Plays for the People ; or, Common Rights and their
Defenders. By
C. Edmund Maurice. (Bell and Sons.)—Mr. Maurice wishes to " popularise " the work of the Commons Preservation Society by presenting to the public "some of its more picturesque aspects." With this hope, he has written three little dramas, the first of which has for its subject the preservation of Epping Forest, (why should we not have now a Part II., turning on the rejection of the High Beech railway scheme ?) the second celebrates the good deed of Timothy Bennett, shoemaker, of Hampton Wick, who in 1752 vindicated a right of way through Bushey Park ; while the third is an imaginary story, setting forth the jobbing tendency of local boards, and the still more culpable inches of ex-officio members. This last, with its more rapid action and obvious issues, is, perhaps, the best of the three. We wish well to Mr. Maurice's plays, though we do not feel very sanguine. For the most part, it is not books that make movements popular, but movements that make books. It is a curious fact that to ninety-nine people out of a hundred the "common rights" in which they are interested mean something quite different from the reality. They are eager to assert the privilege of the public to enjoy certain open spaces. True "common rights" :.re really "com- moners' rights," to which the interests of the public are really adverse. Grazing rights, for instance, become valueless, when a common be- comes accessible to the "toiling millions." "Lopping," to take another example, had its use as an instrument for defeating the claims of grasping lords, but lopping has had to be extinguished, in the interests of the public, which likes to see the trees in full beauty.
The Companion to the Grammars. By F. Venosta. (Williams and Norgate.)—Signor Veneta has put together a collection of words, phrases, &c., in English, French, German, and Italian. The book ie likely to be useful, though the English is not altogether beyond reproach. Our usage of articles has not been mastered, and some of the phrases and terms are incorrect. We do not speak of "a made- up dish," or "a copy-book of penmanship." A "Fallow," for ,` Fellow," on p. 212, is a ludicrous, but suggestive misprint. " Town- due" scarcely represents " l'octroi," though it would not be easy to suggest a real equivalent. The City of London "corn and coal duties are our nearest approach. Bat after all, we can find but few errors.
Previous page
