Kathleen J. Fraser
The last quarter of the nineteenth century constituted busy years for professional theatre in North America; more than 135 companies toured cities and towns in central Canada.1 Eugene A. McDowell was active as an actor-manager from 1874 until two years before his death in 1893. McDowell was American-born, kept a permanent address in New York, and was active in the United States and the West Indies; however, he spent three-quarters of his stage life in Canada. Because his Companies travelled widely and reflected current taste, McDowell's contribution to Canadian theatre history is significant. Furthermore, his activities are an excellent illustration of the protean managerial practices of the theatrical times.
Before outlining and analyzing McDowell's activities as a manager, it would be expedient to review the facts of his life. Eugene A. McDowell was born in South River, New Jersey in 1845, and, as far as we know, made his professional début in 1865 at Ben DeBar's theatre in St Louis.2 There is a gap of seven years between this and the next recorded account when McDowell performed at Mrs Conway's Park Theatre in Brooklyn and remained in her stock company for three winter seasons commencing in 1872.3 It was here that McDowell formed many professional contacts and first acted in plays which later became part of his own repertoire. While with Mrs Conway, McDowell worked with Miss Fanny Reeves who had been with Mrs Conway's company since 31 October 1870. Miss Reeves, born in 1852, made her first New York appearance in 1857 with her mother at Laura Keene's theatre. McDowell married Fanny Reeves in 1877 during his two-year stint as manager of the Academy of Music in Montreal. In later years, Fanny became the star of the troupe. The reviews suggest that she was well-loved by audiences and often given lockets, watches, and large purses of money. Although she was competent in many dramatic forms, she had a particular talent for comic rôles. Both McDowells were very capable comedians, and this shaped their repertoire to an extent. The Company became a family troupe momentarily in 1879 with the birth of their only child, Claire. At the age of five months, she made her début on the Winnipeg stage in T. W. Robertson's Caste as the 'Hon. Geo. D'Alroy, JR'. A review of Caste from the Winnipeg Free Press (29 May 1879) would indicate that McDowell knew how to play on the heart and purse strings of his audience:
But perhaps the star of the evening - at least with the ladies - was Baby Claire McDowell, who was tendered a most enthusiastic reception. By her appearance - in place of the accustomed rag baby - the play which usually suffers to the verge of ludicrous in the last act, by the production of the inanimate bundle of rags, was entirely relieved of that only too apparently short step from the sublime to the ridiculous, which almost universally mars the act. Baby Claire commences her theatrical career at a remarkably early age, and if she always fills her part as naturally as last evening, a bright future indeed is in store for her.
Claire made a definite hit with Winnipeg audiences as her parents calculated she would. Robert Lawrence has found that Claire not only continued her stage career, but went to Hollywood where she could be found in the movies until 1944. No further descendents have been found.4
The last biographical note on E. A. McDowell is the notice of his death after a lengthy bout with paresis, a type of paralysis, on 21 February 1893 in Bloomingdale, Indiana. The first obituary to appear was in the Montreal Star (22 February 1893), and it characterizes the active nature of his life:
From Montreal [in 1877], McDowell went to New York and was soon on the 'road' with a new company and his wife the 'star.' They went all over Canada playing in all the leading cities to good business for years, but would lose what they made in Canada in the United States. This always made poor McDowell miserable and worried him a great deal, and he finally broke down under the strain a few months ago. . . . About two years ago Mr. McDowell and his wife played at the Academy supported by an excellent Company. He was in good health then, and he would say, laughingly, to his friends, 'Going through Canada once more for another fortune.'
The phrase from his obituary, 'from Montreal, McDowell went to New York', is like a refrain in the story of his life. McDowell considered New York home: 154 W 25th Street was his permanent address during the 1880's. He achieved moderate personal success in New York plays, and because of this, he was promptly able on his tours to Canada and the West Indies to form new companies, obtain new properties and scenery, and obtain the rights to current plays like Dion Boucicault's The Shaughraun and William Gillette's The Private Secretary.
Furthermore, New York was a place to renew theatrical ties and to make bookings for tours, partly because many small town Canadian opera houses advertised their vacancies in the New York Dramatic Mirror, and because Canadian managers came to New York every year to book shows. By returning to New York periodically, McDowell ensured that his casts and repertoire did not become stale. In less than a seventeen-year period, he managed to produce over 250 different plays.
The core of McDowell's repertoire came from his early work with Mrs Conway. Many successful plays by Augustin Daly were performed at her theatre when McDowell was there. In later years, he was to remember these popular plays, and would produce Divorce, Alixe, and Under the Gaslight regularly. Two other plays on which Mcdowell would depend greatly also turned up at Mrs Conway's: Dion Boucicault's Arrah-na-Pogue and Lester Wallack's Rosedale. The latter play was a particularly useful drawing-card on tour as it required the services of local battalions, of which there were many in nineteenth-century Canada, and usually the use of a precocious local child. In a Galls Newsletter interview (11 December 1880) in Kingston, Jamaica, McDowell did some advertising for his upcoming engagement: ' "Rosedale," sir, a piece that pleases everybody, high, low, rich and poor. It was produced at Wallack's 15 years ago, holds its own, and is the most popular piece brought out in America.' McDowell continued with a description of its lavish costumes and scenery, its spectacular nature, and most important of all, the fact that he would be able 'to introduce at a most telling moment a detachment of soldiers from Newcastle.' Rosedale was a play McDowell often billed first, as he did for the grand opening of the Academy of Music in Montreal on 15 November 1875 and the opening of the Grand Theatre in Kingston on 6 January 1879.
After leaving Mrs Conway's Company in 1875, McDowell returned to New York to perform as an independent actor at least eight times, acting with many of the great artists of the day: James O'Neill, Edwin Booth, Annie Russell, Clara Morris, and Fanny Davenport. While playing in New York, McDowell would often leave in the middle of a run or a season. E.A. McDowell first came to Canada while he was still associated with Mrs Conway's stock company in New York. It was a fairly common practice among New York actors to seek summer employment north of the border to stave off some lean unemployed summer months. Nonetheless, it is not entirely speculative to think of E. A. McDowell as a restless, independent individual, and a man who preferred being an employer to an employee. It was this independence that took him north to Canada and south to the West Indies.
When McDowell was beginning his theatrical affair with Canada in 1874, resident stock companies were being replaced by road companies of New York productions or touring companies like McDowell's which played Canadian theatres for a night or a week depending on the size of the house or the town. Both the resident and the touring systems had their drawbacks. Resident companies made audiences weary of the same faces month after month, and they sustained the practice which allowed actors like James O'Neill to continue in The Count of Monte Cristo for thirty-two years. On the other hand, touring companies, while allowing for more variety, had faults as well: the actors - and managers - became exhausted mentally and physically. Because of the changing practices in theatrical management, one has to admire the scope of McDowell's activity: his ability to recover from financial and artistic setbacks, his risk-taking willingness to explore new territories in terms of geography and repertoire, and his dexterity at adapting both himself and his Companies to the touring situation successfully.
In May of 1874, E.A. McDowell managed a stock company in Saint John, New Brunswick with William Nannary. In the middle of the Saint John engagement, the Company went to Halifax for a month, returning to Saint John in the middle of July. Although Nannary was well-known in the Maritimes, as far as we know, this was McDowell's first engagement in Canada, and the pair opened the new Academy of Music in Saint John. There are several aspects of this playing engagement worth mentioning. The repertoire was standard, crowd-pleasing fare, and much of it was familiar to actors who had been with Mrs Conway the previous winter. One of the actors performing with the Nannary-McDowell Company in 1874 was F.H.D. Veith, a local retired garrison officer and amateur actor who wrote a detailed account of his experiences in the 1850's with E.A. Sothern in his Recollections of the Crimean Campaign.5 It would seem that Veith was a local favourite, and Nannary, a more experienced manager than McDowell, showed wisdom in selecting Veith for some parts during the season. The principal stars of this four-month stay in the Maritimes were Neil Warner and Gertrude Kellogg, moderately well-known players from New York. From newspaper accounts for Saint John and Halifax in the summer of 1874, we can observe that even at this early stage in his independent career, McDowell had developed not only the desire to manage a company, but had also discovered the lucrative nature of touring in Canada. The Maritimes and various summer resort areas in Quebec and Ontario attracted many New York theatre people who appreciated the chance to escape the city, the relatively low cost of living, and new audiences. We also know that the engagement must have been a financial success. Nannary remained in the Maritimes for many years. Because of his personal and financial success, McDowell returned to the east coast on many occasions, certain of his investment.
McDowell must have enjoyed his limited managerial experience in Halifax; a year later, he set off on a tour which would found his reputation in Canada. In November of 1874, Dion Boucicault premièred The Shaughraun at Wallack's Theatre in New York. In the spring of 1875, McDowell, probably through questionable tactics which were common at the time, brought The Shaughraun to Toronto. This was McDowell's first experience as a touring actor-manager. He starred as Conn, the Shaughraun, 'the soul of every fair, the life of every funeral, and the first fiddle at weddings and patterns.' Although McDowell made a lasting impression on Canadian audiences through the character of Conn, and became known as the manager of the Shaughraun Company, he also experienced his first real troubles as a manager. They were the sort of difficulties he would experience throughout his career. Prior to the opening of The Shaughraun in Toronto, McDowell published a letter in the Toronto Mail (14 April 1875) from Boucicault, which said that McDowell had the Canadian rights to the play. This was certainly a publicity ploy on the part of McDowell, but in all probability it was a legitimate one. Felix Morris, a comedian, was with the original Shaughraun Company, and, according to him, Mr Alfred Becks, an agent of Boucicault's, was with the Company as it toured. Becks had to collect royalties and watch Mr Boucicault's interests. McDowell's troubles with Boucicault arose a year later when McDowell was managing the Academy of Music in Montreal. Felix Morris says,
From Ottawa we visited the smaller towns of Western Canada, and, of course, did badly. Salaries were in arrears, and royalties too, and this led to constant friction between the manager and Mr. Becks. We worked along, however, the railroad frequently advancing tickets on our baggage in order to facilitate our migrations. It was sometimes inconvenient, to be sure, to be subjected to these temporary divorces from our impediments, but we were a jolly crew and didn't mind much. We eventually reached Québec, where we intended to fill in a final week. But fortune smiled, business opened well and continued so for six weeks, the company in the mean time having taken affairs into their own hands. We were enabled to pay off Mr. Boucicault's claims, discard the "Shaughraun" and reappear in a repertoire of our own. This change in plan met with such welcome success that finally our financial difficulties came to a satisfactory and propitious end.6
Although this incident illustrates the precarious, hand-to-mouth arrangements of touring companies, McDowell, in fact, did not pay Boucicault in full and he did not discard The Shaughraun. The fact that McDowell was not black-listed in the Dramatic Mirror suggests that some compromise was reached. McDowell was quite correct when, in his letter to the Toronto Mail (16 September 1876), he referred to 'the utter confusion which prevails on the subject of copyright', as Gilbert and Sullivan were to discover to their chagrin in 1880 when HMS Pinafore was played by hundreds of companies, including McDowell's. But, technically, McDowell was probably safe as long as he did not play it in the United States. The cost of touring such a spectacular play - 'a revolving tower on my back', as McDowell phrased it in the same letter, a reply to Boucicault's charges of piracy - made it difficult to please everyone financially. Keeping the wolf from the door was one of McDowell's greatest problems; the wolves included actors, playwrights, and creditors. There were times, throughout the years, when the Company would not act until they had been paid or else they would discard McDowell and take over the theatre.
McDowell was fortunate or persistent in procuring the rights to Boucicault's latest play in 1875; everyone was bound to flock to a play by the author of London Assurance and Arrah-na-Pogue. Toronto was impressed with the production as the following review from Grip (24 April 1875) indicates:
Who or what is a Shaughraun and how is it pronounced? These conundrums puzzled all Toronto for days. Now we know. It is an Irish gentleman in a tattered red coat, high boots, with a fiddle in a bag on his back and an invisible dog. As to the pronunciation we are not so certain as yet, as diversities of opinion seem to prevail, even on the stage itself. However, the Shaughraun has furnished MR. BOUCICAULT with the title of a very good play, though not the best we have seen of his .... MR. MCDOWELL, the Shaughraun, is somewhat too American to suit our view of a Sligo peasant, but has plenty of humour and life .... altogether, the whole may be pronounced a brilliant success, barring some of the scenery.
We can note from the remainder of the review a wise political gesture, as well as good casting, on McDowell's part in allowing Mrs Morrison and C.W. Couldock of Toronto's Grand Opera House substantial parts in The Shaughraun. This was the most spirited review of The Shaughraun examined, but there was never a bad one; McDowell carried this play with him for the rest of his career, often playing it for his Benefits. Thus, while McDowell's first touring experience in Canada established a reputation of quality productions, the tour was not a complete success.
However, McDowell was obviously not as badly stung by the experience as Morris painted him to be; it was a surprise to all that within weeks of 'losing' his Company, he had assumed the management of the new Academy of Music in Montreal. In the fall of 1875, McDowell must have been relatively secure financially, and had sufficient theatrical connections to manage the opening of the Academy. This two-year period in McDowell's career has been thoroughly documented by Robert Lawrence, but a review of the reasons for McDowell's failure in Montreal is necessary to complete a picture of his managerial career. Failure is not a just term to describe the situation: it was amazing that McDowell persevered under the conditions he did for two years. He gained a reputation in Montreal as a man who tried to produce plays with care. His financial fortunes, however, fluctuated wildly. He tried to produce too many plays in too short a period - approximately eighty plays in two years. This probably led to a sacrifice of quality for quantity and variety. It is doubtful whether McDowell had enough energy or money to produce one new play a week successfully.
The newspaper reviews supported McDowell's aims, and chastised readers who did not attend the theatre often enough, but the reviews also damaged his box office on occasion. The Montreal Star (21 January 1876) writes, 'Montreal, in a theatrical point of view, is not like other large cities in the Dominion and United States. Our citizens are not essentially theatrically inclined', and it would, therefore, 'require "uphill" work on the part of a manager.' The Star agreed that McDowell was doing more than could be expected, adding that the people of Montreal were not giving him their full support. The paper, while supportive and full of the 'puff characteristic of the age, also contributed to the decline. It was not an undiscriminating newspaper, and put pressure on McDowell from time to time. A critic from the Star flayed McDowell for attempting a tragic rôle that did not suit him (29 November 1875). The play under scrutiny was W.S. Gilbert's Pygmalion and Galatea:
We are inclined to think that the onus for the "murder" of the play is solely attributable to the Manager in casting the characters. To begin with himself, a more absurd attempt at portraying the young and melancholy sculptor we have never witnessed. It requires no argument to prove that Mr. McDowell is pure and simple a comedian; he was made for a comedian, fashioned for a comedian, looks all over a comedian and cannot divest himself of that character. His essay last night in a different line was like Toole dressed as "Paul Pry" essaying to impersonate the "melancholy Dane", in Shakespeare's "Hamlet."
Montreal audiences had begun to tire of the faces in the stock company after the first season. Thus, we can observe that what had happened in New York several years before, was now happening in Montreal.
The solution to keeping an audience and remaining solvent was very expensive and risky. To import stars in the spring of 1876 must have cost McDowell a fortune. The only star he made money on was the famous English actress, Miss Adelaide Neilson, who was on her only tour of North America. Some of the other stars were no less expensive to McDowell, and yet they failed to attract large audiences. Among the 'names' McDowell brought in during this season were George Fawcett Rowe, Lucille Western, Joseph Murphy, Oliver Doud Byron, Dominick Murray, Rose Eytinge, and John T. Raymond. The situation of actors McDowell could ill-afford was complicated by numerous changeovers; in business managers, directors of amusements, and lessees in the two-year period. On top of this, McDowell's financial difficulties were made public in the newspapers. Periodically we hear of this and that member of the Academy leaving for New York in dissatisfaction. In the Star (17 May 1876) we notice that 'In reorganizing his company for the summer, Mr McDowell was obliged to dispense with no fewer than forty-five persons.' Mutiny in the ranks of the Company, as we have witnessed in Morris' account of the Shaughraun tour, became apparent. Once again in the Star (11 August 1876), we are reminded that 'the vicissitudes of theatrical direction are exemplified in the condition of things at the Academy. Mr Arnold, a member of the Company, announces, in a card, that owing to the financial difficulties of the management, the Stock Company have taken the theatre, and will give a short season of eight nights preparatory to their departure from the city.'
In May of 1877, McDowell could no longer sustain the Academy. The financial outlay, the creditors, the Company, and some of the negative comments in the newspapers were too much for McDowell to bear. He had discovered, from short touring excursions originating from the Academy, that touring was less of a risk than running a resident stock company. From this point on, McDowell only assumed limited stock engagements in Winnipeg and the Maritimes, and confined himself primarily to touring. Furthermore, he learned that it was better to travel with a few solid plays than with dozens not quite up to scratch. If there is a positive note to be found in McDowell's Montreal experiences, it lies in the artistic respect he received. He was always highly thought of on his return visits to Montreal, whether he was working with professionals or amateurs. The Montreal column of the Dramatic Mirror (24 March 1888) notes that Mr and Mrs McDowell were producing amateur theatricals: 'E.A. McDowell has been distinguishing himself in Canada by getting up military dramas with real soldiers. His latest was given in Montreal on the 13th and 14th, in which detachments of Her Majesty's national infantry and artillery figure conspicuously. The massing of the companies was said to be a masterstroke of stage manipulation.' Between 1876 and 1888, E.A. McDowell learned much about theatrical management in Montreal, but he learned it the hard way.
As we move into the touring aspects of McDowell's career, we notice that he was part of a movement which was spreading theatre to the west of Canada. Thus, while McDowell toured primarily in Ontario and Quebec, he is also important to Canadian theatre history because his was the first professional dramatic stock company in Winnipeg. Before he arrived in May of 1879, garrison and other amateur theatricals had been the normal fare. But Winnipeg did have writers, and, as we shall see, McDowell produced two short-lived, local plays, which, while well-received in Winnipeg, would not have been successful elsewhere. McDowell developed a rapport with the locals which did not hurt his reputation. On the occasion of a performance of Edmund Falconer's Eileen Oge in 1880, we find that, 'A number of local amateurs will take part in the novel Irish dance called "The Haymaker's Run".' He employed local children when necessary: Miss Georgie Fairfield, Little Josie Dell, and Maggie Gerrie were the most notable. He set up a baseball team in 1880, and McDowell's Orphans played the City Nine. He had two benefits on the occasion of a boiler explosion at the mill. As was his custom in other centres, he made extensive use of the local military band, cavalry, and artillery; Winnipeg, like Halifax, was a garrison town. McDowell also used the Winnipeg Fire Brigade in Dion Boucicault's The Streets of New York. Topical and local 'hits' were often mentioned in the Winnipeg Free Press reviews.
What is interesting about McDowell's visits to Winnipeg is the variety of fare offered during at least seven engagements with Companies, and one two-day visit by Mr and Mrs McDowell. A brief analysis of some of the first visits may give some insight into what is meant by variety. In the space of four weeks in 1879, McDowell produced sixteen different plays. One might think he was over-extending himself, but there was only one he had not played previously in Montreal - HMS Pinafore. The Winnipeg Free Press review (17 June 1879) noted that 'Last night's performance had been rehearsed hardly more than a week, and that in spare moments of other work, and sung almost without fault, one is amazed at the degree of excellence that was attained, and feels quite willing to accord all possible praise to Mr McDowell and members of his company.' This was McDowell's first venture into light opera and was enjoyed by the audience although the Winnipeg Free Press (18 June 1879) commented on the show's closing: 'McDowell's Company is not an opera company and might, therefore, not have reached the expectations of some.' The repertoire, apart from Pinafore, was not novel, but, as usual, it was respectable and well-executed. The Company was very successful and promised to return the following year, which they did.
The 1880 bill in Winnipeg was even more varied, perhaps because McDowell could predict the response of his audience. This eight and a half week visit took place in the middle of the highly successful HMS Parliament tour. It seems odd that McDowell should remain so long in one place, but Winnipeg's population was growing rapidly and the box office was good. From 18 May through 14 July, thirty-four plays were offered of which twenty-seven were different from the previous season. Once again, nearly all were revivals from his Montreal days. The Company was a good one; E.A. McDowell and Fanny Reeves starred, and during the season imported Amelia Herbert from London, Alex Stuart from the Union Square Theatre in New York, and Neil Warner, the first professional Shakespearian actor to play Winnipeg. His Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth, and Richard III were well-received.
Apart from the new and successful Canadian satire, HMS Parliament by W. H. Fuller, one other Canadian play was performed during the 1880 season. Frank I. Clarke's 'laughable absurdity', Hymen's Harvest, was produced on 30 June and 1 July. Clarke was a Winnipeg journalist who had been an active amateur in Winnipeg's Garrison Theatre in the early 1870's. Company actor, Charles Arnold, a Winnipeg Free Press reviewer wrote (2 July 1880), 'made a wise selection in presenting a programme of fun, music, and dancing, and we trust he will be rewarded by a large audience.' As far as we know, there is no extant script for Hymen's Harvest.
The 1882 tour to Winnipeg is bizarre in the context of McDowell's career. E.A. McDowell's Comic Opera Company was a disaster, and it is difficult to understand why McDowell embarked on this venture apart from the fact that the continent was 'Pinafore mad'. Between 17 July and 12 August, his Company performed eight comic operas in Winnipeg and made a four-day excursion to St Paul's and Portage La Prairie. The Winnipeg Free Press (14 August 1882) summarized what took place: 'The season had not been a successful one owing to a variety of circumstances, but with the experiences gained by the operatic manager during his present visit, he hoped to be more successful next time.' There were no proper reviews during this engagement, only the occasional blurb. Three of the reasons for failure may have been that the performance site was an outdoor pavilion, the weather - constant rain - was not conducive to outdoor productions, and that Fanny Reeves was not with McDowell. McDowell announced in the Winnipeg Free Press (14 August 1882) that, 'He had also made up his mind that on his next visit to the city Mrs. McDowell should accompany him, a remark that was received with a storm of applause, that indicates pretty well the esteem in which that lady is held in this city.' One event of interest did occur during the comic opera season, and that was the Citizen's Benefit for McDowell on 12 August, probably the most eclectic benefit he ever had. It included a hornpipe, various classical arias, scenes from Trovatore, Faust, and Martha, the last act of Olivette, and the Cracksman's Chant from Rosedale!
Realizing that his strength did not lie in managing a comic opera company, McDowell returned to his regular touring routine in 1886. This stay in Winnipeg was part of the Private Secretary tour, and in the space of three weeks, twelve different plays were performed. Of course, The Shaughraun, Rosedale, and other standbys were present; two performances of The Big Boom by local author Charles W. Handscomb were added. Like Frank I. Clarke, Handscomb was a Winnipeg journalist; his play concerns the population and real estate boom and the subsequent collapse of both. A script has not been located for The Big Boom, and Handscomb, as far as we know, wrote no other plays. The 1886 production involved both McDowell's Company and members of Winnipeg's Operatic Society. The Big Boom, while apparently not of the same calibre as HMS Parliament, was probably written in the same vein; it is unfortunate that a script has not been found to serve as an historical document of one of the most momentous periods in Winnipeg's history. The Winnipeg Free Press review (23 November 1886) gives some idea of its quality, nature, and reception:
In its general features the play resembles the average melodrama; but some of the scenes being laid in Winnipeg gave the actors the opportunity of getting off "local hits;" and around these and in these the chief interest of the play centered .... The hit of the evening was certainly the wail of the "busted boomer", the refrain of which ran
0 never will I forget that cry
Nor the deep succeeding gloom,
When A.W. Ross, the real estate boss,
With Edmonton bust the boom.
This to a Mikado air, had a decidedly enlivening effect ....
The 1886 season is the last one to be examined, but there were several later visits to Winnipeg, all of which were well-received.
We have seen that McDowell began his Canadian career in the Maritimes. As with engagements in Winnipeg, trips to the Maritimes were often part of a longer tour, though McDowell had limited seasons of stock there as well. His experiences in Winnipeg and the Maritimes taught him that critics were more conservative here than in Ontario and Quebec. James Albery's Pink Dominoes was received with some misgivings by the Winnipeg Free Press (3 June 1880):
It is too spicy - at least for this town. Some of the situations are very suggestive as well as amusing ' and some of the sallies are capable of a double construction by wicked minded people. Literally there is nothing to offend the ear or the eye, but there are expressions which are suggestive of more than is really expressed. Of course a Winnipeg audience is too pure to twist an interpretation out of a passage that it was not intended to convey, but still it would be better if they were not afforded the opportunity for doing so .... We regard its production here as injudicious, and it is just as well that to-night's representation should be its last.
In Halifax, McDowell, like E.A. Sothern twenty years before him, found the forces of morality against him, but on a more specific issue than the one which had faced Sothern.7 Four 'dancers', the St Felix Sisters, had been offered to the Montreal public in 1876-77 without creating a fuss. We find, however, that the Sisters were not acceptable to certain people in Halifax:
In the following year there arose a new non-sectarian but equally bitter argument, when stage manager McDowell introduced ballet to Halifax. Beauty and the Beast was the piece, the St. Felix and Menzelli sisters the dancers. Next morning (June 4, 1878) the Morning Herald fairly roared that McDowell must "cut the obstrusive legs of his female athletes from the program ... there were several ballet scenes for which the proper criticism would have been administered by a policeman's baton." The local papers at once protested this label of vulgarity. The Evening Reporter on the same day noted that ballet was avoided by the straightlaced but rapturously applauded by those present, and ended with the handy phrase "honi soit qui mal y pense". Undaunted, the Herald returned with another expression of utmost disgust over the flaunting of lascivious limbs: "This atrocious assault on female modesty, this shocking exposition of the female figure in a state of contortion.... those twistings and whirlings, those leg-shakings and arm-pointings are vulgar and indecent, and have not an element of grace in them ... If Herodias is set to dance at the Academy, it is the manager's head that will roll" [Morning Herald, June 5, 1878]. The Evening Reporter of course retorted that no lascivious thought could enter any but a diseased mind; the Morning Chronicle was more harsh with the Herald's "gross puppy", whose sheer ignorance kept him from recognizing an art form that is appreciated by Royalty.8
McDowell, like a responsible citizen and an imaginative manager, made the best of an uncomfortable situation on his programmes. We find before the performance in question that 'The St. Felix Sisters' will appear 'in their New Specialties'. After the inflammatory reviews, we notice the 'Re-appearance of the Charming Little 4 - ST. FELIX SISTERS - 4 who will appear in entirely new songs and dances, "The Sweet Bye and Bye," "Tie Back," and "Violets dipped in Dew." The Above songs will be presented with NEW COSTUMES."9 Opposition to theatre from public minded newspapers was common at the time, but no other example of such sustained venom against a McDowell production was found. Most managers, then and now, welcomed these attacks - and even wrote some of them under pseudonyms - because these attacks were good for the box office.
There was no such opposition, however, to elaborate staging and 'realistic' effects. Maritime reviewers were even more ecstatic than their colleagues elsewhere. Two excerpts from reviews of Edward Bulwer-Lytton's The Lyons' Mail and Dion Boucicault's The Colleen Bawn from the Saint John Daily Sun (5 July 1889 and 17 July 1889) aptly illustrate this enthusiasm.
The appearance of two horses, drawing the mail cart with carriers and postilon [sic], the attack on the men, the murder and the robbery of the mail bags, is all given with fine effect, and altogether the piece is one of the best mounted ever put upon the stage in this city.
New scenery from the brush of Mr. William Gill will be used and the recently invented tank effect will be seen. A part of the stage has been converted into a reservoir containing over eight thousand gallons of water, which will be used in the first scene, showing Castle Chute on the banks of Lake Killarney, and in the cave scene in the third act, during which Colleen Bawn is thrown into the water.
The expert and elaborate use of scenic effects can be further noted in playbills. A programme for Divorce gives us a preview of 'Boucicault's Great Drama of London Life. AFTER DARK! With Thrilling Effects, including the UNDERGROUND RAILROAD SENSATION and a VIEW OF LONDON BY NIGHT. '10 On this particular Maritimes engagement, McDowell had procured the services of a well-known scenic artist from New York, William Gill. McDowell's Companies were solid and versatile, and while poor acting would not be tolerated, their success depended, to a large extent, as was the case with many Victorian productions, on the props, the costumes, and the scenic wizardry of special effects. These played an important rôle in the selection of repertoire.
Touring Canada with many plays in his repertoire was one of McDowell's practices. In the mid-eighties, however, McDowell began to take a single New York play on tour almost annually, perhaps because of the expense of touring many plays or perhaps because he had exhausted his repertoire in small towns in Canada. McDowell's first single-play tour took place in 1880 with HMS Parliament, a Canadian play by W. H. Fuller. Hauling the interior and the exterior of the Parliament buildings across the country must have been a feat worth remembering. The Company adapted the play as they toured. Robert Lawrence has noted that, 'A survey of available Canadian newspapers shows that the text and action of HMS Parliament evolved during the extensive tour. The actors regularly incorporated allusions to local matters like civic improvements (to be paid out of government funds), political appointments and causes célèbres.' 11 According to Lawrence, McDowell discovered that interest in a political satire diminished the further east and west he moved from Ottawa. Thus, McDowell did not revive the parody again.
Future tours seem pale in comparison to that of HMS Parliament. Among the plays toured were Gillette's The Private Secretary and E.S. Field's Wedding Bells in 1885, Mr Barnes of New York in 1888, R. L. Stevenson's Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde in 1889, and, what I believe to be the focus of their last tour, The Balloon in 1890.12 In January of 1889, McDowell had two separate play tours on the road in Canada. One senses from the reviews of the period that McDowell had over-extended himself again: he was managing two companies two thousand miles apart.13
These tours, which took place almost annually, took their toll on McDowell, and the last tour with The Balloon took him back to the West Indies and South America after an extensive tour of Canada. It was in South America that he collapsed from 'nervous prostration' and the Company thought it wise to return to New York instead of heading on to South Africa as they had intended.
The quality of McDowell's productions is certainly one reason he was always welcomed by audiences from Saint John to Winnipeg. In addition, he was always sensitive to changing needs and tastes. When resident stock was popular, he took a lease on a theatre in Montreal and Halifax, made every effort to be assimilated into the community, and provided variety through an enormous changing repertoire. Although he and Fanny were good and popular stars, he often imported name stars for particular plays. Later, when the public wearied of resident stock, he began to tour, maintaining a large repertoire. He then exchanged the considerable cost of maintaining a theatre for the variable costs of transportation, rental, and accommodation. His relatively lengthy engagements in Winnipeg have to be explained, in part, by the high cost of transportation, and, in part, by the fact that the public taste for quasi-resident stock lasted longer in the new western city than in Toronto or Montreal. Because his standard of production was reasonably high, McDowell could count on an annual welcome in a great many cities and towns.
Some general observations can be made about McDowell's tours, as well as tours of other contemporary companies. Each tour had one major, and usually new play, and several 'classic' melodramas and comedies. One could almost count on the presence of The Shaughraun, for example, if the town warranted more than a few performances. The featured new play allowed even the smallest centres to keep up with the theatrical times. By the mid-eighties, McDowell could gauge the reaction of Canadian audiences reasonably well, and knew which plays would go over and which would fold. Successful tours lasted approximately seven months, and it is fortunate that there were several of those.
The one word most frequently used in reviews to describe E.A. McDowell
was 'favourite'. He was thought highly of in communities large and small
in Canada. For theatre people, these years could be characterized as an
age of versatility; McDowell was certainly a man of his time, and must
be admired for his stamina, integrity, and flexibility.
Notes
1 M.M. BROWN, 'Theatre Calendar for London, Ontario,
1880-1914,' Manuscript, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario.
135 is a rough count from the calendar.
Return to article
2 Dramatic Mirror 4 March 1893
Return to article
3 GEORGE C. ODELL, Annals of the New York Stage
New York: Columbia University Press, 1937, ix
Return to article
4 ROBERT LAWRENCE, 'Eugene A. McDowell and his Contributions
to Canadian Theatre 1875-1890,'
Dalhousie Review 58, No 2 (1978),
p 251
Return to article
5 F.H.D. VEITH, Recollections of the Crimean Campaign
Montreal: Lovell and Son, Ltd., 1907
Return to article
6 FELIX MORRIS, Reminiscences New York: International
Telegram Company,1892, pp 68-69
Return to article
7 The information about E.A. Sothern is from a paper
given by Alan Andrews of Dalhousie University entitled 'E.A. Sothern and
Halifax Theatre'; it was given at the 1978 ACTH/AHTC conference in London,
Ontario.
Return to article
8 JANET MAYBEE, 'Theatre in Halifax, 1850-1880,' M.A. Diss. Dalhousie University 1965, pp xxxvii-xxxviii
[Please note there are two #8 endnotes listed in the essay]
Return to article
9 From Academy of Music programmes for 3 June 1878 and
20 June 1878. The programmes were found in the scrapbook of Dr Cox, No.
12 of Miscellaneous Scrapbooks, courtesy of the Provincial Archives of
Nova Scotia.
Return to article
10 Ibid, programme for 20 June 1878
Return to article
11 ROBERT LAWRENCE, 'Dramatic History: HMS Parliament,'
CTR,
No. 19 (1978), p 44
Return to article
12 A list of the towns visited during the nine-month
Private
Secretary tour illustrates the vast territory McDowell would cover
in one of these tours. The information is from the Dramatic Mirror
of the same period. Ottawa, Belleville, St Catharines, Hamilton, London,
Toronto, Brantford, Kingston, Ottawa, Brockville, Ogdensburg, N.Y., Morrisburg,
Montreal, Saint John, Moncton, Halifax, Augusta, Me., Québec City,
Brockville, Ottawa, Perth, Belleville, Toronto, Hamilton, London, Chatham,
St Thomas, Toronto, Elmira, Binghampton, Cortland, London, St Catharines,
London, Belleville, Ottawa, Hamilton, Guelph, Chatham, Ann Arbour, Muskegon,
Chicago, Oshkosh, Duluth, Milwaukee, Chicago, Winnipeg, Chatham, and Toronto.
Return to article
13 In late 1889, E.A. McDowell was managing a company
in Saint John, New Brunswick, and Fanny Reeves was managing another company
in Winnipeg at the same time. Although Miss Reeves was often in New York
productions, and quite independent of her husband, this engagement, as
far as we know, is the only instance where she is a manager.
Return to article