February, 1607-8; so that Shakespeare was a grandfather before he had reached his forty-fifth year; but Mrs. Hall had no farther increase of family. By whom New Place, otherwise called "the great house," was inhabited at this period, we can only conjecture. That Shakespeare's wife and his youngest daughter Judith (who completed her twenty-eighth year in February, 1612,) resided in it, we cannot doubt; but as it would be much more than they would require, even after they were permanently joined by our great dramatist on his retirement from London, we may perhaps conclude that Mr. and Mrs. Hall were joint occupiers of it, and aided in keeping up the vivacity of the family circle. Shakespeare himself only completed his forty-eighth year in April, 1612, and every tradition and circumstance of his life tends to establish not only the gentleness and kindness, but the habitual cheerfulness of his disposition. Nevertheless, although we suppose him to have separated himself from the labours and anxieties attendant upon his theatrical concerns, he was not without his annoyances, though of a different kind. We refer to a chancery suit in which he seems to have been involved by the purchase, in 1605, of the remaining term of a lease of part of the tithes of Stratford. It appears that a rent of 271. 13s. 4d. had been reserved, which was to be paid by certain lessees under peril of forfeiture, but that some of the parties, disregarding the consequences, had refused to contribute their proportions; and Richard Lane, of Awston, Esquire, Thomas Greene, of Stratford-upon-Avon, Esquire, and William Shakespeare, "of Stratford-upon-Avon, gentleman," were under the necessity of filing a bill before Lord Ellesmere, to compel all the persons deriving estates under the dissolved college of Stratford to pay their shares. What was the issue of the suit is not any where stated; and the only important point in the draft of the bill, in the hands of the Shakespeare Society, is, that our great dramatist therein stated the value of his "moiety" of the tithes to be 601. per annum. In the summer of 1613 a calamity happened which we do not believe affected our author's immediate interests, on account of the strong probability that he had taken care to divest himself of all theatrical property before he finally took up his residence in his birth-place. The Globe, which had been in use for about eighteen years, was burned down on 29th June, 1613, in consequence of the thatch, with which it was partially covered, catching fire from the dis 66 charge of some theatrical artillery'. It is doubtful what play was then in a course of representation: Sir Henry Wotton gives it the title of All is True," and calls it "a new play;" while Howes, in his continuation of Stowe's Annales, distinctly states that it was "Henry the Eighth2." It is very possible that both may be right, and that Shakespeare's historical drama was that night revived under a new name, and therefore mistakenly called "a new play" by Sir Henry Wotton, although it had been nearly ten years on the stage. The Globe was rebuilt in the next year, as we are told on what may be considered good authority, at the cost of King James and of many noblemen and gentlemen, who seem to have contributed sums of money for the purpose. If James I. lent any pecuniary aid on the occasion, it affords another out of many proofs of his disposition to encourage the drama, and to assist the players who acted under the royal name. Although Shakespeare 1 John Taylor, the water-poet, was a spectator of the calamity, (perhaps in his own. wherry) and thus celebrated it in an epigram, which he printed in 1614 in his "Nipping and Snipping of Abuses," &c. 4to. "UPON THE BURNING OF THE GLOBE. "Aspiring Phaeton, with pride inspirde, 2 See "Hist. of Engl. Dram. Poetry and the Stage," vol. i. p. 386, and vol. iii. p. 293. 3 This fact, with several other new and curious particulars respecting the fate of the Blackfriars theatre, the White friars (called the Salisbury Court) theatre, the Phonix. the Fortune. and the Hope (which was also at times used for bear-baiting) is contained in some manuscript notes to a copy of Stowe's Annales, by Howes. folio, 1631, in the possession of Mr. Pickering: they appear to have been made just after the last event mentioned in them. The burning of the Globe is there erroneously fixed in 1612. When, too. it is said that the Hope was built in 1610, the meaning must be that it was then reconstructed, so as to be adapted to both purposes, stage-plays and bear-baiting. The memoranda are thus headed: A note of such passages as have beene omitted, and as I have seene, since the printing of Stowe's Survey of London in 4to, 1618, and this Chronicle at large, 1631." "PLAY HOUSES.-The Globe play house, on the Bank side in Southwarke, was burnt downe to the ground in the yeare 1612. And new built up againe in the yeare 1613, at the great charge of King James, and many noble men. and others. And now pulled downe to the ground by Sir Mathew Brand on Munday, the 15 of April, 1044, to make tenements in the rome of it } "The Black Friers play house, in Black Friers London. which had stood many yeares, was pulled down to the ground on Munday, the 6 day of August, 1655, and tenements built in the roome. "The play house in Salisbury Court. in Fleete streete, was pulled down by a company of souldiers, set on by the Sectaries of these sad times, on Saturday, the 24th day of March, 1949. "The Phenix. in Druery Lane, was pulled down also this day, being Saturday the 24th of March. 1649, by the same souldiers. iii might not be in any way pecuniarily affected by the event, we may be sure that he would not be backward in using his influence, and perhaps in rendering assistance by a gift of money, for the reconstruction of a playhouse in which he had often acted, from which he had derived so much profit, and in the continuance of the performances at which so many of his friends and fellows were deeply interested. He must himself have had an escape from a similar disaster at Stratford in the very next year. Fires had broken out in the borough in 1594 and 195, which had destroyed many of the houses, then built of vood, or of materials not calculated to resist combustion; but that which occurred on the 9th July, 1614, seems to have done more damage than both its predecessors. At the instance of various gentlemen in the neighbourhood, including Sir Fulk Greville, Sir Richard Verney, and Sir Thomas Lucy, King James issued a proclamation, or brief, dated 11th May, 1615, in favour of the inhabitants of Stratford, authorizing the collection of donations in the different churches of the kingdom for the restoration of the town; and alleging that within two hours the fire had consumed "fifty-four dwelling-houses, many of them being very fair houses, besides barns, stables, and other houses of office, together also with great store of corn, hay, straw, wood, and timber." The amount of loss is stated, on the same authority, to be "eight thousand pounds and upwards!" What was the issue of this charitable appeal to the whole kingdom, we know not. It is very certain that the dwelling of our great dramatist, called New Place, escaped the conflagration, and his property, as far as we can judge, seems to have been situated in a part of the town which fortunately did not suffer from the ravages of the fire. The name of Shakespeare is not found among those of "The Fortune play house, between White Crosse streete and Golding Lane, was burned down to the ground in the year 1618. And built againe, with bricke worke on the outside, in the year 1622; and now pulld downe on the inside by these souldiers, this 1649. "The Hope, on the Banke side in Southwarke, commonly called the Beare Garden: a play house for stage playes on Mundays, Wednesdayes, Fridayes, and Saterdayes; and for the baiting of the beares on Tuesdays and Thursdayes-the stage being made to take up and downe when they please. It was built in the year 1610; and now pulled downe to make tenements by Thomas Walker, a peticoate maker in Cannon Streete, on Tuesday the 25 day of March, 1656. Seven of Mr. Godfries beares, by the command of Thomas Pride, then hie Sherefe of Surry, were shot to death on Saturday, the 9 day of February, 1655, by a company of souldiers." 1 We take these particulars from a copy of the document "printed by Thomas Purfoot," who then had a patent for all proclamations, &c. It has the royal arms, and the initials I. R. at the top of it as usual. It is in the possession of the Shakespeare Society. inhabitants whose certificate was stated to be the immediate ground for issuing the royal brief', but it is not at all unlikely that he was instrumental in obtaining it. We are sure that he was in London in November following the fire2, and possibly was taking some steps in favour of his fellowtownsmen. However, his principal business seems to have related to the projected inclosure of certain common lands in the neighbourhood of Stratford in which he had an interest. Some inquiries as to the rights of various parties were instituted in September, 1614, as we gather from a document yet preserved, and which is now before us. individuals whose claims are set out are," Mr. Shakespeare," Thomas Parker, Mr. Lane, Sir Francis Smith, Mace, Arthur Cawdrey, and "Mr. Wright, vicar of Bishopton." All that it is necessary to quote is the following, which refers to Shakespeare, and which, like the rest, is placed under the head of "Auncient Freeholders in the fields of Old Stratford and Welcome." The "Mr. Shakspeare, 4 yard land3: noe common, nor ground beyond Gospell bushe: noe ground in Sandfield, nor none in Slow Hill field beyond Bishopton, nor none in the enclosures beyond Bishopton." The date of this paper is 5th September, 1614, and, as we have said, we may presume that it was chiefly upon this business that Shakespeare came to London on the 16th November. It should appear that Thomas Greene, of Stratford, was officially opposing the inclosure on the part of the corporation; and it is probable that Shakespeare's wishes were accordant with those of the majority of the inhabitants however this might be, (and it is liable to dispute which party Shakespeare favoured) the members of the municipal body of the borough were nearly unanimous, and, as far as we can learn from the imperfect particulars remaining upon this subject, they wished our poet to use his influence to resist the project, which seems to have been supported by Mr. Arthur Mainwaring, then resident in the family of Lord Ellesmere as auditor of his domestic expenditure. 1 The name of his friend William Combe is found among the " esquires" enumerated in the body of the instrument. 2 This fact appears in a letter, written by Thomas Greene, on 17th November, 1614, in which he tells some person in Stratford that he had been to see "his cousin Shakespeare," who had reached town the day before. Malone informs us, without mentioning his authority, that "in the fields of Old Stratford, where our poet's estate lay, a yard land contained only about twenty-seven acres," but that it varied much in different places: he derives the term from the Saxon gyrd land, virgata terræ.-Shakspeare, by Boswell, vol. ii. p. 25. According to the same authority, a yard land in Wilmecote consisted of more than fifty acres. It is very likely that Shakespeare saw Mainwaring; and, as it was only five or six years since his name had been especially brought under the notice of the Lord Chancellor, in relation to the claim of the city authorities to jurisdiction in the Blackfriars, it is not impossible that Shakespeare may have had an interview with Lord Ellesmere, who seems at all times to have been of a very accessible and kindly disposition. Greene was in London on the 17th November, and sent to Stratford a short account of his proceedings on the question of the inclosure, in which he mentioned that he had seen Shakespeare and Mr. Hall (probably meaning Shakespeare's son-in-law) on the preceding day, who told him that they thought nothing would be done'. Greene returned to Stratford soon afterwards, and having left our poet in London, at the instance of the corporation, he subsequently wrote two letters, one to Shakespeare, and the other to Mainwaring, (the latter only has been preserved) setting forth in strong terms the injury the inclosure would do to Stratford, and the heavy loss the inhabitants had not long before sustained from the fire. A petition was also prepared and presented to the privy council, and we may gather that the opposition was effectual, because nothing was done in the business: the common fields of Welcombe, which it had been intended to inclose, remained open for pasture as before. How soon after the matter relating to the inclosure had been settled Shakespeare returned to Stratford,-how long he remained there, or whether he ever came to London again, we are without information. He was very possibly in the metropolis at the time when a narrative poem, founded in part upon his historical play of "Richard III.," was published, and which until now has escaped observation, although it contains the clearest allusion, not indeed by name, to our author and to his tragedy. It is called "The Ghost of Richard the Third," and it bears date in 1614; 1 The memorandum of the contents of his letter (to which we have already referred on p. lxii.) is in these terms, avoiding abbreviations:"Jovis, 17 No. My casen Shakespeare comyng yesterday, I went to see him, how he did. He told me that they assured him they ment to inclose no further than to Gospel bush, and so upp straight (leaving out part of the Dyngles to the field) to the gate in Clopton hedg, and take in Salisburys peece; and that they mean in Aprill to survey the land, and then to gyve satisfaction, and not before: and he and Mr. Hall say they think there will be nothyng done at all." In what way, or in what degree, Shakespeare and Greene were related, so that the latter should call the former his "cousin," must remain a matter of speculation; but it will be recollected that the parish register of Stratford shows that "Thomas Greene, alias Shakespeare,' was buried on 6th March, 1589-90. Whether Thomas Greene, the solicitor, was any relation to Thomas Greene, the actor, we have no means of ascertaining. |