Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

printed three times for the same bookseller in 1608; and in order perhaps to increase its sale, (as well as to secure the purchaser against the old "King Leir," a play upon the same story, being given to him instead) the name of "M. William Shake-speare" was placed very conspicuously, and most unusually, at the top of the title-page. The same observation will in part apply to "Pericles," which came out in 1609, with the name of the author rendered particularly obvious, although in the ordinary place. "Troilus and Cressida," which was published in the same year, also has the name of the author very distinctly legible, but in a somewhat smaller type. In both the latter cases, it would likewise seem, that there were plays by older or rival dramatists upon the same incidents. The most noticeable proof of the advantage which a bookseller conceived he should derive from the announcement that the work he published was by our poet, is afforded by the title-page of the collec tion of his dispersed sonnets, which was ushered into the world as "Shakespeare's Sonnets," in very large capitals, as if that mere fact would be held a sufficient recommendation. In a former part of our memoir (p. lxx.) we have alluded to the circumstance, that in 1609 Shakespeare was rated to the poor of the Liberty of the Clink in a sum which might possibly indicate that he was the occupant of a commodious dwelling-house in Southwark. The fact that our great dramatist paid six-pence a week to the poor there, (as high a sum as anybody in that immediate vicinity was assessed at) is stated in the account of the Life of Edward Alleyn, printed by the Shakespeare Society, (p. 90) and there it is too hastily inferred that he was rated at this sum upon a dwelling-house occupied by himself. This is very possibly the fact; but, on the other hand, the truth may be, that he paid the rate not for any habitation, good or bad, large or small, but in respect of his theatrical property in the Globe, which was situated in the same district. The parish reg

1 The account (preserved at Dulwich College) does not state that the parties enumerated (consisting of 57 persons) were rated to the poor for dwelling-houses, but merely that they were rated and assessed to a weekly payment towards the relief of the poor, some for dwelling-houses, and others perhaps in respect to different kinds of property it is thus entitled:

A breif noat taken out of the poores booke, contayning the names of all then habitantes of this Liberty, which are rated and assessed to a weekely paiment towardes the relief of the poore. As it standes now encreased, this 6th day of Aprill, 1609. Delivered up to Phillip Henslowe, Esquior, churchwarden, by Francis Carter, one of the ovreseers of the same Liberty." It commences with these names :Phillip Henslowe, esquior, assessed at weekely

Ed. Alleyn, assessed at weekely

The Ladye Buckley, weekly

VOL. I.-O

[ocr errors]

vjd

vjd

iiijd

ister of St. Saviour's establishes, that in 1601 the churchwardens had been instructed by the vestry "to talk with the players" respecting the payment of tithes and contributions to the maintenance of the poor; and it is not very unlikely that some arrangement was made under which the sharers in the Globe, and Shakespeare as one of them, would be assessed. As a confirmatory circumstance we may add, that when Henslowe and Alleyn were about to build the Fortune play-house, in 1599-1600, the inhabitants of the Lordship of Finsbury, in the parish of Cripplegate, petitioned the privy council in favour of the undertaking, one of their reasons being, that "the erectors were contented to give a very liberal portion of money weekly towards the relief of the poor." Perhaps the parties interested in the Globe were contented to come to similar terms, and the parish to accept the money weekly from the various individuals. Henslowe, Alleyn, Lowin, Town, Juby, &c., who were either sharers, or actors and sharers, in that or other theatres in the same neighbourhood, contributed in different proportions for the same purpose, the largest amount being six-pence per week, which was paid by Shakespeare, Henslowe, and Alleyn1.

The ordinary inhabitants included in the same list, doubt

The account is in three divisions; and in the first, besides the above, we find the names of

[blocks in formation]

and twenty-one others. The next division includes a list of nineteen names, and at the head of it we find,

Mr. Shakespeare

Mr. Edw. Collins

John Burret

vjd

vjd

vjd

and all the rest pay a rate of either 24 or 114, including the following

actors:

[blocks in formation]

jd ob.

The third division consists of seven persons who only paid one penny per week, and among them we perceive the name of no individual who, according to other evidence, appears to have been in any way concerned with theatres: Maione (see his "Inquiry," p. 215,) had seen this document, but he mis-states that it belongs to the year 1608, and not 1609.

1 John Northbrooke, in his Treatise against Plays, Players, &c., (Shakespeare Society's reprint, p. 126,) informs us that in 1577 people contributed weekly to the support of the poor "according to their ability, some a penny, some-two-pence, another four-pence, and the best commonly giveth but six-pence."

less, paid for their dwellings, according to their several rents, and such may have been the case with Shakespeare: all we contend for is, that we ought not to conclude at once, that Shakespeare was the tenant of a house in the Liberty of the Clink, merely from the circumstance that he was rated to the poor. It is not unlikely that he was the occupier of a substantial dwelling-house in the immediate neighbourhood of the Globe, where his presence and assistance would often be required; and the amount of his income at this period would warrant such an expenditure, although we have no reason for thinking that such a house would be needed for his wife and family, because the existing evidence is opposed to the notion that they ever resided with him in London.

CHAPTER XVII.

Attempt of the Lord Mayor and aldermen in 1608 to expel the King's players from the Blackfriars, and its failure. Negotiation by the corporation to purchase the theatre and its appurtenances: interest and property of Shakespeare and other sharers. The income of Richard Burbage at his death. Diary of the Rev. J. Ward, Vicar of Stratford, and his statement regarding Shakespeare's expenditure. Copy of a letter from Lord Southampton on behalf of Shakespeare and Burbage. Probable decision of Lord Chancellor Ellesmere in favour of the company at the Blackfriars theatre.

WE have referred to the probable amount of the income of our great dramatist in 1609, and within the last ten years a document has been discovered, which enables us to form some judgment, though not perhaps an accurate estimate, of the sum he annually derived from the private theatre in the Blackfriars.

From the outset of the undertaking, the Lord Mayor and aldermen of London had been hostile to the establishment of players within this precinct, so near to the boundaries, but beyond the jurisdiction of the corporation; and, as we have already shown, they had made several fruitless efforts to dislodge them. The attempt was renewed in 1608, when Sir Henry Montagu, the Attorney General of the day, gave an opinion in favour of the claim of the citizens to exercise their municipal powers within the precinct of the late dissolved monastery of the Blackfriars. The question seems in some shape to have been brought before Baron Ellesmere, then Lord Chancellor of England, who required from the Lord Mayor and his brethren proofs that they had exercised any authority in the disputed liberty. The distinguished lawyers of the day retained by the city were imme

diately employed in searching for records applicable to the point at issue; but as far as we can judge, no such proofs, as were thought necessary by the highest legal authority of the time, and applicable to any recent period, were forthcoming. Lord Ellesmere, therefore, we may conclude, was opposed to the claim of the city.

Failing in this endeavour to expel the King's players from their hold by force of law, the corporation appears to have taken a milder course, and negotiated with the players for the purchase of the Blackfriars theatre, with all its properties and appurtenances. To this negotiation we are probably indebted for a paper, which shows with great exactness and particularity the amount of interest then claimed by each sharer, those sharers being Richard Burbage, Laurence Fletcher', William Shakespeare, John Heminge, Henry Condell, Joseph Taylor, and John Lowin, with four other persons not named, each the owner of half a share.

We have inserted the document entire in a note2, and hence we find that Richard Burbage was the owner of the freehold or fee, (which he no doubt inherited from his father) as well as the owner of four shares, the value of all which, taken together, he rated at 1933l. 6s. 8d. Laurence Fletcher (if it be he, for the Christian name is written

1 These transactions most probably occurred before September, 1608, because Laurence Fletcher died in that month. However, it is not quite certain that the "Laz. Fletcher," mentioned in the document, was Laurence Fletcher: we know of no person named Lazarus Fletcher, though he may have been the personal representative of Laurence Fletcher.

2 It is thus headed

"For avoiding of the Playhouse in the Precinct of the Blacke Friers.

Imp. Richard Burbidge oweth the Fee, and is alsoe a
sharer therein. His interest he rateth at the grosse
summe of 1000l. for the Fee, and for his foure shares
in the summe of 9331. 6s. 8d.
Item. Laz. Fletcher oweth three shares, which he rateth
at 7007., that is, at seven yeares purchase for each
share, or 331. 6s. 8d., one yeare with another
Item. W. Shakespeare asketh for the wardrobe and
properties of the same playhouse 500l., and for his
4 shares, the same as his fellowes, Burbidge and
Fletcher; viz. 933/. 6s. 8d.

[blocks in formation]

Item. Heminge and Condell eche 2 shares

Item. Joseph Taylor 1 share and an halfe
Item. Lowing also one share and an halfe

Item. Foure more playeres with one halfe share to eche of them

Summa totalis

[blocks in formation]

6166 13 4

Moreover, the hired men of the Companie demaund some recompence for their great losse, and the Widowes and Orphanes of Players, who are paide by the Sharers at divers rates and proportions, so as in the whole it will cost the Lo. Mayor and the Citizens at least 70007."

"Laz,") was proprietor of three shares, for which he claimed 7001. Shakespeare was proprietor of the wardrobe and properties of the theatre, estimated at 500l., as well as of four shares, valued, like those of Burbage and Fletcher, at 331. 6s. 8d. each, or 9331. 68. 8d., at seven years' purchase: his whole demand was 14331. 6s. 8d., or 5007. less than that of Burbage, in as much as the fee was considered worth 1000l., while Shakespeare's wardrobe and properties were valued at 5007. According to the same calculation, Heminge and Condell each required 4667. 13s. 4d. for their two shares, and Taylor 350l. for his share and a half, while the four unnamed half-sharers put in their claim to be compensated at the same rate, 466/. 13s. 4d. This mode of estimating the Blackfriars theatre made the value of it 61667. 138. 4d., and to this sum was to be added remuneration to the hired men of the company, who were not sharers, as well as to the widows and orphans of deceased actors: the purchase money of the whole property was thus raised to at least 70007.

Each share, out of the twenty into which the receipts of the theatre were divided, yielded, as was alleged, an annual profit of 331. 6s. 8d.; and Shakespeare, owning four of these shares, his annual income, from them only, was 1331. 6s. 8d.: he was besides proprietor of the wardrobe and properties, stated to be worth 500l.: these, we may conclude, he lent to the company for a certain consideration, and, reckoning wear and tear, ten per cent. seems a very low rate of payment; we will take it, however, at that sum, which would add 50l. a year to the 1337. 6s. 8d. already mentioned, making together 1837. 6s. 8d., besides what our great dramatist must have gained by the profits of his pen, upon which we have no data for forming any thing like an accurate estimate Without including any thing on this account, and supposing only that the Globe was as profitable for a summer theatre as the Blackfriars was for a winter theatre, it is evident that Shakespeare's income could hardly have been less than 366/. 13s. 4d. Taking every known source of emolument into view, we consider 4001. a year the very lowest amount at which his income can be reckoned in 1608.

The document upon which this calculation is founded is preserved among the papers of Lord Ellesmere, but a remarkable incidental confirmation of it has still more recently been brought to light in the State-paper office. Sir Dudley Carlton was ambassador at the Hague in 1619, and John Chamberlaine, writing to him on 19th of March in that year, and mentioning the death of Queen Anne, states that "the funeral is put off to the 29th of the next month, to the great hinderance of our players, which are forbidden to play

« ZurückWeiter »