That the theatrical business of America was disorganized, unstable, and, in general, so conducted as to entail loss on many or most persons engaged in it, by reason of _competition_, poor judgment, and lack of discrimination in its transactions; that the prevalent administration of it was not favorable to the development of actors and the promotion of the art of the Theatre; that their combination was made to cure, and that it did cure, the defects of theatrical business, stabilize it and render it reputable and responsible,--placing it, in this respect, on a level with other business; and that, incidentally, it would, and did, tend to prosper the means whereby the Theatre must live--namely, Acting and the exhibition of Acting. A. L. Erlanger, executive of the Booking Department of this organization (that is, of the firm of Klaw & Erlanger, the particular business of which was, and is, to “book,” _i.e._, to arrange, the tours of theatrical companies), has thus stated a part of his views relative to the character and doings of the Syndicate: “The American [theatrical] manager of to-day is _unique_, _contrasting_ him with the _managers of long ago_, and that still exist in England, France, and elsewhere, in that _he_ is _qualified_ and _experienced_ in staging _all kinds_ of theatrical entertainments.... As for the question of Commercialism _versus_ Art in Stage matters, I cannot see where the fact that financial solvency, _making the business of the theatrical world comparable_ in its _integrity_ with that found in other occupations, lessens the artistic value of the question [_sic_]. No actor will act the worse because he knows his salary will be paid promptly; and the fact that the business of the theatres is conducted on _firm lines_ is calculated to encourage, rather than dismay, the actor, the dramatist, and everybody else whose interest in the Stage is primarily artistic.” In support of those views and in advocacy of the Syndicate of which he was an active member the late Charles Frohman wrote (“The New York Herald,” March 13, 1910): “Several men united to systematize the conduct of the Theatre, _put the actor’s profession on a self-respecting footing_, guard the playwright against piracy, protect the managers of theatrical companies against unfair competition [_i.e._, competition not profitable to the members of the Syndicate.--W. W.], at the same time obliging them _to keep faith_ with managers of theatres.” A third voucher for the exalted integrity and far-reaching beneficence of the methods exemplified in the operations of the Syndicate was furnished by Charles Burnham, at that time manager of Wallack’s Theatre, not himself a member of the benign brotherhood, but obviously congenial with it, and President of “The Theatrical Managers’ Association,” a society which the Syndicate practically dominated: