g as much like you as I
possibly could) was very full on the first night of _Loyal Love_, a play
which has apparently been put upon the stage for the personal and
exclusive benefit of Mrs. BROWN-POTTER.

[Illustration: Saved by the Bottle.]

Certainly this talented lady has vastly improved since she made her
first appearance in _Man and Wife_, and has only to continue at the same
rate of progress to become in a very short time a really admirable
actress. _Loyal Love_ is rather a foolish piece, and reminded me equally
of the _Lady of Lyons_, _Romeo and Juliet_, and _Box and Cox_. The plot
was feeble in the extreme; and had not Mrs. BROWN-POTTER made a decided
point by calling a rude and ancient king, who _would_ wear his hat in
the presence of ladies, "Old Man," I really think the performance would
have fallen rather flat. As it was, the phrase (which was accepted by
the "first-nighters" as a colloquial "Americanism") put everyone in good
humour, and the last Act, with its amusing mock poisonings, and comical
arrests and counter-arrests, went with every token of genial
satisfaction. By the way, the "bottle trick" (by which poison is turned
into wine) should be treated more avowedly in a spirit of burlesque.
Were a decanter of pantomimic proportions introduced, the effect would
be excellent. _Loyal Love_ is not a good name for this funny little--it
is only in four Acts--play. It is a pity, as the hero and heroine are
always declaring that they would like to live and die together on a
desert island, that it was not called _Mr. and Mrs. Robinson Crusoe_,
with an explanatory subtitle of the _Purposeless Plotter, the
Death-Dealing Wine-Cellar, and the Grand Old King_.

[Illustration: Heroic Proportions.]

At the Adelphi a new and original drama called _The Bells of Haslemere_,
has been produced amidst the enthusiastic applause of the entire Press.
I am sorry to say I was a little disappointed. No doubt my expectations
had been unduly raised by the "notices." It appeared to me that there
was nothing absolutely and entirely new and original in the play, save a
series of hats worn by Mr. JOHN BEAUCHAMP in the character of a
fraudulent trustee. However, it is only just to say that the _chapeaux
of Joseph Thorndyke_ were unique. Had they been produced as "exhibits"
to an affidavit read during a summons heard before one of the Chief
Clerks in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice, they must
have assisted materially