PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI. Volume 107, 15th December, 1894. _edited by Sir Francis Burnand_ [Illustration: DE GUSTIBUS. "SEE _'ER_, AS JUST PARST US? THAT'S MISS SELINA DEVEREUX, AS SINGS AT THE NORTH LONDON TIVOLI. SHE'S THE POOTIEST GAL IN CAMDEN TOWN, THAT LITTLE TART IS!" "GIT ALONG WITH YER! SHE'S GOT A CHEST LIKE A SHILLIN' RABBIT!"] * * * * * A TREE WITH VARIEGATED LEAVES. The following communications have found their way into the Editor's box at 85, Fleet Street, and are published that their writers may claim them. As most of the signatures were more or less illegible, it has been considered advisable to suppress them, to prevent the possibility of mistakes. The only exception that has been made to this rule is in the case of the last letter, wherein seemingly is summed up the moral of the controversy. _Communication No. 1, dated Tuesday._ Is it not time, considering that there is nothing of particular interest attracting public attention, that a protest should be raised against the "Society" plays which occupy the stages of some of our best theatres? You see I pave the way to my gentle reproof by buttering up vested interests. To do this the better, I will say something nice about "our most capable actors," and write "I remember BUCKSTONE, and SOTHERN, the BANCROFTS, and, aye, Mr. TREE himself." This will prove that there is no malice in my suggestions. Let me describe the piece to which, in the dead season of the year, I object. The plot is centred in the love for each other of a partially-reclaimed lady and an opium-drinking gentleman; I might use stronger expressions, but I know your paper is intended for the family rather than the dress-circle, and my language is therefore modulated to meet the modest requirements of the case. Take it from me, Sir, that the story of these two individuals is nauseous and degrading. I say that its unravelling should not be foisted on the public in a modern play. But that you may not consider my impressions libellous, I add that the piece is finely staged, and in parts well written. For all that, I cannot imagine why the manager, with his lofty ideas of the function of a theatre as a medium of education, has permitted himself to produce it. And if that observation does not draw the manager in question, my name is not X. Y. Z. _Communication No. 2, dated Wednesday._