and there is no reason for supposing that he would appear in any unbecoming garb if liberty of dress were permitted to him at the opera....  If the check-takers are empowered to inspect and decide as to the propriety of the cut and colour of clothes, why should they not also be allowed to examine the texture?  On the same principle, too, the cleanliness of opera-goers ought to be inquired into.  No one whose hair is not properly brushed should be permitted to enter the stalls, and visitors to the pit should be compelled to show their nails.”

There have been, from time to time, protests, unavailing however, against the tyranny of the opera-managers.  In his “Seven Years of the King’s Theatre” (1828), Mr. Ebers publishes the remonstrance of a gentleman refused admission to the opera on the score of his imperfect costume, much to his amazement; “for,” he writes, “I was dressed in a superfine blue coat with gold buttons, white waistcoat, fashionable tight drab pantaloons, white silk stockings and dress shoes, all worn but once, a few days before, at a dress concert, at the Crown and Anchor Tavern.”  He proceeds to express his indignation at the idea of the manager presuming to enact sumptuary laws without the intervention of the Legislature, and adds threats of legal proceedings and an appeal to a British jury.  “I have mixed,” he continues, “too much in genteel society not to know that black breeches, or pantaloons, with black silk stockings, is a very prevailing full dress, and why is it so?  Because it is convenient and economical, for you can wear a pair of white silk stockings but once without washing, and a fair of black is frequently worn for weeks without ablution. P.S.—­I have no objection to submit an inspection of my dress of the evening in question to you or any competent person you may appoint.”  Of this offer it would seem that Mr. Ebers did not avail himself.

CHAPTER II.

The master of the revels.

Lords of Misrule and Abbots of Unreason had long presided over the Yuletide festivities of Old England; in addition to these functionaries King Henry VIII. nominated a Master and Yeoman of the Revels to act as the subordinates of his Lord Chamberlain, and expressly to provide and supervise the general entertainments and pastimes of the court.  These had already been ordered and established after a manner that seemed extravagant by contrast with the economical tastes of the preceding sovereign, who yet had not shown indifference to the attractions of poetry, music, and the stage.  But Henry VIII., according to the testimony of Hall, was a proficient, not less in arms than in arts; he exercised himself daily in shooting, singing, dancing, wrestling, “casting of the bar, playing at the recorders, flute, virginals, and in setting of songs, making of ballettes; and did set two goodly masses, every in them five parts, which were sung oftentimes in his