

HAMmToN HOUSE,, Sept. z, 1874.
{"character_count": 7104, "word_count": 1210, "ccnet_language_score": [0.958899974822998], "ccnet_perplexity": [1224.800048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



ther preface, Iproceed.-The Duke of Wellington
has in his collection painting, /" Christ in the
Garden" which he purchased at a considerable
price, copy of very superior excellence OF the
celebrated painting of that subject. Soon after
wards, the British Government bought the original
at the enormous price OF six thousand pounds ster
ling, for the National Gallery. When these two
works Of art, the reputed original and the reputed
copy, came thus in uxta position before the trbu-
nal of artistic criticism, considerable doubts were
raised whether after all the Duke of Welngton's
was not the original and the government picture
the copy. So closely is it possible for two differ
ent productions of art to resemble each other. .


There Is case now before the American public
tar more wonderful than this case Of artistic re-
sembance OF an infinitely more astonishing kind.
Those who never had the pleasure of seeing Mr..
Macready's performance of any of his celebrated
parts, may now have that qualification by visiting
the Park Theatre. Let us not be told that Mr..
Macready is not in New York ; that he is an
nounced on the contrary at Philadelphia II is no
such thing. He is at the Park, where he has as
sumed the name Of Anderson. We saw him with
our bodily eyes there, in visible form and SUBJ
stance. So we said and so we believed, until after
leaving the house we actually saw Mr.. Macready,
not the stage, but in his proper person, at time
and place incompatible with the appearance on
the Park boards which we had just witnessed. II
was not then, 1t seems, Mr.. Macready Prodigi-
GUS y


Were such things here do speak about


Or have we eaten of the insane root,


That takes the reason prisoner3


Mr.. Anderson has robbed Mr.. Macready of his
personal identity. Il is not an imitstion Of style
II is the actual TRANSMISSION OF the elements of nd
vduality of one man into another. Philosophers
have startled common minds by prromulging the
Anderson has afforded practical demonstration Of
process infinitely more incredible, tor he has
tually effected the transmigraton OF bodies. We
saw Mr.. Anderson several years ago, when he was
by Macready Mr.. Anderson was then Mr.
Anderson. He had his own attributes. It was
possible, when necessary. to call witness to Q
jury box to establish his identity He had, like all
men, his distinguishing traits. His limbs moved,
his eye rolled, his head was held on his shoulders
his gesticulations. gait, voice, and play OF counte-
nance, were governed by the dictates Of his own
will, and the promptings of his own mind. Mais
nous apoms change tout cela The nature ct Mr.
Anderson is now subdued to the very qualities Of
his lord. His body is governed by Macready's
spirit. All the elements of Macready's individua
The motion of the limbs, the play oi the muscles,
every characteristic gesticuation, the gait, the
dragging after him Of the feet, scraping the stage
slowly with the toes the see saw of the shoulders,
the turning of the eyes one way and the head ano
ther, the modulation and pitch of the voice
the arrangement, length, and color of the
hair, giving peculiar character to the head,
the hands and fingers, to say nothing OF those
things which apperain to the province OF the dress
er and the wardrobe, none of which are neglected,
are SO identical with his great original, that we
protest seriously and in good faith that tor several
minutes after the first entrance OF the actor we
could not convince ourselves that it was not Ma
cready whose bodily presence we beheld. We had
recourse to the bill, which assured US, contrary to
he n
Anderson and not Mr.. Macready. 1t has been said
that any admirer of Mr.. Macready, provided he
were blindfolded, might witness any performance
OF Mr.. Anderson, without discovering that II was
not Mr.. Macready. We maintain that the reno
val OF the bandage from the eyes would only in
crease such assurance by summoning the evidence
London critics call Mr.. Anderson Macceady's
shado,0. This implies simllitude ot outline only,
and feebly expresses the marvellous identity which
this consummate mime has realized. His per-
fOrmances are stereotypes OF those of Macready.
His presence the boards excites the same feeling
OF awe as preternatural apparltion. He is Mac
ready's Wrath.


The performances of this actor follow those OF
Macready with closeness of resemblance extend
ing to the minutest conceivable Details painfully
accurate that it is impossible for any familiar
with the one to estimate fairly the pretensons OF
of the other When we visit the theatre the aston
ishment produced at the accuracy of the copy ef
fecually excludes all consideration Of the absolute
merits Of the performance. We shall not attempt
to criticiseshs actor, because he puts It out OF our
power to do So He renders 1t impossible for US to
think of himself at all by never permitting us for
one moment to forget his master and patron. An
idea has occurred to US, a hint OF which we would
TAIN whisper IN the lug OF our excellent TREND
Simpson, whose treasury would be thereby replen-
ished far more effeetuay than by the brilliant con.
stellation which he has attracted from the eastern
skies. Let him get up Shakspeare's Comedy OF Er
rors, ''and induce MacreadyandAnderson 70 person
ate, the one Antipholus OF EPhesus, and the other
Antiphouso OF Syracuse. He will easily find two low
comedians, who, by the aid of dresses, paint, wigs,
aud little drilling, may present sufficiently lu-
dicrous resemblance for the two Dromios. Our
life upon it, he will have such a run Of houses as
have not been witnessed at the Park since the
palmy days Of that temple OF the legitimate drama,
when Price, inits directorn chair, added.hs acute
respected lessee. Only conceive such perform
ance. Imagine the audience as effectually de.
ceIved as Adriana herself, and finding il really i'm
possible TO guess which is which OF the duplicate
Antipho. Imagine the roars Of laughter which
the following dialogue would produce -


Duke-stand apars-I know not which is which.


.adriana-Which of you two did dine with me to-day7


.adriana a--And are you not my husbandf


.antipholns Of Ephesus-No, | say nay to that, &C.


Although in friendly regard to the Park treasury
we recommend this, we frankly acknowledge that
we should not ourselves venture to attend the per-
formance. There are paroxysms Of laughter which
are not unattended with danger 10 life, and If the
audience, either wholly or partially, should expire
under Inc exhDltion, Is question !0r grave con-
slderation whether verdict of wIlful murder
would not be brought in against Macready and
Anderson as principals, and against Simpson as ac-
cessory before the fact


AN EUROPEAN TRAVELLER


ARRrvALs-Col Trotten, u. S. A.; Hon. Lewis
Cass, jr., Detroit; Mr.. Ferguson, of South Caroi-
ma, who distinguished himself by religious essay
in the theological department at Cambridge, at the
American. Gen. Leslie Coombs, Kentucky; Gen
Ttllmadge, N. Y, al the Astor. Judge Waynes,
Savannah; Col. Cehens, Baltimore Judge Dom
nell, U. G., at the City Hotel M. 5. d. Iturbide,