The date of the year when this petition of the actors was presented to the privy council is ascertained from that of the remonstrance of the inhabitants which had rendered it necessary, viz. 1596; but by another paper, among the theatrical relics of Alleyn and Henslowe at Dulwich College, we are enabled to show that both the remonstrance and the petition were anterior to May in that year. Henslowe (step-father to Alleyn's wife, and Alleyn's partner) seems always, very prudently, to have kept up a good understanding with the officers of the department of the revels; and on 3rd May, 1596, a person of the name of Veale, servant to Edmond Tylney, master of the revels, wrote to Henslowe, informing him (as of course he must take an interest in the result) that it had been decided by the privy council, that the Lord Chamberlain's servants should be allowed to complete their repairs, but not to enlarge their house in the Blackfriars; the note of Veale to Henslowe is on a small slip of paper, very clearly written; and as it is short, we here insert it:

"Mr. Hinslowe. This is to enfourme you that my Mr., the Maister of the revelles, hath rec. from the Ll. of the counsell

players of the private house, or theatre, in the precinct and libertie of the Blackfriers, which hath beene for many yeares used and occupied for the playing of tragedies, commedies, histories, enterludes, and playes. That the same, by reason of its having beene so long built, hath fallen into great decay, and that besides the reparation thereof, it hath beene found necessarie to make the same more convenient for the entertainment of auditories coming thereto. That to this end your Petitioners have all and eche of them put down sommes of money, according to their shares in the said theatre, and which they have justly and honestly gained by the exercise of their qualitie of stage-players; but that certaine persons (some of them of honour) inhabitants of the said precinct and libertie of the Blackfriers have, as your Petitioners are informed, besought your honourable Lordshipps not to permitt the said private house any longer to remaine open, but hereafter to be shut up and closed, to the manifest and great injurie of your petitioners, who have no other meanes whereby to maintain their wives and families, but by the exercise of their qualitie as they have heretofore done. Furthermore, that in the summer season your Petitioners are able to playe at their new built house on the Bankside calde the Globe, but that in the winter they are compelled to come to the Blackfriers; and if your honorable Lordshipps give consent unto that which is prayde against your Petitioners, thay will not onely, while the winter endures, loose the meanes whereby they now support them selves and their families, but be unable to practise themselves in anie playes or enterludes, when calde upon to performe for the recreation and solace of her Matie and her honoracle Court, as they have beene heretofore accustomed. The humble prayer of your Petitioners therefore is, that your honorable Lordshipps grant permission to finish the reparations and alterations they have begun; and as your Petitioners have hitherto been well ordered in their behaviour, and just in their dealings, that your honorable Lordshipps will not inhibit them from acting at their above namde private house in the precinct and libertie of the Blackfriers, and your Petitioners, as in dutie most bounden, will ever pray for the increasing honor and happiness of your honorable Lordshinne "

order that the L. Chamberlen's servauntes shall not be distourbed at the Blackefryars, according with their petition in that behalfe, but leave shall be given unto theym to make good the decaye of the saide House, butt not to make the same larger then in former tyme hath bene. From thoffice of the Revelles. this 3 of maie, 1596. "RICH. VEALE."

Thus the whole transaction is made clear: the company, soon after the opening of the Globe, contemplated the repair and enlargement of the Blackfriars theatre: the inhabitants of the precincts objected not only to the repair and enlargement, but to any dramatic representations in that part of the town: the company petitioned to be allowed to carry out their design, as regarded the restoration of the edifice, and the increase of its size; but the privy council consented only that the building should be repaired. We are to conclude, therefore, that after the repairs were finished, the theatre would hold no more spectators than formerly; but that the dilapidations of time were substantially remedied, we are sure from the fact, that the house continued long afterwards to be employed for the purpose for which it had been originally constructed'.

What is of most importance in this proceeding, with reference to Shakespeare, is the circumstance upon which we have already remarked; that whereas his name, in 1589, stood twelfth in a list of sixteen sharers, in 1596 it was advanced to the fifth place in an enumeration of eight persons, who termed themselves "owners and players of the private house, or theatre, in the precinct and liberty of the Blackfriars." It is not difficult to suppose that the speculation at the Globe had been remarkably successful in its first season, and that the Lord Chamberlain's servants had thereby been induced to expend money upon the Blackfriars, in order to render it more commodious, as well as more capacious, under the calculation, that the receipts at the one house during the winter would be greater in consequence of their popularity at the other during the summer.

Where Shakespeare had resided from the time when he first came to London, until the period of which we are now speaking, we have no information; but in July, 1596, hẹ was living in Southwark, perhaps to be close to the scene of action, and more effectually to superintend the performances at the Globe, which were continued through at least seven months of the year. We know not whether he removed there shortly before the opening of the Globe, or whether from the first it had been his usual place of abode; but Malone tells us," From a paper now before me, which for

1 The ultimate fate of this playhouse, and of others existing at the same time, will be found stated in a subsequent part of our memoir.

merly belonged to Edward Alleyn, the player, our poet appears to have lived in Southwark, near the Bear-garden, in 1596" He gives us no farther insight into the contents of the paper; but he probably referred to a small slip, borrowed, with other relics of a like kind, from Dulwich College, many of which were returned after his death. Among those returned seems to have been the paper in question, which is valuable only because it proves distinctly, that our great dramatist was an inhabitant of Southwark very soon after the Globe was in operation, although it by no means establishes that he had not been resident there long before. We subjoin it exactly as it stands in the original: the hand-writing is ignorant, the spelling peculiar, and it was evidently merely a hasty and imperfect memorandum."Inhabitantes of Sowtherk as have complaned, this of Jully, 1596. Mr Markis

Mr Tuppin
Mr Langorth

Wilsone the pyper

Mr Barett

Mr Shaksper

Phellipes

Tomson

Mother Golden the baude

Nagges

Fillpott and no more, and soe well ended."

to

This is the whole of the fragment, for such it appears be, and without farther explanation, which we have not been able to find in any other document, in the depository where the above is preserved or elsewhere, it is impossible to understand more, than that Shakespeare and other inhabitants of Southwark had made some complaint in July 1596, which, we may guess, was hostile to the wishes of the writer, who congratulated himself that the matter was so well at an end. Some of the parties named, including our great dramatist, continued resident in Southwark long afterwards, as we shall have occasion in its proper place to show. The writer seems to have been desirous of speaking derogatorily of all the persons he enumerates, but still he designates some as Mr. Markis, Mr. Tuppin, Mr. Langórth, Mr. Barett, and Mr. Shaksper;" but "Phellipes, Tomson,

1 "Inquiry into the Authenticity," &c. p. 215. He seems to have reserved particulars for his "Life of Shakespeare," which he did not live to complete, and which was imperfectly finished by Boswell.

2 This may have been Augustine Phillippes, who belonged to the company of the Lord Chamberlain's servants, and whose name stands fourth in the royal license of May 1603. He died as nearly as possible two years afterwards, his will being dated on the 4th May, and

Nagges, and Fillpott," he only mentions by their surnames, while he adds the words " the pyper" and "the baude " after "Wilsone" and "Mother Golden," probably to indicate that any complaint from them ought to have but little weight. All that we certainly collect from the memorandum is what Malone gathered from it, that in July 1596, (Malone only gives the year, and adds "near the Bear-garden," which we do not find confirmed by the contents of the paper) in the middle of what we have considered the second season at the new theatre called the Globe, Shakespeare was an inhabitant of Southwark. That he had removed thither for the sake of convenience, and of being nearer to the spot, is not unlikely, but we have no evidence upon the point: as there is reason to believe that Burbage, the principal actor at the Globe, lived in Holywell Street, Shoreditch, near the Curtain playhouse, such an arrangement, as regards Shakespeare and the Globe, seems the more probable.

CHAPTER XL

Chancery suit in 1597 by John Shakespeare and his wife to recover Asbyes: their bill; the answer of John Lambert; and the replication of John and Mary Shakespeare. Proba ble result of the suit. William Shakespeare's annual visit to Stratford. Death of his son Hamnet in 1596. General scarcity in England, and its effects at Stratford. The quantity of corn in the hands of William Shakespeare and his neighbours in February, 1598. Ben Jonson's "Every Man in his Humour," and probable instrumentality of Shakespeare in the original production of it on the stage. Henslowe's letter respecting the death of Gabriel Spenser.

WE have already mentioned that in 1578 John Shakespeare and his wife, in order to relieve themselves from pecuniary embarrassment, mortgaged the small estate of the latter, called Asbyes, at Wilmecote in the parish of Aston Cant

66

proved on the 13th May, 1605. Among other bequests to his friends and" fellows," he gave a thirty-shillings piece of gold " to William Shakespeare. He was a distinguished comic performer, and the earliest notice we have of him is prior to the death of Tarlton in 1588.

1 It is just possible that by "Wilsone the pyper" the writer meant to point out Jack Wilson," the singer of "Sigh no more, ladies," in "Much ado about Nothing," who, might be, and probably was, a player upon some wind instrument. See also the "Memoirs of Edward Alleyn," (printed by the Shakespeare Society) p. 153, for a notice of "Mr. Wilson, the singer," when he dined on one occasion with the founder of Dulwich College.

Malone's Shakspeare by Boswell, iii. p. 182.

K*

lowe, to Edmund Lambert, for the sum of 401. As it consisted of nearly sixty acres of land, with a dwelling-house, it must have been worth, perhaps, three times the sum advanced, and by the admission of all parties, the mortgagers were again to be put in possession, if they repaid the money borrowed on or before Michaelmas-day, 1580. According to the assertion of John and Mary Shakespeare, they tendered the 407. on the day appointed, but it was refused, unless other moneys, which they owed to the mortgagee, were repaid at the same time. Edmund Lambert (perhaps the father of Edward Lambert, whom the eldest sister of Mary Shakespeare had married) died in 1586, in possession of Asbyes, and from him it descended to his eldest son, John Lambert, who continued to withhold it in 1597 from those who claimed to be its rightful owners.

In order to recover the property, John and Mary Shakespeare filed a bill in chancery, on 24th Nov. 1597, against John Lambert of Barton-on-the-Heath, in which they alleged the fact of the tender and refusal of the 401. by Edmund Lambert, who, wishing to keep the estate, no doubt coupled with the tender a condition not included in the deed. The advance of other moneys, the repayment of which was required by Edmund Lambert, was not denied by John and Mary Shakespeare, but they contended that they had done all the law required, to entitle them to the restoration of their estate of Asbyes: in their bill they also set forth, that John Lambert was "of great wealth and ability, and well friended and allied amongst gentlemen and freeholders of the country, in the county of Warwick," while, on the other hand, they were "of small wealth, and very few friends and alliance in the said county." The answer of John Lambert merely denied that the 407. had been tendered, in consequence of which he alleged that his father became “lawfully and absolutely seised of the premises, in his demesne as of fee." To this answer John and Mary Shakespeare put in a replication, reiterating the assertion of the tender and refusal of the 40. on Michaelmas-day, 1580, and praying Lord Keeper Egerton (afterwards Baron Ellesmere) to decree in their favour accordingly.

If any decree were pronounced, it is singular that no trace of it should have been preserved either in the records of the Court of Chancery, or among the papers of Lord Ellesmere; but such is the fact, and the inference is, that the suit was settled by the parties without proceeding to this extremity. We can have little doubt that the bill had been filed with the concurrence, and at the instance, of our great dramatist, who at this date was rapidly acquiring wealth, although his father and mother put forward in their