A dramatic author, the friend both of Colman and Yates, had bitterly complained of the retrenchments made by the Examiner in a certain play, or, to follow Colman's own words, had stated "that his comedy would be sure to be damned by the public, owing to the removal of some devilish good jokes by the Examiner." "Cannot you, my dear Fred, instruct him better ?" wrote Colman.

"The play, you know, must be printed in strict accordance with my obliterations; but if the parts be previously given out, it will be difficult to induce the actors to preach from my text!" No doubt upon this hint the actors spake.

Only, in that case, of what good was the Examiner, regarded as a public servant?
It was questioned at the time whether the Chamberlain, by his deputy, was not exercising more authority than he was really clothed with, under virtue of the Licensing Act.

He was entitled to prohibit the performance of any play; but could he make terms with the managers, and cut and carve their manuscripts, forcing upon them his capricious alterations?
Further, it was asked by what right he delegated his power to another?
The Act made no mention of his deputy or of such an officer as an Examiner of Plays.

And then, as to the question of fees.
What right had he to exact fees?
There was no mention of fees in the Act.