“But of course it’s the way clothes are worn much more than the clothes themselves.  I mean, some men can never look well dressed, whereas others can look well in anything.”

“But he does go to the best tailor, I’m sure.”

“How many times have you seen this new piece?”

“Six.”

“Only six!  I’ve seen it eleven.”

“I’ve seen it three times.”

“I’ve seen it five times; but one of those doesn’t count, because when we got there we found he was ill with chicken-pox.  Wasn’t that rotten luck?”

“I heard he had been ill, but I didn’t know what it was.  Was it really chicken-pox?”

“Yes, poor darling.”

“Fancy him having a thing like that!  I suppose it’s part of the price of keeping so young.”

“Oh, yes, isn’t he young!”

“They say this thing’s going to run for years.”

“I hope not.  I want to see him in something new.  It’s so wonderful how he’s always the same and yet always different.”

“I want him to be in every play.  I never go to one without thinking how much better he would be than the other leading man.”

“I saw that little what’s-his-name imitate him the other evening.  Really it’s rather a shame.”

“Yes, I’ve seen it.  I couldn’t help laughing, but I hated myself for it.  I’m sure, too, he doesn’t waggle his head like that.”

“No!  I couldn’t see the point of that at all; but the people shrieked.”

“Pooh, they’d laugh at anything.”

“What did you like him best of all in?”

“That’s difficult.  Of course he was priceless as the policeman.  But then he was priceless as the American too, in that thing before this.”

“Well, I think—­”

And so on.  Except that I never mention his name, and I have suppressed the titles of the plays, this is practically an exact reproduction of the conversation.  Naturally many of the sentences overlapped, for ladies no less than gentlemen often talk at the same time; but otherwise I have reported faithfully.

And who was the subject of these eulogies?  You will guess at once when I say that he is probably the only actor in history who is referred to more often by his Christian name only than by his surname or full name.  These young women who adored WALLER spoke of him not as LEWIS, but as LEWIS WALLER; and that is the usual custom.  The divine SARAH is perhaps the only other histrion, and she is a woman, who may be spoken of simply as SARAH, with no risk of ambiguity.  Ordinarily, as I say, we use either the surname only or the surname and Christian name combined, as ELLEN TERRY, VIOLET LORAINE, GEORGE GRAVES, GEORGE ROBEY, LESLIE HENSON, NELSON KEYS.  But these four devotees referred to their hero always as GERALD; just GERALD.

* * * * *

[Illustration:  Mr. Punch’s Navy Pages]

* * * * *