KNIGHTS OF THE THEATRE

Evening Star, Issue 19782, 4 February 1928, Page 18

KNIGHTS OF THE THEATRE

[Written by C. R, Alien, for the ‘Evening Star.’] Word of the illness of Sir John Martin Harvey comes to remind us that the ranks of theatrical, knights are sorely diminished. A roll-call of those actors whom the King has honored might suggest an interesting course of theatrical biography to any who may be interested in this fascinating by-path in history. Sir Henry Irving has his biographer in Bram Stoker, whose ‘ Dracula ’ has lately been adapted for the stage. To supplement this somewhat egotistical work there is Ellen Terry’s autobiography, which is a book of such unaffected humility and sweet good sense that one cannot but fall under its spell. Mrs Corny ns Carr, in her latest book of reminiscences, devotes many chapters to Irving and the Lyceum, for whose productions she designed so many costumes.

It is scarcely eighteen months since Mr Henry Ainley announced to an audience of radia listeners the passing of Sir Squire Bancroft. Tho Bancroft name is synonymous with that of the Haymarket, which house has had at least three historians. First there is Lady Bancroft’s book, written under the name by which she was known and beloved by a former generation, Marie Wilton. Then there is ‘The History of the Haymarket Theatre,’ written by Mr Cyril Maude, who, in partnership with the late Mr Frederick Harrison, carried on the Bancroft tradition for so many years at the Haymarket. It was said of Mr Harrison when he died that ho was the last representative of the old courtly school of managers. Lady Tree, in her life of Beerbohm Tree, deals with the ‘Trilby’ days at the Haymarket; but her book is more concerned with the magnificent theatre on the other side of tho street, which, it is said, was built out of the profits on ‘ irilby.’ Sir Herbert Beerbohm Tree was the only actor-knight who rivalled Irving in magnificence of production. Ino glory of His Majesty’s returned for a brief season when Flecker’s ‘ Hassan ’ was produced there. Tree was to have played Hassan himself, but other matters intervened, and the poet died at Davos with hope still deferred. Sir Charles Wyndham will always be lemenibered as the delineator of David Garrick. He was an army surgeon in the American Civil War, and, like the son of another theatrical knight, Mr Gilbei t Hare, found acting more congenial than doctoring. 1 do not think Sir John Hare has a biographer, but he figures in many books of reminiscences, notably that of Mr Seymour Hicks, bn- Johnson Forbes-Robertson, though he never established a temple of Thespis like Irving and Tree, is-perhaps a greater figure than either. He retired from the stage before his Hamlet had suffered tarnishment, and appears today only as a lecturer. Ho is to be heard at Tufton street, in Westminster, where the blind of London forgather for an annual reading competition. I have never heard a more mellifluous voice, either from stage or pulpit. The sound of it carried mo back in thought to my first London theatre more than twenty years back when ForbesRobertson played Mark Embury in ‘Mice and Men,’ which afterwards found its way into the Nellie StewartHarcourt Beatty repertoire in New Zealand. However, 1 must avoid Mr Bram Stoker’s mistake of an autobiographical biography. Sir Johnson Forbes-Robertson is a pre-Raphaelite, perhaps the last of them, though Mr Forbes Maddox Hueffcr carries on the name. It is hardly necessary to state that Forbes-Robertson posed "for Dante in the pre-Raphaelite picture par excellence.

There are four knights yet to be celebrated, and only a section of a column to do it in. Sir George Alexander, though Mr H. G. Wells may make a butt of him in ‘ The New Machiavelli,’ did something more than advertise the new soft double collar. He was the master-producer of Pinero and Wilde, and to his courage we owe the production of what is perhaps tho most beautiful of modern poetical dramas, the ‘ Paolo and Francesca ’ of f> ephen Phillips.' Sir Gerald Du Manner fills the place of Sir George Alexander in more senses of the phrase than one. Not only Inis he occupied tho Saint James with ‘lnterference ’ for the last year, but he is the head of the profession on its administrative side, as Sir George was before him. His partnership with Mr Frank Curzon at Wyndham’s is comparable with that between Mr Maude and Mr Harrison. In both cases tbe manager has been taken and the actor left. Sir Gerald has perhaps created more Barrie roles than any other actor, which is but fitting, as he’ is the uncle of Barrie’s adopted children. Sir Frank Benson may be described .os tho knight errant of the company. Ho takes the English-speaking world as his crusading ground, and champions Shakespeare wherever he goes. He assisted •Mr Lascelles, tho pageantmaster at Wembley, and must have found it difficult to keep his hands off the megaphone. There remains Sir Charles Hawtrey, the greatest stage prevaricator tho English stage has seen. It is difficult to say why Sir Charles Hawtrey was knighted. It was certainly not for the part ho played in ‘Up in Mabel’s Room.’ He was so specialised an actor that he was able to retain his moustache in the white light of the morning after the night before. That no man grudged him his honor was manifest by the spirit which informed the memorial service at Saint Martin’s-in-the-Fields. Canon Hannay, in whose play Hawtrey was acting up to within a few days of his death, paid him a fine tribute: “He gave the people laughter.” On week days Canon,Han nay is George Birmingham. ]

So ends the roll of theatrical knights It is probably incomplete. Sir Harry Lauder may have played Hamlet, and Sir Barry Jackson certainly has “ produced” him, in modern dress. Sir Gerald is left in possession of the field, so far as London is concerned It is quite certain that he will not play Hamlet, unless it, he at the theatrical garden party.