sarah bernhardt and her tomb—the actress’s holiday—love of her son—sarah bernhardt shrimping—why she left the comédie fran?aise—life in paris—a french claque—three ominous raps—strike of the orchestra—parisian theatre customs—programmes—late comers—the matinée hat—advertisement drop scene—first night of hamlet—madame bernhardt’s own reading of hamlet—yorick’s skull—dr. horace howard furness—a great shakespearian library.

it is not every one who cares to erect his own mausoleum during his life.

there are some quaint and weird people who prefer to do so, however: whether it is to save their friends and relations trouble after their demise, whether from some morbid desire to face death, or whether for notoriety, who can tell? was it not one of our dukes who built a charming crematorium for the benefit of the public, and beside it one for himself, the latter to be given over to general use after he himself had been reduced to spotless ashes within its walls? he was a public benefactor, for his wise action encouraged cremation, a system which for the sake of health and prosperity is sure to come in time.

[pg 152]

madame sarah bernhardt has not erected a crematorium, but on one of the highest spots of the famous père lachaise cemetery in paris she has placed her tomb. it is a solid stone structure, like a large sarcophagus, but it is supported on four arches, so that light may be seen beneath, and the solidity of the slabs is thereby somewhat lessened. one word only is engraven on the stone:

bernhardt.

this is the mausoleum of one of the greatest actresses the world has ever known. what is lacking in the length of inscription is made up by the size of the lettering.

upon the tomb lay one enormous wreath on the jour des morts, 1902, and innumerable people paid homage to it, or stared out of curiosity at the handsome erection.

though folk say madame bernhardt courts notoriety, there are moments when she seeks solitude as a recreation, and she has a great love of the sea.

every year for two months she disappears from theatrical life. she forgets that such a thing as the stage exists, she never reads a play, and as far as theatrical matters are concerned she lives in another sphere. that is part of her holiday. it is not a holiday of rest, for she never rests; it is a holiday because of the change of scene, change of thought, change of occupation. her day at her seaside home is really a very energetic one.

photo by lafayette, new bond street.

madame sarah bernhardt as hamlet.

at five the great artiste rises, dons a short skirt, [pg 153]country boots, and prepares to enjoy herself. often the early hours are spent in shooting small birds. she rarely misses her quarry, for her artistic eye helps her in measuring distance, and her aim is generally deadly. another favourite entertainment is to shrimp. she takes off her shoes and stockings and for a couple of hours will stand in the water shrimping, for her “resting” is as energetic as everything else she does. she plies her net in truly professional style, gets wildly enthusiastic over a good catch, and loves to eat her freshly boiled fish at déjeuner. perhaps she has a game with her ten lovely russian dogs before that mid-day meal.

her surroundings are beautiful. she adores flowers—flowers are everywhere; she admires works of art—works of art are about her, for she has achieved her own position, her own wealth, and why should she not have all she loves best close at hand?

after déjeuner the guests, of whom there are never more than two or three, such as m. rostand (author of cyrano de bergerac) and his wife, rest and read. not so madame bernhardt. she sits in the open air, her head covered with a shady hat, and plays salta with her son. this game is a kind of draughts, and often during their two months’ holiday-making she and her only child maurice will amuse themselves in this way for two or three hours in the afternoon; generally she wins, much to her joy. she simply loves heat, like the salamanders, and, even in july, when other people feel too hot, she would gladly wear furs and have a fire. she can never be too[pg 154] warm apparently. her own rooms are kept like a hothouse, for cold paralyses her bodily and mentally.

how she adores her son—she speaks of him as a woman speaks of her lover; maurice comes before all her art, before all else in the world, for maurice to her is life. he has married a clever woman, a descendant of a royal house, and has a boy and two girls adored by their grandmother almost as much as their father. she plays with them, gets up games for them, dances with them, throws herself as completely into their young lives as she does into everything else.

about 3.30 au tennis is the cry. salta is put aside and every one has to play tennis. away to tennis she trips. sarah never gets hot, but always looks cool in the white she invariably wears. she wants an active life, and if her brain is not working her body must be, so she plays hard at the game, and when tea is ready in the arbour close at hand, about 6.30, she almost weeps if she has to leave an unfinished “sett.”

she must be interested, or she would be bored; she must be amused, or she would be weary; thus she works hard at her recreations, the enforced rest while reading a novel being her only time of repose during her summer holiday. she walks when she has nothing else to do, and rambles for miles around her seaside home, only occasionally going on long carriage expeditions, with her tents and her servants, to pitch camp for the night somewhere along the coast.

then comes dinner—dinner served with all the[pg 155] glories of a parisian chef, for madame, although a small eater, believes well-cooked food necessary to existence. there is no hurry over dinner, and “guess” games are all the fashion, games which she cleverly arranges to suit the children. no evening dresses are allowed, nor décolleté frocks; except for flowers and well-cooked food, madame likes to feel she is in the country and far removed from paris, therefore a dainty blouse is all that is permitted. music is often enjoyed in the evening. sometimes on a fine night madame will exclaim:

“let us go and fish,” and off they all go. down the endless steps cut in the rock the party stumble, and on the seashore they drag their nets. up those same steps every night toil men with buckets of salt water, for the great actress has a boiling salt water bath every morning, to which she attributes much of her good health. fishermen throw nets for the evening’s catch, but “sarah” is most energetic in hauling them in, and gets wildly excited at a good haul. her unfailing energy is thrown even into the fishing, and she will stay out till the small hours enjoying the sport. one summer madame bernhardt caught a devil fish—this delighted her. she took it home and quickly modelled a vase from her treasure. seaweed and shells formed its stand, the tail its stem. she seldom sculpts nowadays, but the power is still there.

it was in 1880 that she retired from the comédie fran?aise, not being content with her salary of ￡1,200 a year, and she then announced her intention of making sculpture and painting her profession. after[pg 156] a rest, however, she fortunately changed her mind, or the stage would have lost one of the greatest actresses the world has known. perhaps the apotheosis of her life was in december, 1896, when she was acclaimed queen of the french stage, and the leading poets of her country recited odes in her honour. on that occasion the heroine of the fête declared:

“for twenty-nine years i have given the public the vibrations of my soul, the pulsations of my heart, and the tears of my eyes. i have played 112 parts, i have created thirty-eight new characters, sixteen of which are the work of poets. i have struggled as no other human being has struggled.... i have ardently longed to climb the topmost pinnacle of my art. i have not yet reached it. by far the smaller part of my life remains for me to live; but what matters it? every day brings me nearer to the realisation of my dream. the hours that have flown away with my youth have left me my courage and cheerfulness, for my goal is unchanged, and i am marching towards it.”

she was right; there is always something beyond our grasp, and those who think they have seized it must court failure from that moment. those nearest perfection best know how far they really are from it.

madame bernhardt’s mind is penetrating, yet her body never rests. she can do with very little sleep—can live without butcher’s meat, rarely drinks alcohol, and prefers milk to anything. perhaps this is the reason of her perpetual youth. she loves her holiday, she loves the simple life of the country,[pg 157] the repose from the world, the knowledge that autograph hunters and reporters cannot waylay her, and in the country she ceases to be an actress and can enjoy being a woman.

in paris her life is very different. she resides in a beautiful hotel surrounded by works of art, and keeps a table ouverte for her friends. she rises at eleven, when she has her masseuse and her boiling bath, sees her servants, and gives personal orders for everything in the establishment. she is one of those women who find time for all details, and is capable of seeing to most matters well. at 12.30 is déjeuner, rarely finished till 2 o’clock, as friends constantly drop in. then off to the theatre, where she rehearses till six. there she sits in a little box, from which point of vantage she can see everything and yet be out of draughts. she always wears white, even in the theatre, and looks as smart as though at a party instead of on business bent. dresses are brought her for inspection, she alters, changes, admires, or deplores as fancy takes her; she arranges the lighting, decides a little more blue or a little less green will give the tone required; but then she has that inner knowledge of harmony and the true painter spirit. she is never out of tune. at six high-tea is served in her dressing-room, for she rarely leaves the theatre. the meal consists mostly of fish—lobster, crab, cray-fish, shrimps, scallops cooked or raw—with a little tea and lots of milk. a chat with a friend, a peep at a new play, and then it is time to dress for the great work of the day. she changes quickly. after the performance is over[pg 158] she sees her manager, and rarely leaves the theatre in paris before 1.30, when she returns home to a good hot supper. but her day is not ended even then. she will have a play read to her or read it herself, study a new part, write letters, and do dozens of different things before she goes to bed. she can do with little rest, and seems to have the energy of many persons in one. in spite of this she has never mastered english, although she can read it.

madame bernhardt will ever be associated in my mind with a night spent at a theatre behind a french claque. that claque was terrible, but the actress was so wonderful i almost forgot its existence, and sat rapt in admiration of her first night of hamlet.

till quite lately there was a terrible institution in france known as the claque, nothing more or less than a paid body of men whose duty it was to applaud actors and actresses at certain points duly marked in their play-books.

at the comédie fran?aise of paris a certain individual known as the chef de claque had been retained from 1881 for over twenty years at a monthly salary of three hundred francs, that is to say, he received ￡12 a month, or ￡3 a week, for “clapping” when required. he was a person of great importance. though disliked by the public, he was petted and feasted by actors and actresses, for a clap at the wrong moment, or want of applause at the right, meant disaster; besides, there was a sort of superstitious fear that being on bad terms with the chef de claque foreboded ill luck.

after performing his duties for twenty-one years[pg 159] with considerable success, the chef de claque was dismissed, and it was decided that professional applause should be discontinued. naturally the chef was indignant, and in the autumn of 1902 sued the comédie fran?aise for 30,000 francs damages or a pension. paris, however, found relief in the absence of the original claque, and gradually one theatre after another began to dispense with a nuisance it had endured for long. history says that during the early days of the claque there was an equally obnoxious institution, a sort of organised opposition known as siffleurs. it was then as fashionable to whistle a piece out of the world as to clap it into success. there was a regular instrument made for the purpose, known as a sifflet, which was wooden and emitted a harsh creaking noise. no man thought of going to the theatre without his sifflet—but the claque gradually clapped him away. thus died out the official dispensers of success or failure.

it so chanced that having bicycled through france from dieppe along the banks of the seine, my sister and i were leaving paris on the first occasion of sarah bernhardt’s impersonation of hamlet—that is to say, in may, 1899. we were so anxious to see her first performance, however, that we decided to stay an extra day. so far all was well, but not a single ticket could be obtained. here was disappointment indeed. of course our names were not on the first night list in paris and, as in england, it is well-nigh impossible for any ordinary member of the public to gain admittance on such an occasion.

the gentleman in the box office became sympathetic[pg 160] at beholding our distress, and finally suggested he might let us have seats upstairs.

“it is very high up, but you will see and hear everything,” he added.

we decided to ascend to the gods, where, instead of finding ourselves beside jupiter and mars, venus or apollo, we were seated immediately behind the claque.

never, never shall i forget my own personal experience of the performance of a claque. six men sat together in the centre of the front row. the middle one had a marked book—fancy shakespeare’s hamlet marked for applause!—and according to that book’s instructions the chef and his friends clapped once, twice, thrice.

on ordinary occasions the claque slept or read, and only woke up to make a noise when called upon by the chef, who seemed to have free passes for his supporters every night, and took any one he liked to help him in his curious work. the noise those men made at hamlet was deafening. the excitement of the leader lest the play should not go off well on a first night was terrible—and if their hands were not sore, and their arms did not ache, it was a wonder indeed. they were so appallingly near us, and so overpowering and disturbing, nothing but interest in the divine sarah could have kept us in our seats during all those hot, stuffy, noisy hours. it was a saturday night, the piece began at 8 p.m., and ended at 2 a.m.

think of it, ye london first-nighters! especially in a french theatre, where the seats are torture racks, the heat equal to dante’s inferno, and no sweet music[pg 161] soothes the savage breast, only long dreary entr’actes and the welcome—if melancholy—three raps french playgoers know so well.

two years later, when i was again in paris, there were different excitements in the air, one a strike of coal-miners, the other—and in paris apparently the more important—a strike of the orchestras at the theatres. a few years previously there could not have been a strike, for the sufficient reason there were no orchestras; but gradually our plan of having music during the long waits crept in. the musicians at first engaged as an experiment were badly paid. when they became an institution they naturally asked for more money, which was promptly refused.

then came the revolt. from the first violin to the big drum all demanded higher pay. it seems that theatre, music hall, and concert orchestras belong to a syndicate of artistes musiciens numbering some sixteen hundred members. during the strike i chanced to be present at a theatre where there was generally an orchestra—that night one small cottage piano played by a lady usurped its place. she managed fairly well—but a piano played by a mediocre musician, does not add to the gaiety of a theatre although it may decrease its melancholy. when november came, the strike ceased. the managers capitulated.

the orchestra in an english theatre is a little world to itself. the performers never mix with the actors, they have their own band-room, and there they live when not before the curtain. at the chief theatres, as is well known, the performers are extremely good,[pg 162] and that is because they are allowed to “deputise”; when there is a grand concert at the st. james’s hall or elsewhere, provided they find some one to take their place in their own orchestra, they may go and play. consequently, when there is a big concert several may be away from their own theatre. many of these performers remain in the same orchestra for years. for instance, mr. alexander told me he met a man one day roving at the back of the stage, so he stopped and asked whom he wanted. the man smiled and replied:

“i am in your orchestra, sir, and have been for eleven years.”

“ah, yes, so you are; i thought i knew your face; but i am accustomed to look at it from above, you see!”

in many london theatres the orchestra is hidden under the stage, a decided advantage with most plays.

parisian theatres are strange places. they are very fashionable, and yet they are most uncomfortable. the seats are invariably too small and too high. the result is there is nowhere to lay a cloak or coat, and short people find their little legs dangling high above the ground. all this causes inconvenience which ends in annoyance, and the hangers-on at the theatres are a veritable nuisance. ugly old women in blue aprons, without caps, pounce upon one on entering and pester for wraps. it is difficult to know which is the worse evil, to cling to one’s belongings in the small space allotted each member of the audience, or to let one of those women take them away. in the latter case before the last act she returns with a great deal of[pg 163] fuss, hands over the articles, and demands her sous. if the piece be only in three acts, one pays for being free of a garment for two of them and is annoyed by its presence during the third. again, when one enters a box these irritating ouvreuses demand tips pour le service de la loge, s’il vous pla?t, and will often insist on forcing footstools under one’s feet so as to claim the pourboires afterwards. the pourboires of the vestiaire are also a thorn in the flesh, and the system which exacts payment from these women turns them from obliging servants into harpies. how parisians put up with these disagreeable creatures is surprising, but they do.

the stage is conservative in many ways; for instance, that tiresome plan of charging for programmes still exists in england in some theatres, and even good theatres too. programmes cost nothing: the expense of printing is paid by the advertisements. free distribution, therefore, does not mean that the management are out of pocket. why, then, do they not present them gratis? as things are it is most aggravating. suppose two ladies arrive; as they are shown to their seats, holding their skirts, opera-bags and fans in their hands, they are asked for sixpence. while they endeavour to extract their money they are dropping their belongings and inconveniencing their neighbours: in the case of a man requiring change the same annoyance is felt by all around, especially if the play has begun.

programmes and their necessary “murmurings” are annoying, and so is the meagreness of the space[pg 164] between the rows of stalls. there are people who openly declare they never go to a theatre because they have not got room for their knees. this is certainly much worse in parisian theatres, where the seats are high and narrow as well; but still, when people pay for a seat they like room to pass to and fro without inconveniencing a dozen persons en route.

matinée hats and late arrivals are sins on the part of the audience so cruel that no self-respecting person would inflict either upon a neighbour. but some women are so inconsiderate that we shall soon be reduced to an american notice like the following, “ladies who cannot, or are unwilling to, remove their hats while occupying seats in this theatre, are requested to leave at once; their money will be returned at the box office.” a gentlewoman never wears a picture hat at the play; if she arrives in one she takes it off. in the same way a gentleman makes a point of being in time. people who offend in these respects belong to a class which apparently knows no better, a class which complacently talks, or makes love, through a theatrical entertainment!

another strange parisian custom is the advertisement drop-scene. at the end of the act, a curtain descends literally covered with pictures and puffs of pills, automobiles, corsets, or tobacco. after a tragedy the effect is comical, but this is an age of advertisement.

but to return to madame bernhardt’s hamlet. when the great sarah appeared upon the scene i did not recognise her. why? because she looked so young and so small. this woman, who was[pg 165] nearly sixty, appeared quite juvenile. this famous tragédienne, who had always left an impression of a tall, thin, willowy being in her wonderful scenes in la tosca, or dame aux caméllias, deprived of her train appeared quite tiny. she had the neatest legs, encased in black silk stockings, the prettiest feet with barely any heel to give her height, while her flaxen wig which hung upon her shoulders, made her look a youth, in the sixteenth century clothes she elected to wear. at first i felt woefully disappointed; she did not act at all, and when she saw her father’s ghost, instead of becoming excited, as we are accustomed to hamlet’s doing in this country, she insinuated a lack of interest, an “oh, is that really my father’s ghost!” sort of style, which seemed almost annoying; but as she proceeded, i was filled with admiration—her players’ scene was a great coup.

on the left of the stage a smaller one was arranged for the players’ scene, and before it half a dozen torches were stuck in as footlights. on the right there was a high raised da?s with steps leading up on either side—a sort of platform erection. the king and queen sat upon two seats at the top, the courtiers grouped themselves upon the stairs. immediately below the royal pair sat ophelia, and at her feet, upon a white polar-bear-skin rug, reclined sarah bernhardt, with her elbow upon ophelia’s knee and her hand upon some yellow cushions. as the play went on she looked up to catch a glimpse of the king, but he was too high above her, the wall of the platform hid him from view. very quietly she rose from[pg 166] her seat, crawled round to the back, where she gradually and slowly pulled herself up towards the da?s, getting upon a stool in her eagerness to see her victim’s face. the king, in his excitement, rose from his seat at the fatal moment, and putting his hand upon the balustrade, peered downwards upon the play-actors.

at that instant sarah bernhardt rose, and the two faces came close together across the barrier in eager contemplation of each other. it was a magnificent piece of acting, one which sent a thrill through the whole house; and as the “divine sarah” saw the guilt depicted upon her uncle’s face she gave a shriek of triumph, a perfectly fiendish shriek of joy, once heard never to be forgotten, and springing down from her post, rushed to the torch footlights, and seizing one in her hand stood in the middle of the stage, her back to the audience, waving it on high and yelling with wild exultant delight as the king and all his courtiers slunk away, to the fall of the curtain. it was a brilliant ending to a great act, and sarah triumphed not only in the novelty of her rendering, but in the manner of its execution.

another hit that struck me as perfectly wonderful in its contrasting simplicity, was, when she sat upon a sofa, her feet straight out before her, a book lying idle upon her lap, and murmured, mots, mots, or again, when she came in through the arch at the back of the stage, and leaning against its pillar repeated quietly and dreamily the lines “to be, or not to be.”

apropos of hamlet, madame bernhardt wrote to the daily telegraph:

[pg 167]

“hamlet rêve quand il est seul; mais quand il y a du monde il parle; il parle pour cacher sa pensée....

“on me reproche, dans la scène de l’oratoire, de m’approcher trop près du roi; mais, si hamlet veut tuer le roi, il faut bien qu’il s’approche de lui. et quand il l’entend prier des paroles de repentir, il pense que s’il le tue il l’enverra au ciel, et il ne tue pas le roi; non pas parcequ’il est irrésolu et faible, mais parcequ’il est tenace et logique; il veut le tuer dans le péché, non dans le repentir, car il veut qu’il aille en enfer, et pas au ciel. on veut absolument voir, dans hamlet, une ame de femme, hésitante, imponderée; moi, j’y vois l’ame d’un homme, résolue mais refléchie. aussit?t que hamlet voit l’ame de son père et appréhend le meurtre, il prend la résolution de le venger; mais, comme il est le contraire d’othello, qui agit avant de penser, lui, hamlet, pense avant d’agir, ce qui est le signe d’une grande force, d’une grande puissance d’ame.

“hamlet aime ophélie! il renonce à l’amour! il renonce à l’étude! il renonce à tout! pour arriver à son but! et il y arrive! il tue le roi quand il est pris dans le péché le plus noir, le plus criminel; mais il ne le tue que lorsqu’il est absolument s?r. lorsqu’on l’envoie en angleterre, à la première occasion qu’il rencontre il bondit tout seul sur un bateau ennemi et il se nomme pour qu’on le fasse prisonnier, s?r qu’on le ramenera. il envoie froidement rosencrantz et guildenstern à la mort. tout cela est d’un être jeune, fort et résolu![pg 168]

“quand il rêve: c’est à son projet! c’est à sa vengeance! si dieu n’avait pas défendu le suicide, il se tuerait par dégo?t du monde! mais, puisqu’il ne peut pas se tuer, il tuera!

“enfin, monsieur, permettez-moi de vous dire que shakespeare, par son génie colossal, appartient à l’univers! et qu’un cerveau fran?ais, allemand, ou russe a le droit de l’admirer et de le comprendre.

“sarah bernhardt.

“londres, le 16 juin, 1899.”

madame bernhardt made hamlet a man, and a strong man—there was nothing of the halting, hesitating woman about her performance, one which she herself loves to play.

it was a fine touch also when she went into her uncle’s room, where, finding him on his knees, she crept up close behind, and taking out her dagger, prepared to kill him. she said nothing, but her play was marvellous, her expression of hatred and loathing, her pause to contemplate, and final decision to let the man alone, were done in such a way as only sarah bernhardt could render them.

another drama took place on this memorable first night of hamlet. two famous men when discussing whether hamlet ought to be fat or thin, struck one another in the face and finally arranged a duel—a duel fought two or three days later, which nearly cost one of them his life.

opposite is the programme of the first night of sarah bernhardt’s hamlet.

[pg 169]

la tragique histoire d’

hamlet

prince de danemark

drame en 15 tableaux de william shakespeare

traduction en prose de mm. eugène morand et marcel schwob

page decoration

m?? sarah bernhardt

hamlet

mm.

bremont le roi

magnier laertes

chameroy polonius

deneubourg horatio

ripert le spectre

schutz premier fossoyeur

lacroix deuxième ?

teste le roi comédien

scheler osric

jean darav rosencrantz

jahan voltimand

colas bernardo

krauss marcellus

laurent guildenstern

barbier fortinbras

stebler deux?? comédien

cauroy francesco

lahor un prêtre

bary cornélius

caillere trois?? comédien

bertaut un gentilhomme

mm???

marthe mellot ophélie

marcya la reine gertrude

boulanger la reine comédienne

prêtres, comédiens, marins, officiers, soldats, etc.

[pg 170]

there is a famous hamlet skull in america, known as yorick’s skull, which is in the possession of dr. horace howard furness, of philadelphia.

dr. furness is one of the greatest shakespearian scholars of the day. dr. georg brandes, of copenhagen, mr. sydney lee, of london, and he probably know more of the work of this great genius than any other living persons.

when i was in america i had the pleasure of spending a few days at dr. furness’s delightful home at wallingford, on the shores of the delaware river. the place might be in england, from its appearance—a low, rambling old house with wide balconies, creeper-grown with roses, and honey-suckle hugging the porch. the dear old home was built more than a century ago, by some of dr. furness’s ancestors, and one sees the love of those ancestors for the old english style manifest at every turn. the whole interior bespeaks intellectual refinement.

he stood on the doorstep to welcome me, a grey-headed man of some sixty-eight years, with a ruddy complexion, and closely cut white moustache. his manner was delightful; no more polished gentleman ever walked this earth than horace howard furness, the great american writer. his father was an intimate friend of ralph waldo emerson, whose famous portrait at the philadelphia art gallery was painted by the doctor’s brother; so young horace was brought up amid intellectual surroundings.

at the back of the house is the world-renowned iron-proof shakespearian library, the collection of[pg 171] forty ardent years. it is a veritable museum with its upper galleries, its many tables, and its endless cases of treasures. the books which line the walls were all catalogued by the doctor himself. he has many of the earlier editions of shakespeare besides other rare volumes. some original mss. of charles lamb, beautifully written and signed elia, are there; a delightful sketch of mary anderson by forbes robertson; lady martin’s (helen faucit) own acting editions of the parts she played marked by herself; and in a special glass case lie a pair of grey gauntlet gloves, richly embroidered in silver, which were worn by shakespeare himself when an actor. if i remember rightly they came from david garrick, and the card of authenticity is in the case. then there are garrick’s and booth’s walking-sticks, and on a small ebony stand, the famous yorick skull handled in the grave-digging scene by all the great actors who have visited philadelphia, and signed by them—booth, irving, tree, sothern, etc.

i never spent a more delightful evening than one in october, 1900, when the family went off to philadelphia to see the dramatisation of one of dr. weir mitchell’s novels by his son, and i was left alone with dr. furness for some hours.

what a charming companion. what a fund of information and humour, what a courtly manner, what a contrast to the ruggedness of ibsen, or the wild energy of bj?rnsen. here was repose and strength. not an originator, perhaps, but a learned disciple. how he loved shakespeare, with what reverence he spoke of him. he scoffed at the mere[pg 172] mention of bacon’s name, and was glad, very glad, so little was known of the private life of shakespeare.

“he was too great to be mortal; i do not want to associate any of nature’s frailties with such a mind. his work is the thing, for the man as a man i care nothing.” this was unlike brandes, whose brilliant books on shakespeare deal chiefly with the man.

there was something particularly delightful about horace furness and his home. even the dinner-table appointments were his choice. the soup-plates were of the rarest oriental porcelain, and the meat-plates were of silver with mottoes chosen by himself round the borders.

“i loved my china, but it got broken year by year, until in desperation i looked about for something that could not break—solid and plain, like myself, eh?” he chuckled. the mottoes were well chosen and the idea as original as everything else about dr. furness.

it was mrs. kemble’s readings that first awakened his love for shakespeare; but he was nearly forty years old when he gave up law and devoted himself to writing; much the same age as dr. samuel smiles when he exchanged business for authorship.

dr. furness loves his shakespeare and thoroughly enjoys his well-chosen library; but still an englishwoman cannot help hoping that when he has done with them, he will bequeath his treasures to the shakespeare museum at stratford-on-avon.