begin yesterday and they will not end to-morrow ,134 and it is this
that has led Archer to propose " A Critical Court of Honour” 135 competent to decide disputes where players and playwrights believe they have been too harshly dealt with by critics . These disputes have sometimes been decided by courts of law , but
Archer deems them incompetent to render judgment on such technical questions. Occasionally the press has been the victim of a jest at the hands of a dramatic critic and these jests must add a cheerful
tone to the somewhat depressing aspects of dramatic criticism .136 It is probably because there have been so many critics who “ came short of rendering the best service to the public because of counting-room
pressure in favor of liberally advertising
theatres, or against the theatres whose patronage was less valu able,” because sometimes actors were friends or foes of editor or owners , and “ the critic was bidden to be 'a respecter of per
sons'” 137 that an eminent dramatic critic has raised the question “ Is dramatic criticism necessary ?” 138
The historian has but one answer to the question, dramatic criticism is absolutely essential if he is to reconstruct the dramatic
representation of the past , and it is this that leads him to change slightly an opinion expressed by Henry Austin Clapp and to say , “ The qualities of Master Samuel Pepys which made him a
dangerous neighbor in 1670 make him valuable to an historian in But press criticism of the drama is much more than the simple
question of a favorable or an unfavorable judgment. There is as yet no consensus of opinion as to what principles should 134 René Doumic, “ La Querelle des auteurs et des critiques au théâtre," Revue des Deux Mondes, September 15, 1906 , Per. V , 35: 446 -457 . 136 Fortnightly Review , April, 1903, n . s. 73: 698-705. The suggestion of such a court grew out of the exclusion of A . B . Walkley from the Garrick theater. Henry Arthur Jones wrote “ An Appeal to the Press” claiming
that Walkley's criticism had shown personal animus. 136 A . W . à Beckett wrote for the Oriental Budget a criticism of an amateur theatrical performance given for a charitable purpose and in it criticized severely the part he had taken himself . The editor sternly rebuked him and characterized the notice as libellous, but was relieved when told , “ The
actor I went for was myself! I always try to be impartial.” — Recollections of a Humorist, pp. 81-82.
137 H . A . Clapp, Reminiscences of a Dramatic Critic, pp. 23- 24.
138 Brander Matthews, Bookman, September, 1915 , 42: 82-87.
