But, undoubtedly, the only interest that could attach itself to this comedy for the theatre-going audience of to-day would be in its presentment according to the customs and manners of the time. In fact, one would be very much entertained were it possible to make _Letitia_ and _Charlotte_ discuss their social schemes and ambitions in a parlour which reflected the atmosphere of New York in 1787. As a matter of fact, however, the audience that crowded into the little John Street Theatre, on the opening night of "The Contrast," was treated to an interior room, which was more closely akin to a London drawing-room than to a parlour in Manhattan. According to the very badly drawn frontispiece, which Wignell used in the printed edition of the play, and which William Dunlap executed, we see a very poor imitation of the customs, costumes, and situations which Tyler intended to suggest. Indeed, we wonder whether Dunlap, when he drew this picture, did not have a little malice in his heart; for there is no doubt that he showed jealousy over the success of "The Contrast," when, after a three years' stay in London, under the tutelage of Benjamin West, he returned to America to find "The Contrast" the talk of the town. Both he and Seilhamer who, however prejudiced they may be in some of their judgments and in some of their dates, are nevertheless the authorities for the early history of the American Theatre, try their best to take away from the credit due Tyler as an American dramatist. They both contend that "The Contrast," though it was repeated several times in succession--and this repetition of a native drama before audiences more accustomed to the English product must have been a sign of its acceptance,--was scarcely what they would consider a success. As evidence, Seilhamer claims that, just as soon as Royall Tyler handed over the copyright of his play to Wignell, the latter advertised the printed edition whenever the subscribers' list was sufficiently large to warrant the publication. It was not, however, until several years after this advertisement, that the play was actually published, the subscribers being headed by the name of President George Washington, and including many of Washington's first cabinet, four signers of the Declaration of Independence, and several Revolutionary soldiers. According to Seilhamer, the American dramatists of those days were very eager to follow the work of their contemporary craftsmen, and, in the list of subscribers, we find the names of Dunlap, Peter Markoe, who wrote "The Patriot Chief" (1783), Samuel Low, author of "The Politician Out-witted" (1789), and Colonel David Humphreys, who translated from the French "The Widow of Malabar; or, The Tyranny of Custom" (1790).