THE NEW BROOM.--The Republican Party in the United States declare--apparently with some show of likelihood--that they will "sweep the country." All honest citizens and anti-Tammany patriots must heartily hope that they will sweep it _clean_.
Most of the _libretto_ of W. S. GILBERT'S latest whimsical opera, entitled _His Excellency_, is evident proof of _his_ excellency in this particular line and on these particular lines. Among principals, Mr. BARRINGTON has perhaps a trifle the best of it; while the part given to our Gee-Gee, _alias_ GEORGE GROSSMITH, is not so striking as his costume, both he and Mr. JOHN LE HAY, whose make-up is wonderfully good, being somewhat put in the shade by the gaiety of the two charming young ladies Miss JESSIE BOND and Miss ELLALINE TERRISS, who act with a real appreciation of the fun of the situation in which their dramatic-operatic lot is cast. But, after all said and sung, it is the brilliancy of the Hussars, under the command of Corporal, afterwards Colonel, PLAYFAIR, that carries the piece, and takes the audience by storm. The music by Dr. CARR would not of itself carr-y the piece were "the book" less fancifully funny than it is, and did it not contain some capital lines which are quickly taken by an appreciative audience. There is plenty of "go" in the Carr-acteristic music for the dance of Hussars; but the most catching "number" is a song of which the first bars irresistibly call to mind the song with a French refrain sung by Miss NESVILLE in _A Gaiety Girl_. Was Dr. OSMOND CARR the composer of that air? or as "that air" sounds vulgar, let us substitute "that tune." If so the resemblance is accounted for, and if he wasn't, then it is only an accidental resemblance of a few bars that at once strikes the retentive ear of the amateur. Scenery and costumes are all excellent in _His Excellency_.
In the New York _Critic_ a suggestion is made that it would be a graceful thing for Editors of Magazines to bring out occasionally a "Consolation Number," containing only rejected contributions. But why not give the Editor's _reasons_ for rejecting them as well? This would be such a "consolation" to the public, if not to the authors! A specimen number might be made up somewhat as follows:--