Yet all our first nights were not “great nights,” when--as a fellow-critic once remarked to Joe--“Strong men shook hands with strangers.” Sometimes they were even dull; on one occasion so much so as to draw from one of the critics an unusually caustic bit of advice: “We are told that so-and-so is a promising young actor,” he wrote, “personally I don’t care how much he promises so long as he never again performs.” For my part I confess that the theatre was still so new to me that I looked forward to any first night with pleasant palpitation, though my best frock was no doubt reserved for the choicest prospects. But to Joe, possibly the duty of writing the prescribed amount on a thoroughly poor piece grew irksome; and when, as on the occasion of the production of F. C. Burnand’s _The Colonel_, his friends and their serious work were the butt of boisterous hilarity, I know his loyalty found it difficult not to retort, as he apparently did in the article alluded to in the following correspondence. It must have been written at the moment when the campaign against so-called “high art” was at its zenith, and had amused the public as it would probably not do to-day; I should not quote it, but for the urbane humour of Joe’s rejoinder to the (temporarily) incensed author. _Feb. 22, 1881._ “DEAR CARR, I have heard that you do the _Saturday Review_ theatrical criticisms. Did you do that on _The Colonel_? if so I am anxious to know if you ever read _Un Mari à la Campagne_; also to ask where the puns are in my piece? I admit three, put in _carefully_ into the right peoples’ mouths--the right puns in the right places. Why is it a farce? Unless _She stoops to Conquer_ is a farce. Where are the evidences of high animal spirits in my play? I don’t pretend to quote your article verbatim but this is my impression of its purport. Had I known at the time that it was your writing I should have tackled you at once; first because I think you are wrong, second because if you are not, I am, and I wish to be put right. I should like to hear your suggestions for the improvement of Act III. where you think I have bungled ‘into seriousness.’ I shouldn’t have taken the trouble to write if I hadn’t been told that you were the critic who in a friendly way pooh-pooh’d the notion of _The Colonel_ being a comedy. I am aware that Dr. Johnson set down _She stoops, etc._ as a farce, and farcical to a degree its plot is, but not its characters. _The Colonel_ I contend is comedy--farcical neither in plot _nor_ characters. Yours truly, F. C. BURNAND (anxious to learn).” 19, BLANDFORD SQUARE, N.W., _February 24th, 1881_. “DEAR BURNAND, I do not as a rule write the Dramatic Criticism for the _Saturday Review_, only when the regular critic is away; but you are right in supposing that I am the author of the article on _The Colonel_.