PROGRESS OF PLAYHOUSES.

NOTWITHSTANDING the longings of the mad philosopher of Geneva in favour of caves and bear-skins, it is clear, that savage life is only a miserable state of being, and that for gaiety and enjoyment an age of refinement possesses a decided superiority. The early poetry of nations we generally find of a melancholy character; turning chiefly on their superstitious fears, revengeful enmities with neighbour ing tribes, and physical privations from a want of food and comfortable habitations. These painful ingredients enter only in small proportions into the representations of refined life, and so great is the lack of real misery, that the tragic picture can only be filled up by magnifying our little foibles and vanities, which form the chief portion of sublunary tribulation.

The fact, too, of tragedy forming the elder-born and first subject of dramatic representation, is another proof of the miseries associated with a rude state of society. Comedy is the offspring of a later age, of an age of refinement, and of course greater cheerfulness and beatitude. It is not, however, our intention to contrast the advantages of savage and civilized life, but merely to string together a few facts, comical and curious, connected with the origin and progress of the drama.

The Roman theatre, it is well known, was a large semicircular building, with long porticoes, covered galleries, and walks planted with trees, in which the people amused themselves till the plays began. All the actors were masked. The mask was an entire head like a helmet, having a painted visage, hair colours, and a large mouth, so disposed that it greatly increased the voice. To express the passions a mask was worn, which viewed in profile, represented joy on one side and grief on the other; the actor turning round dextrously when necessary. The immense size of the theatres, frequently capable of containing 30,000 people, would have rendered it absolutely impossible for the greater part of the audience to see the natural countenance of the actor; this artificial enlargement then had its use. Among the Grecians the declamation of the actors was a sort of singing; they had choruses and notes as music has, but not characters like those of the musical song.

Passing from the ancients, we find the origin of all the European theatres may be traced to a kind of extempore farce performed by persons strolling from town to town, and acting to the multitude in places of public resort. These buffooneries were in the fifteenth century succeeded by the Mysteries, in which Adam and Eve,

243

the patriarchs and prophets, and the apostles, were brought upon the stage, and very often represented in the most parodical manner. Accustomed to the splendid scenic representations of the Romish churches, it was thought no profanation thus to amuse themselves. Accordingly a play at first was considered only an afterpiece of religious duties, and was frequently acted in the church-yards or burying-grounds.

The Mysteries were succeeded in Eng land by another species of dramatic representation, called the Moralities; in which the virtues and vices of mankind were personified and introduced on the stage. In the sixteenth century, however, all these mummeries were superseded by the legitimate drama, or the productions of a Shakspeare, Jonson, and Fletcher.

The earliest patent for acting comedies. and tragedies is dated 1574; and such was the rapid progress of this rational amusement, that early in the next century, not less than fifteen licensed theatres were opened to the inhabitants of London. The best plays, especially those of Shakspeare, were acted chiefly at the Blackfriars' theatre, or at the Globe in Southwark. A flag was hoisted on the front of each theatre. The price of admission to the best place was a shilling, to the inferior ones a penny or twopence. The critics sat, on the stage, and were furnished with pipes and tobacco. The curtain drew not up, but was drawn back on each side. From the raillery of sir Philip Sidney, it is doubtful whether there was a change of scenes. It is probable this deficiency was supplied by the names of places being written in large characters on the stage; stating for instance, that this was a wood, a garden, Thebes, Rome, or Alexandria, as the case might require. The stage was lighted with branches like those hung in churches. Before the exhibitions began, three flourishes, soundings, or pieces of music were played; and music was likewise played between the acts. Perukes and masks formed part of the stage paraphernalia: and the female parts for the first hundred years were performed by young men. One dramatic piece composed the whole entertainment; and the hours of acting began at one in the afternoon, and lasted about two hours. The audience before the performance, amused themselves with reading or playing at cards; others drank ale or smoked tobacco. For some time plays were acted on Sundays only; after 1579, they were acted on Mondays and other days indiscriminately,

Such continued the state of the drama till the civil war, when it was opposed by the puritans ; a race of men morose, steru

By a provoking mistake we were again a few minutes too late to hear Mr. M'Culloch's introductory observations, and have, in consequence, been indebted to the kindness of a friend, for the commencement of the lecture. Mr. M. begins at the economical, though somewhat Scottish, hour of nine o'clock in the morning; so that it requires a little exertion on the part of suburbans to arrive by that time at the place appointed. However, as we are very desirous of presenting our readers with a tolerable transcript of these very interesting discourses, and that we may perform our task comfortably, we have some thoughts of repairing to the London-tavern over night, so that, in future, we may be ready at our post without fail next morning.

The lecturer, we understand, began by stating that all capital is destined for the maintenance of productive labour only, and may be employed in four different ways : 1. In procuring the rude produce annually required for the use of society; 2. In manufacturing and preparing that rude produce for immediate consumption; 3. In transporting commodities from places where they abound, to those where

they are wanted; 4. In dividing articles of consumption into such small quantities as suit the occasional demands of purchasers. In the first way is employed the capital of all those engaged in the culti vation of the land, in mines, or fisheries; in the second, those of manufactories; in the third, those of all wholesale merchants; and in the fourth, those of all retailers. All employed capital may be classed under one of these four general heads.

Each of these four different ways of employing capital is essentially necessary to the other three, or to the general conveniency of society.

Unless capital is first employed in raising the raw material, neither manufactures nor trade of any kind can exist, Unless capital is employed in manufacturing or preparing the rude produce, it either would not be produced at all, or it would not be brought into that state adapted for use and consumption. Unless capital is employed in conveying rude or manufactured produce to districts where it is wanted, no more of it would be produced than necessary for the consumption of the neighbourhood. The capital of the merchant exchanges the surplus produce of one place for that of another, and thus increases the general industry and enjoyin the retail trade, commodities could not ment. Again, without capital employed be subdivided into the small quantities or parcels suited to the demands of pur chasers. If there were no such trade as a butcher, for example, every man would be obliged to purchase a whole ox, or a whole sheep at a time. The prejudices of some persons against shopkeepers and tradesmen are altogether without foundation. So far is it from being necessary either to tax them or to restrict their numbers, that they can never be so multiplied as to hurt the public; though they may, by competition, so as to hurt one another.

It is an error to suppose society is more benefited by capital being invested in one branch of industry more than another. The pursuits of the agriculturist, the merchant, the carrier, and the retailer are all alike advantageous to the community; and, in proportion to the amount of their respective capital, equally productive of national wealth. If it. were not so, the less beneficial pursuits would be abandoned. It is the rate of profit which determines the employment of capital, which again depends on the price-the demand or the necessities of the public, for that species of industry; which if not equal in different kinds of employment, that employment gradually declines from want of encouragement.

M. Quesnay, and after him Dr. Smith, had assumed a distinction between agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial industry; and attempted to show the superior productiveness of the former.

Mr. M Culloch here gave some account of Quesnay, and the theory of the Econo mists. The father of the French philosopher was a small proprietor, and having been educated in the country, he was naturally inclined to regard agriculture with peculiar favour. Observing the depressed state of France, he set himself to trace the cause which prevented her making the progress which the ingenuity of her population, a fine climate, and fertile soil seemed to ensure. He speedily discovered that the prevention of the exportation of corn, and the preference given by the regulations of Colbert to manufac turing and commercial industry, formed the most powerful obstacles to the improvement of agriculture. Not content with exposing the impolicy of this preference, Quesnay fell into an error in the opposite extreme, by attempting to show that agriculture was not merely equal, but superior to manufactures, and the only species of industry which contributed to increase the riches of a nation. Founding his theory on the indisputable fact, that every thing which ministers to our wants is drawn from the soil, he assumed, as the basis of his system, that the earth is the ONLY source of wealth, and held that industry is incapable of producing any new value except when employed in agriculture, including under that term fisheries and mines. His observation of the striking effects of the vegetation of nature, and the circumstance that of those who are engaged in industry, none but the cultivators of the soil paid rent for the use of natural agents, appeared an incontrovertible proof, that agriculture was the only species of industry which yielded a net surplus (produit net) above the expense of production.

On this principle, Quesnay proceeded to divide society into three classes: 1. The productive class, by whose agency all wealth is produced, consisted of farmers and labourers, engaged in agriculture; 2. The proprietary class, consisting of those who live on the rent of land, or the net surplus raised by the cultivators, after their necessary expenses have been deducted; 3. The unproductive class consisted of merchants, manufacturers, citizens, menials, &c., whose labour, though exceedingly useful, added nothing, according to Quesnay, to the national wealth, and who subsisted entirely on the wages paid to them by the other two classes. Supposing this classification correct, all taxes must ulti

245

mately fall on the proprietary class, since the other two classes could hold nothing which had not in the first instance been derived from the owner of the soil. Consistently with this principle, and to save the expenses of indirect taxation, Quesnay proposed that all existing burdens should be repealed, and that a single tax, (impôt unique,) laid directly on the land, should be imposed in their place.

In this ingenious theory, M. Quesnay and his followers mistook altogether the nature of production, and really supposed wealth to consist of matter; whereas, in its natural state, matter is rarely possessed of utility, and is always destitute of value. Industry does not produce wealth, by making any addition to the matter of our globe; this being a quantity susceptible of neither augmentation nor diminution. Its real effect is to produce wealth by giving utility to matter already in existence; and it is obvious, that labour employed in manufactures and commerce is just as productive of utility, and conse quently of wealth, as the labour employed in agriculture. The opinion of the economists, that the labour of the agriculturist is assisted by natural agents, is unquestionably true: the husbandman prepares the ground for the seed and deposits it there; but it is nature that unfolds the germ, that feeds and ripens the growing plant and brings it to a state of maturity. But it is easy to show that nature is equally aiding in every other branch of industry. The powers of water and of wind, which move our machinery, support our ships, and impel them over the deep,-the pressure of the atmosphere, and the elasticity of steam, which enable us to work the most stupendous engines,-are they not the spontaneous gifts of nature? In fact, the single advantage of machinery consists in its having enabled us to press the powers of nature into our service, and to make them perform the drudgery, the principal of which, otherwise, must have been the labour of man. In navigation, for example, is it possible to doubt that the powers of nature, the buoyancy of the water, impulse of the wind, and the polarity of the magnet, contribute as much as the toil of the sailor to waft our ships from shore to shore? In bleaching and fermentation the whole process is carried on by natural agents; and it is to the effects of heat in softening and melting metals, in preparing our food, and in warming our houses, that in these northern climates we owe the chief comforts of our habitations.

Finally, it is an idle refinement to institute distinctions between rural and manufacturing industry: for wealth is necessarily the result of both; and it is by

their concurrence products acquire consumable value. The value of corn results as much from the reaper who gathers it in, of the miller and baker, who convert it successively into flour and bread, as it does from that of the sower and ploughman. Without the labour of the weaver, the raw material of flax would lose all its value, and be regarded no way superior to the most useless weed that grows. What can we gain by inquiries to determine which of these two species of labour conduces most to national wealth? or are they not as idle as if we busied ourselves, whether the right or left foot is most useful in walking?

The lecturer concluded his interesting discourse, with remarking on the alleged increased mortality among mechanics and artisans he denied the popular notion of the degrading tendency of manufactures, and concluded with expatiating on the immense advantages which had resulted from them to this country. They had laid the foundation of agricultural prosperity, by the wealth they had created, and tended materially to the diffusion of comfort and independence among all classes of society.

LECTURE VI.

MONEY.

Origin of Money-Different Commodities used for that Purpose-Advantages of Gold and Silver-Money not a Sign of Value-Prices of Commodities Seignorage-Expense of a Metallic Currency-Origin of Paper Money. AFTER alluding to the scope of the preceding lectures, Mr.M'Culloch introduced his present subject with stating, that in a state of society in which every one produces enough for his own consumption and no more, there would be no need of money. Exchange is the foundation of money, and the instrument by which the butcher, brewer, or agriculturist exchanges the commodities of which they have a surplus, for those in which they are deficient. In different countries and stages of civilization, various media have been employed for the purpose of barter. Such nations as subsist by the chase use the skins of wild beasts. Cattle, among the ancient Germans, was the regular medium of transfer, and it was in this description of coin all penalties and fines for crimes and misdemeanours were levied. In the agricultural state corn is employed as the measure of value. In Abyssinia, and among other African tribes, small shells termed cowries perform the office of money; and in Newfoundland, and some parts of Asia, dried fish is used.

But none of those commodities possess the qualities essential to money, namely, divisibility, durability, portableness, and unchangeable value. Skins could not be divided, so as to suit the purposes of trade; cattle and corn were objectionable, both from their changeable value, and the difficulty of transporting them from place to place.

These defects led to the general adoption of gold and silver as the instrument of exchange. The precious metals are less subject to deterioration than other commodities. They comprise a great value in a small compass, and are of the same quality all over the world. A considerable period, however, elapsed before they were used in their present form. At first, bars or ingots were only employed; a lump of silver or gold was bartered for corn or cattle. This is not conjectural, since we learn from Pliny and Aristotle, that commodities were regularly exchanged for certain quantities of the precious metals. And in the sacred writings it is related that Abraham bought a piece of land for 400 shekels of silver. China, money does not circulate under public authority but in bulk, and passes according to weight. Such a mode opens a wide door to adulteration, and affords no mark for ascertaining the fineness of the metal. Indeed, the operation of assaying and ascertaining the proportion of pure gold or silver in a given quantity. of specie, is a task of difficulty with all the advantages of modern science.

In

Hence money with the mark of authority originated; a stamp was used to indicate at once its weight and fineness. Exchanges were thereby facilitated, and every one had the means of disposing of his surplus products. Coin is merely a piece of metal of known weight and fineness, the great advantage of which consists in saving the trouble of weighing, and protecting the receiver from fraud. Money is incorrectly said to be a sign of value; it is not a sign, but the thing signified. A promissory note is truly only a sign, and is intrinsically worth only the value of the paper. But the value of gold and silver depends on the same principle as the value of other commodities: they measure the value of commodities, no more than commodities measure the value of them. If a hat sell for a guinea, it is as correct a measure of the value of a guinea, as a guinea is of the hat. Mr. Locke thought the value of the precious metals was conventional, and depended on the mutual agreement of society; the notion was refuted by the famous Law, of Mississippi memory, and Mr.Harris. Without monopoly, the price of gold is regu