| + + | Ath. 1905, 1: 155. F. 4. 840w. |
“‘The sin of David’ is even cleverer than ‘Herod’ and ‘Ulysses’ in its superficial dramatic quality, its superficial poetry. But the true dramatic fire is not in it.” Ferris Greenslet.
| + + — | Atlan. 96: 422. S. ‘05. 140w. |
“To one who has read all four plays of Mr. Phillips it appears unhappily evident that The sin of David is inferior in movement to Ulysses, even as this must rank below Herod, nor is it equal in pathos to Paolo and Francesca. There are passages in the play which would drag in presentation.” Louis H. Gray.
| + + — | Bookm. 20: 554. F. ‘05. 970w. |
“Has the fine literary qualities we associate with the name of the author. But as an acting play it can have at best a success of esteem, for while there are some strong and moving scenes in it, the general air is of the closet rather than the stage.” J. B. G.
| + + | Critic. 46: 91. Ja. ‘05. 710w. |
“The verse is dignified and filled with a haunting melodious charm.”
| + | Dial. 38: 47. Ja. 16, ‘05. 440w. | |
| * | + — | Ind. 59: 1162. N. 16, ‘05. 110w. |
“A play better calculated to ‘place’ him critically than any of its predecessors. The chief impression made by it is that it is the product of a moderate poetic faculty guided by an industrious and self-poised intelligence.”