THE THEATRE QUESTION.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume I, Issue 52, 11 October 1887, Page 2

THE THEATRE QUESTION.

It is always gratifying to a journalist to be able to stir up public opinion on any subject, and it is in this light we must regard a communication from a correspondent, given elsewhere, and dealing with our reference to the fire question. We were at first inclined to think the writer of the letter was treating himself to a joke, but he evidently is taking the matter seriously, and informs us that he “ could not help pondering a good deal on the subject.” It would be well if the public would think a good deal more on many questions in which they are deeply interested, and if our correspondent is not to be complimented on the result of his ponderings, it is to his credit that he should have taken the trouble to think.

The writer says that our views are of an alarmist nature, and accuses us of bolstering up our case with arguments that are not applicable to the circumstances, We suppose he means to say that because the Paris Opera Comique and Exeter Theatre 'catastrophes have occurred so far away it is not allowable to make the slighest approach to the possibility of a parallel case here—our critic would not have a comparison, made in degree. Another sad case has just come under our notice, which may as well be given here, with all deference to our correspondent. A fire broke out a short time ago in a theatre at Hurley, Wisconsin. All the audience escaped, but eleven actors and actresses were burnt, two girls being consumed at a window in view of the onlookers, who could not render assistance until it way too late. This, of course, it is not intended should have any application here, but it has a bearing on the general question, We have endeavored .not_to fall into extreme or alarmist views-—the plain facts are before us, and a good case can be stated without resorting to the imagination, If our comments have not been lucid enough for “ Common-sense," we take the liberty to lament the obliquity of his mental vision. Then we are tofd we should remember that there are gatherings in the halls for charitable purposes as well as for theatrical amusements. “ Commonsense” must have very peculiar views on charity. Perhaps he thinks that the sacrifice of a few hundred of those wicked theatre-goers would be a blessing rather than otherwise. At any rate his moral principles are not such as we should care to recommend. For our part we would prefer that there were no possibility of danger to anyone who entered the buildings, whether to gratify the fancies of weak human nature or to engage in devotional exercises. It is only the galleries, however, that are at fault, and these can be altered without very great cost to the proprietors—a mere nothing in comparison to the danger to life—and we have too much respect for the owners to think it possible that they will resent the extra expense, or object to closing the galleries until such time as they see fit to make the alterations. We did not refer to this matter long ago for the best of reasons.