be reputed infamous." You perceive then, according to this commentator, that the infamy falls only on those who act infamous plays.

was.

Since time changes every thing, rational men will judge the subject as it is, not as it

Were not the physicians turned out of Rome as infamous persons ?* And in the esteem they are now held, is there the least mark of their infamy left; Why then should

any

reflection remain to stigmatize a laudable and ingenious profession, which in France (and perhaps elsewhere) is become rather the school of virtue than that of vice? The reason why players formerly were declared infamous, was from the infamy so predominant in the plays which they acted, and the infamy which they themselves added to it by their dissolute

eh biur lives. And now, since that cause_is re

A new moved, its consequences indubitably should

. ,

be abolished. If any consequences are to be drawn from this happy change, it is, that plays being altogether unblameable, those who act them, provided they live honestly, should not be reckoned among the number of dishonourable persons. This is so far true, that the being a player does not degrade any man's quality. FLORJDOR, who is said to have been the greatest player France ever had, being a gentleman by birth, was not judged unworthy of that title upon account of his profession. When inquiry was made about the false noblesse, he was admitted by the king and council to make out the truth of his, which by right of inheritance, descended to his posterity. Those of the Opera, if born gentlemen, are not (by the institutes granted to that musical academy) to lose their quality. Now, are there prerogatives for the one which are not

to be allowed to the other? And if there be any distinction between them, have not all ages determined it in favour of comedy, since by the consent of all nations, poetry is the elder sister of music?

You say, several Doctors (or at least such as pretend to be so) have shewn you certain rituals which forbid the confessors to administer the sacraments to players, which they confirm by the authority of several councils. To this I answer, that those rituals, and the canons of those councils, only mean it of such players who act scandalous pieces, or who act themselves immodestly. But let those people tell you what ditference they make between stage-plays and other kind of sports ; for as to the rituals, the canons, the councils, &c. they make none, but equally prohibit them all. Yet your Doctors, who talk so loudly of the fathers and the councils, do not scrupulously fol

L

low their decisions against gaming and other sports. We find that abbots, priests, bishops and ecclesiastics make no difficulty of playing, and pretend that all the censures of the Fathers ought to be understood of the EXCESS in sports, and not of those which are moderate, and used without much application, to pass away a little time. Why then should not the same thing be urged, and the same indulgence allowed in behalf of plays, since we find such a dispensation with respect to other sports? Besides should you ask the bishops and prelates what they think of plays, they would declare, that when they are modest, and have nothing in them which wounds morality and christianity, they do not pretend to censure them. And even if they were silent in the case, one may guess at their opinion by their conduct, since in those very diocesses where those severe rituals are used, plays are acted, tolerated, and perhaps approved. If they

are bad, why are they tolerated ? As they are acted at Paris, I see no fault in them. It is true, I cannot pass a definitive judgment upon them, since I never go to see them ; but there are three very easy modes of knowing what is done at the theatres ; and I acknowledge that I have made use of all three. The first is, to inform one's self of it by men of sense and probity, who, out of that horror they have to sin, would not allow themselves to be present at those exhibitions, if sinful. The next is, to judge, by the confessions of those who go thither of the evil effects which plays produce upon their minds. The third is, the reading of the plays :-And I protest, by these ways I have not been able to discover the least appearance of the excess which the Fathers with so much justice condemned in plays. Numerous persons of eminent virtue, and of a very nice, not to say scrupulous conscience, have been forced to own to me,