Semilunar Passion Flower. _Passiflora peltata._
Dedicated to _St. Eanswide_.
~September 13.~
_St. Eulogius_, Patriarch of Alexandria, A. D. 608. _St. Amatus_, Bp.
A. D. 690. Another _St. Amatus_, or _Ame_, Abbot, A. D. 627. _St.
Maurilius_, 5th Cent.
* * * * *
“GENTLEMAN SMITH,”
THE ORIGINAL CHARLES SURFACE.
_To the Editor of the Every-Day Book._
Dear Sir,
Probably a biographical sketch of this eminent professor of the
histrionic art, may prove acceptable to your interesting weekly sheet.
Of the latter days of Mr. Smith, I write from my own recollection of
him. It is a pleasant occupation to record the acts of these worthies of
the legitimate drama--to notice the talents and acquirements of an actor
so universally respected for the kindness of his disposition--the
firmness of a mind gradually developing principles and conduct worthy
the sympathy and respect of all--and whose ease and gracefulness of
manner obtained for him the honourable distinction of “Gentleman Smith.”
The subject of our memoir was born in London, in 1730. He was designed
for the church, and in 1737 his father sent him to Eton, from whence he
was removed to St. John’s-college, Cambridge, in 1748. The vivacity and
spirit which had distinguished young Smith while at Eton, here led him
into some rash and impetuous irregularities. He was young--very young:
unknown to the world, and too worldly in his pleasures. The force of
evil example, so glaringly displayed within our colleges and
grammar-schools, was powerful--and Smith yielded to its power. One hasty
act of imprudence and passion, frustrated his father’s hopes, and
determined the future pursuits of this tyro. Having one evening drunk
too freely with some associates of kindred minds, and being pursued by
the proctor, he had the imprudence to snap an unloaded pistol at him.
For this offence he was doomed to a punishment to which he would not
submit; and in order to avoid expulsion immediately quitted college. He
now had the opportunity of gratifying his inclination for the stage, and
without any deep reflection upon the step he was about to take,
immediately upon his arrival in London, applied to Mr. Rich, then
manager of Covent-garden theatre, and succeeded in obtaining an
engagement. He made his first appearance in January, 1753, in the
character of _Theodosius_; on which occasion many of his college friends
came up for the purpose of giving him their support. His second attempt
was _Polydore_, in the “Orphan;” after which he appeared successively in
_Southampton_, in the “Earl of Essex,” and _Dolabella_, in “All for
Love.” Mr. Smith was obliged for some time to play subordinate parts;
but after Mr. Barry quitted the stage, he undertook several of the
principal characters in which that great actor had appeared with such
distinguished approbation. Mr. Smith’s mode of acting had many
peculiarities which were considered as defects, but from his frequent
appearance, the audience seemed to forget them, or to regard them as
trifles undeserving notice, when viewed in connection with the many
excellencies which he always displayed. This favourable disposition
towards him was greatly increased by his upright and independent conduct
in private life, which gained for him very general esteem. When
Churchill published his “Rosciad,” in 1761, the only notice he took of
him in his satire, is comprised in the following couplet:--
“Smith the genteel, the airy, and the smart,
Smith was just gone to school to say his part.”
After being twenty-two years at Covent-garden, Garrick engaged him, in
the winter of 1774, to perform at Drury-lane, where he remained till the
close of his professional labours in 1788. Though Mr. Smith, for a
considerable period, played the first parts in tragedy, nature seemed
not to have qualified him for this branch of the histrionic art. His
person was tall and well formed, but his features wanted flexibility,
for the expression of the stronger and finer emotions of tragedy, and
his voice had a monotony and harshness, which took much from the effect
of his finer performances. The parts in this line in which he acquired
most popularity were _Richard the Third_, _Hotspur_, and _Hastings_.
But, now, I must speak of those powers in which Mr. Smith was
unrivalled. His personation of _Charles Surface_, in the “School for
Scandal,” (of which he was the original representative,) has always been
spoken of as his masterpiece, and, indeed, the highest praise and
admiration were always awarded him for originality, boldness of
conception, truth, freedom, ease, and gracefulness of action and manner.
A sigh of tender regret to the recollection of so great a worthy has
been uttered by the pleasant ELIA, in his “Essay upon Old Actors,” to
which I refer every lover of the drama,--there he will discover what our
favourites in the old school of acting were,--and what our modern
professors ought now to be!
Mr. Smith’s _Kitely_ has been extolled as superior to that of Garrick.
_Archer_ and _Oakly_ are two other parts, in which he acquired high
reputation.
On the 9th of March, 1788, after performing _Macbeth_, he delivered an
epilogue, in which he announced his intention to quit the stage at the
close of the season, thinking it time to “resign the sprightly _Charles_
to abler hands and younger heads.” On the ninth of June following, he
took his leave, after the performance of _Charles Surface_, in a short,
but neat and elegant address: expressing his gratitude for the candour,
indulgence, and generosity he had experienced, and his hope that the
“patronage and protection the public had vouchsafed him on the stage,
would be followed by some small esteem, when he was off.” He performed
but once afterwards, which was in the same part, in 1798, for the
benefit of his old friend King. Mr. Smith was first married to the
sister of the earl of Sandwich, the widow of Kelland Courtnay, Esq.; she
died in 1762. Soon afterwards he married Miss Newson, of Leiston, in
Suffolk. Lord Chedworth bequeathed him a legacy of 200_l._ He died at
Bury St. Edmunds, on the 13th of September, 1819, in the 89th year of
his age.[316]
In my humble walk of life, when a boy at the free grammar-school of Bury
St. Edmunds, I had, with my young “classical” companions, frequent
opportunities of meeting this aged veteran of the drama. His appearance
was always agreeable to us. He encouraged our playful gambols, and was
well-pleased in giving us something to be pleased with. In his eightieth
year he looked “most briskly juvenal.” His person was then debonair, and
his fine, brown, intelligent eye reflected all the mind could realize of
the volition of _Charles Surface_. His dress was in perfect keeping with
the vivacious disposition of the man. He always wore, when
perambulating, a white hat, edged with green--blue coat--figured
waistcoat--fustian-coloured breeches, and gaiters to correspond. Thus
apparelled, he was, when the weather was favourable, to be met with in
some one of the beautifully rural walks in the neighbourhood of the
town, tripping on at a sharp, brisk pace, and twisting his thin
gold-headed cane in his right hand. His politeness was proverbial; and
the same ease and gracefulness of carriage--dignity of manner--and
suavity of address--were features as conspicuous off, as when on, the
stage. It was a lucky moment for us to meet him near our “tart” and
“_turn-over_” shop. He would anticipate our _raspberry_ cravings, and
remind us that he “was once a school-boy,” and that the _fagging_ system
was only to be tolerated in the hopeful expectation of a plentiful
reward in “sweets” and “sugar-candy.” He was one whom Shakspeare has
painted--
“That liv’d, that lov’d, that lik’d, that look’d with cheer.”
Should this trifling sketch fall into the hands of any of my respected
fellows, who were with me during my labours at the above-named school, I
am confident they will contemplate this great man’s memory with that
regard which his rich pleasantries, and our personal knowledge of him,
are calculated to inspire. He was an honourable man; and it was his
honourable conduct which alone conducted him to an honourable
distinction in the evening of his days. Unlike the many of his
profession, whose talents blaze forth for a while, and then depart like
a sunbeam, he retired into the quiet of domestic life--sought peace and
solace--and found them. In a word, “Gentleman Smith” was a respecter of
virtue:--and he developed its precepts to the world in the incidents of
his own life.