Hawaii Holomua, Volume II, Number 43, 7 November 1894 — Barnstormers All. [ARTICLE]

Barnstormers All.

s Allow me to tuke you to task f ; f.ir yonr adnlation of tbe company I of plnyere who are now bolding i: tbe boards at tbe Opeia House. I I Frora your repeated commenda- - tions of tbeir play I was almost • porsuaded that it migbt be a mistako ou my part to suppose tbat ( ) tbey were unfit for most of tbe i pieeea tbev’ bave attempted -i to render, ond so, against my r botter judgment, I was induced 1 1 to go and see tbeir presontation 3 ' of the “Henrietta,” last evening. t Tbe first solecisra I observed on tbo part of the management was * th'j crediting of tbe play to Stuart Tiobson as (autbor) were as j everyone who knows anytbing of , sucb matters knows that Bronson j Howanl wroto that cbarming j pla}-. Tbe most unpardonable I solecism, bowever, was tbe plae- i ing of sncb a play iu tbe bands 1 of snch playors, wbo are no more fit for it tban tbey are for purposes of legislatiou. After having I aeon Stuart Robsonate j>erson Ber , tie it was little joy to me to waieh . the very stagey Mr, St.ow in tbat part; and witb recoIlections of otbere of Robson’s tronpe, tbe very “dizzy” acting of some ; membors of the Dailey eomhinatic>n proved exceedingly dismal. ; This remark applies witb esj>eeial force to tbe pursou, wbo iu a good troupe, is the life and soul of tbe pieee, from tbo moraeut of bis Jentry on the stage. The stock-jobbing pareon of tbe the author is by no means the stitf. dismal aud seedy old party j presouted to us last nigbt. With- ' out going iuto a detailed critique ;of the presentation. let me ven-| ture tbe opinion tbat Mr. Snow j passed tbe lino of mediocrity, old \ analstyne aud bis othcr sou, i ! with tbe old clerk closely ap j proachcd that line, while tbe entire kalanee of tbe company 1 were strung away at varying distances in the rear. It was most oppressive to sit throngb the soletnu stilluess attending some !of tbe scenes tbat, with an even moderately accomp)isheU eompauy, would bave kept tbe bouse convulsed with mirth. I am quite coufirmed in my previous \ opinion that Mr. Dai)«y, having j struck “relvet” on bis last en- 3 gagement here, tbonght he conld t safely dispence with what Uttle 1 ,taient his ironpe contained. and i pxlm off upon our • long-suffering e Honolulu puklie anj kiud of t ‘ barnstormers' that he coald 1 galber at tbe soond olbts wbistle £ from among the attaches o! 4he c aumoroas S*n Francisco stages. a ln my hnmhle jndgment tbis «e- a tion oo Mr. Dailey’s p«rt was not e f*ir to Honolulu. nor oroditable e to bimse!f, in fact, Ulooksnot g nnlike dishonesty on his part e i , . . . t >

e Will yoa print the foregoing. as i| * mild, but well deserred protest *gainst tbīs action of Mr. Dailey s io setting l»efore the puhlie of v this city bills of fare rery good [, in tberaselves. bat so very badly ■. serve«l as to nentr:»lire the good e intentions and talects of tbe liter*ry cooks who prep«red tfaem for tbe pnhlie. tbus obliging a Goud Natared Crit;c.