of Berlin, and is a most unique and unapproachable popular artist. I saw him last year in "Mein Leopold," and was struck again with the vigour and variety of his singular powers. Dessoir, who recently retired, was a meritorious tragedian, though his tragedy leaned somewhat towards the domestic and familiar. Hendrichs, an imposing but unimpassioned actor, whose Götz von Berlichingen was good, has also retired from the Berlin stage. An ingénue of very distinctive merit, Fräulein Gossmann, was lost to the German stage a few years ago when she retired into married life.

Eduard Devrient's long experience and love of his art have led him to the conclusion that the influence of the stage affects men not in their material, but in their spiritual interests; and that the stage should be ranked by the State with the Church and with the school; he cannot regard the drama as an ordinary branch of amusement, or of mere trading industry, looking only to money profit and loss: and this view of the stage may be taken as a fair representation of German theory and experience.

"THE MEMBER FOR STOKE."

BY THE MEMBER FOR THE CHILTERN HUNDREDS.

N a charming letter addressed to "The People of England, Wales, and Scotland," and signed "Edward Vaughan Kenealy," we have the first formal intimation of the scheme which has resulted in adding to the House of Commonsthe famous "Member for Stoke." That letter was written just after Dr. Kenealy had been disbarred, and is a rare specimen of severe reasoning, chaste argument, and admirable English. "This is," the writer says, "the only opportunity I shall have of pointing out the weak points of the case without my countrymen send me to Parliament, when I assure them that certain persons shall hear from me again. To slightly parody the words of Lord Byron on his friend Hobhouse

Let Disraeli but send me to Newgate,

And Newgate will send me to Parliament.

But I hope I shall get there without, and I shall then test whether England is extinct or not. You may be quite sure that the donkeys will not bray me down, and that I will force Brand to let me catch the 'Speaker's eye'; yea, and that I will make the House hear truths that it has not heard for years, and that, as in the Court of Queen's Bench I muzzled and chained Cerberus for nearly a year, so will I treat that other three-headed dog Gladstone, Cross, and Disraeli, if they dare to treat me unfairly. The judges never forgave me for showing that I was their lord and master. I knew my power. I kept them in hand as easily as I might have kept Three Puppies in a leash. They kicked and chafed and barked and howled every day; but they were powerless. I did it without difficulty, and I assure you that if I can but get in I will manage the House of Commons with equal ease, and I hope without once losing equanimity." The preservation of the Doctor's equanimity under the circumstances herein presented is, I venture to say, a secondary consideration, and the people of England, Wales, and Scotland (not to mention Ireland, as Dr. Kenealy does not) may be forgiven if they turn with some anxiety to observe how the House of Commons itself bears, and has borne, the incursion of this modern Hercules. The manifesto in which this terrible threat incidentally appears is dated

66

"December, 1874," and is one of a series of blood-curdling references to members of the House of Commons individually and collectively which are of curious interest now that the author is privileged to sit covered in the presence of the Speaker, to vote and to speak. It may perhaps be noted that at the outset the proposal, cautiously put forth, was to return to Parliament the Claimant himself. Sir," writes a correspondent of the Englishman in June, 1874; "considering the subservient conduct of members of Parliament I would suggest that constituencies should organise for the purpose of securing the return of the tried friends of the unfortunate Claimant, Sir Roger Tichborne. Every effort should be made to return the Claimant himself to the House of Commons, and seats ought to be secured for Mr. Guildford Onslow, Dr. Kenealy, Mr. Skipworth, Mr. Biddulph, and other tried men whose. sterling worth is beyond dispute." This is a significant passage, of which, perhaps, we may hear more before many months are passed. A study of Dr. Kenealy's life and writings, undertaken for the purposes of this article, have, however, convinced me that the Member for Stoke is not a man greatly under the influence of sentiment. There is in all his actions and writings a keen consideration of substantial results as far as they may be turned to the account of Dr. Kenealy. When, for example, he recently visited a town in the west of England for the purpose of delivering an address, the Organising Committee "organised" a triumphant public reception, in which an open carriage drawn by four grey horses largely figured, and which was rounded off by a cheerful supper. Kenealy took his seat in the carriage, and beamed benignly through his gold spectacles on the crowds that thronged the roadway. Also he partook of the supper, and thereafter "said a few words" expressive of the satisfaction with which he regarded the manly qualities of the people of this western town in general, and of the Organising Committee in particular. The parting over night was, I have heard, quite a touching scene. The Organising Committee were charmed with the Man, though a little overawed by the Scholar. Still it was delightful to be in such company, and on the following morning the Organising Committee returned with increased pleasure, bringing with them a cheque for a good round sum of money, the net proceeds of the public entertainment. But here the sky grew dark, and the thunder which had erewhile been rolling round the accustomed heads of "the judges" broke over the astonished Organising Committee. Where were the details of the accounts? the Doctor wanted to know. He was not going to be put off with "round

sums" representing net profits. He must see and check the receipts and the expenditure, or the Organising Committee should be pilloried in everlasting infamy beside Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, and other enemies of the human race. After some show of resistance the hapless Committee produced the account, in which the open carriage, the four greys, and the supper figured among the expenses. But Dr. Kenealy would have none of such trifling with a Great Cause. If the Organising Committee chose to take him into the town behind four grey horses and afterwards to entertain him at supper that was their affair, and they must pay the cost out of their own pockets. He would have the full amount of the "takings," less cost of hire of hall, &c., and the unfortunate Organising Committee were fain to hand it over.

The same uncompromising spirit appears in the pages of the Englishman of the 17th Oct., 1874, in the form of an editorial note attached to the accounts of " The London Testimonial Fund." It appears from the figures that a series of meetings held in various parts of London with the view of furthering a national Testimonial to Dr. Kenealy had not been strikingly successful. Expenses incurred for the hire of public halls had not always been covered by the "amount collected,” and the result was that out of a total revenue of £40 16s. 9 d., £26 148. 91d. had vanished in expenses, and only £14 25. had been handed over to the Doctor. Whereupon the Committee, who appear to have gratuitously devoted their time for upwards of six months to collecting coppers for the Doctor, are gratified by the publication of the following note appended to their account:- "We hope some investigation of these accounts will be made. They are eminently unsatisfactory."

I mention these two little incidents by way of bringing out what I have been greatly struck with-to wit, Dr. Kenealy's ability to subordinate sentiment to considerations of business, and also his determination that no one shall share with him a single penny of the profits which this gigantic delusion rains into the money boxes with various labels which he rattles wherever he goes. It is quite possible that the Organising Committee in the western town referred to provided carriages for themselves also in the triumphal entry, and it is beyond doubt that they did their share in quaffing the porter and sipping the punch that circulated round the festive board at which the Doctor presided at the conclusion of his labours in the Lecture Hall. Not less improbable is it that if the suggested investigation into the accounts of the London Committee of the Kenealy National Testimonial Fund were to take place it would appear that the Committee