AND PROGRESS OF PUPPET-PLAYS IN ENGLAND.

Before we proceed farther, it will be necessary to consider, briefly, the antiquity and nature of puppet-plays in the old country. It is the more proper to do so, because they form a branch of our drama which has never been examined by the historians of our stage with as much interest and industry as the subject deserves. When we mention that no less a man than Dr. Johnson was of opinion that puppets were so capable of representing even the plays of Shakspeare, that Macbeth might be performed by them as well as by living actors, it will be evident from such a fact only, that the inquiry is far from unimportant. In connection with this opinion, and confirmatory of it, we may add, that a person of the name of Henry Rowe, shortly before the year 1797, did actually, by wooden figures, for a series of years, go through the action of the whole of that tragedy, while he himself repeated the dialogue which belongs to each of the characters.

Puppet-plays are of very ancient date in England; and, if they were not contemporary with our Mysteries, they probably immediately succeeded them.

The formidable rivalship of puppet-plays to the regular drama is established by the fact that the proprietors of the theatres in Drury Lane, and near Lincoln’s Inn Fields, formerly petitioned Charles II. that a puppet-show stationed on the present site of Cecil Street in the Strand, might not be allowed to exhibit, or might be removed to a greater distance, as its attractiveness materially interfered with the prosperity of their concerns. It is not unlikely that burlesque and ridicule were sometimes aimed at the productions of the regular stage by the exhibitors of “motions.”

Powell’s show was set up in Covent Garden, opposite to St. Paul’s Church; and the “Spectator” (No. 14) contains the letter of the sexton, who complained that the performances of Punch thinned the congregation in the church, and that, as Powell exhibited during the time of prayers, the tolling of the bell was taken, by all who heard it, for notice of the intended commencement of the exhibition. The writer of the paper then proceeds, in another epistle, to establish that the puppet-show was much superior to the opera of “Rinaldo and Armida,” represented at the Haymarket, and to observe that “too much encouragement could not be given to Mr. Powell’s skill in motions.” A regular parallel is drawn between the two, which ends most decidedly in favor of Powell in every respect but the inferior point of the moral.

From these sources we collect, most distinctly, that the popularity of Punch was completely established, and that he triumphed over all his rivals, materially lessening the receipts at least at the Opera, if not at the regular national theatres, and accomplishing at that period, by his greater attractiveness, what Dennis, by his “Essay on Operas after the Italian manner,” and other critiques de profession, had been unable to effect. He could hardly have taken such firm possession of the public mind if he had only recently emigrated from his native country.

The late Mr. Joseph Strutt, in his “Sports and Pastimes of the People of England,” thus speaks of the puppet-shows in his time: “In my memory these shows consisted of a wretched display of wooden figures, barbarously formed and decorated, without the least degree of taste or propriety: the wires that communicated the motion to them appeared at the top of their heads, and the manner in which they were made to move evinced the ignorance and inattention of the managers. The dialogues were mere jumbles of absurdities and nonsense, intermixed with low, immoral discourses, passing between Punch and the fiddler, for the orchestra rarely admitted of more than one minstrel; and these flashes of merriment were made offensive to decency by the actions of the puppet.”

From whatever cause the change may have arisen, certain it is that at present, in the ordinary exhibitions of “Punch and Judy,” the breaches of decorum complained of by Mr. Strutt are rare and slight.

We have never seen less than two men concerned in these ambulatory exhibitions: one to carry the theatre and use Punch’s tin whistle, and the other to bear the box of puppets and blow the trumpet. During the performance the money is collected from the bystanders, and far from agreeing with Mr. Strutt that the contributions are “very trifling,” we have seen, for we have taken the pains to ascertain it, three, four and five shillings obtained at each repetition; so that, supposing only ten performances take place in a summer’s day, the reward to the two men, on an average, might be about a sovereign each. On one occasion we remember to have seen three different spectators give sixpence, besides the pennies elsewhere contributed, on which the collector went back to the theatre and whispered the exhibitor, who immediately made Punch thus address the crowd: “Ladies and gentlemen, I never yet played for sevenpence halfpenny, and I never will; so good-morning.” He then “struck his tent” and departed, pocketing nearly two shillings, and excusing himself from going through the performance, under pretence that all the contributions he had received only amounted to sevenpence halfpenny.

CHAPTER III.
ANTIQUITY OF PUNCH IN AMERICA.

In the preceding chapters we have spoken of the origin, progress and high esteem held for Punch and puppet-plays throughout the countries of Italy and England; and judging from our own personal experience and actual knowledge, in still greater favor may Punch be said to hold for himself amongst the fun-loving Americans. What children’s party is brought to a perfect state of merriment unless with the greetings and comicalities of Mr. Punch?

Though for a while the tracing of the adventures and travels of Mr. Punch throughout this land is lost, yet we have before us sufficient to show that his family are of good antiquity, the New York Gazette of Feb. 20th, 1739, having the following announcement:

“To-morrow will be performed, in Mr. Holt’s long room, the new pantomime entertainment, in grotesque characters, called ‘The Adventures of Harlequin and Scaramouch; or, The Spaniard Trick’d,’ to which will be added an Optick, wherein will be represented in perspective several of the most noted cities and remarkable places in Europe and America, with a new Prologue and Epilogue addressed to the town. To begin precisely at six o’clock. Tickets to be had at Mr. Holt’s, at five shillings each.”

Ireland’s history of the New York stage preserves the next earliest record of mechanical puppets performed in this country. It refers to the New York Gazette of August, 1747:

“To be seen at the house of Mr. Hamilton Hewetson, at the sign of the Spread Eagle, near White Hall slip, Punch’s opera, ‘Bateman; or, The Unhappy Marriage,’ with a fine dialogue between Punch and his wife, Joan, acted by a set of lively figures.”

In August, 1749, the play of “Whittington and his Cat” was announced to be acted in New York city by Punch’s company of comedians, and in the following year the same company, supposed to be mechanical figures, were to have performed the “Norfolk Tragedy; or, The Babes in the Wood,” along with “Entertainments of Men and Women.”

Passing on to the time within the memory of the present generation, we find that Mr. Punch came into special favor about the year 1866, as may be gathered from the reports in the English newspapers of that time, Manvers and others of England’s best Punch and Judy players having left its shores to try their fortunes in America’s more favored channels.

In 1874 the demand for