K-v 
 
 k
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 Kenneth Macgowan
 
 SCHEME &> ESTIMATES 
 
 FOR A 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE
 
 Afc have in England everything to make us dissatisfied with the chaotic and 
 ineffective condition into which our theatre has fallen. We have the remem- 
 brance of better things in the past, and the elements for better things in the 
 future. We have a splendid national drama of the Elizabethan age, and a later 
 drama which has no lack of pieces conspicuous by their stage qualities, their 
 vivacity and their talent, and interesting by their pictures of manners. We 
 have had great actors. We have good actors not a few at the present 7/toment, 
 But we have been unlucky, as we so often are, in the work of organisation. . . . 
 // seems to me that every one of us is concerned to find a remedy for this melan- 
 choly state of things, and that the pleasure we have had in the visit of the French 
 company [the Comidie Franfaisel is barren, unless it leaves us with the impulse 
 to do so, and with the lesson how alone it can be rationally done. "Forget" — 
 can we not hear these fine artists saying in an undertone to us, amidst their 
 graceful compliments of adieu ? — "forget your clap-trap, and believe that tlu 
 State, the nation in its collective and corporate character, does well to concern 
 itself about an influeiue so important to national life and manners as the theatre. 
 . . . The people will have the theatre ; then make it a good one. . . . The theatre 
 is irresistible ; organise the theatre 1 " 
 
 MATTHEW ARNOLD.
 
 SCHEME & ESTIMATES 
 
 FOR A 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 By 
 WILLIAM ARCHER 
 
 and 
 
 GRANVILLE BARKER 
 
 New York 
 DUFFIELD & COMPANY 
 
 1908
 
 Copyright, 1908, by 
 DUFFIELD & COMPANY 
 
 THE PREMIER PRESS 
 NEW YORK
 
 
 HAVING READ AND CAREFULLY 
 CONSIDERED THIS SCHEME FOR A 
 NATIONAL THEATRE, WE DESIRE TO 
 EXPRESS OUR BELIEF THAT SUCH AN 
 INSTITUTION IS URGENTLY NEEDED, 
 AND THAT IT COULD IN ALL PROBA- 
 BILITY BE SUCCESSFULLY ESTAB- 
 LISHED ON THE GENERAL LINES 
 HERE INDICATED. 
 
 HENRY IRVING. 
 
 SQUIRE BANCROFT. 
 
 J. M. BARRIE. 
 
 HELEN nOYLY CARTE, 
 
 JOHN HARE. 
 
 HENRY ARTHUR JONES. 
 
 A. W. PINERO. 
 
 572350
 
 NOTE 
 
 This book was compiled and privately printed in the 
 year 1904. We need not enter into our reasons for not 
 publishing it at that date : it is suflScient that they 
 have now ceased to operate. 
 
 In drawing up the following Estimates we had the 
 assistance of many expert advisers. Most of those leaders 
 of the theatrical profession who signed the declaration 
 on the previous page, not only read the book in proof, 
 but favoured us with many criticisms and suggestions 
 which are embodied in the text as it now stands. 
 Among our other advisers, those to whom we owe special 
 acknowledgments are : Mr. Robert Courtneidge, Miss 
 Edith Craig, Mr. Walter Hann, Mr. Ian Robertson, 
 and Mr. Horace Watson. We are deeply indebted to 
 them for information placed at our disposal ; but they 
 are of course in no way responsible for the deduction^ 
 we have drawn from it, or for the general scheme into 
 which it has been woven. 
 
 It is a source of pleasure and pride to us that the 
 list of those who gave their sanction to our scheme should 
 be headed by the name of Sir Henry Irving. 
 
 W. A. 
 H. G. B. 
 
 August, 1907.
 
 PREFACE FOR AMERICA 
 
 When Mr. Granville Barker and I determined to publish this book, 
 which had been printed for private circulation three years ago, we 
 thought for a moment of preparing an American edition of it, wherein 
 our financial estimates should be stated in dollars instead of in pounds. 
 But we very soon abandoned the idea. WTiy translate into American 
 currency fig-ures which do not pretend to apply to American condi- 
 tions ? We might, indeed, have called American experts into council, 
 and tried to adjust our estimates to the American scale. But even if 
 we had had time to face such a task, it would scarcely have been worth 
 while; for it would have required far more than a mere correction of 
 figures to fit our scheme with any precision to American needs and 
 opportunities. We determined, then, to leave the book a purely Eng- 
 lish document, trusting that American readers would make for them- 
 selves the necfissary adaptations, and appropriate to their own case 
 as many of our suggestions as they " had any use for." 
 
 Nevertheless, it may not be out of place for me to indicate briefly 
 those parts of the book which I would, so to speak, underline for 
 America. I do so without any special reference to the schemes and 
 enterprises in the direction of theatrical progress that are already afoot 
 in the United States. Looking at the problem in its widest aspect, I 
 try to point out those features of our Scheme which are, in my judg- 
 ment, worthy of consideration by all who are interested in the estab- 
 lishment of an artistic theatre in any Anglo-Saxon community. 
 
 The American reader may possibly find a stumbling-block at the 
 
 outset in the name " National Theatre." It has really no importance. 
 
 The British nation is geographically so much more concentrated than 
 
 the American nation that siich a theatre as is here in view might fairly 
 
 be called " national " in a sense in which the term could scarcely be 
 
 applied to any American theatre. If the institution outlined were 
 
 established in London, its claim to rank as " national " would not 
 
 i
 
 ii PREFACE FOR AMERICA 
 
 be contested by Manchester, Leeds, or even Edinburgh; whereas New 
 York would scarcely concede " national " pre-eminence to a theatre 
 established in Washington, nor Chicago to a theatre established in 
 New York. In America, perhaps, " City Theatre " might not inaptly 
 designate the type of playhouse indicated. In this term I do not 
 mean necessarily to imply a " Municipal Theatre " in the Continental 
 sense; that is, a theatre owned and directly or indirectly controlled 
 by the Municipality. What I mean is simply a theatre commensurate 
 to the artistic needs of a great city. There are at least half-a-dozen — 
 perhaps a dozen — cities in the United States quite capable of support- 
 ing a theatre on the scale of that which is here outlined. The name 
 matters nothing. Found the institution, and a fitting name will very 
 soon present itself.* 
 
 Turning now to Section I of our Scheme, I believe that the prin- 
 ciple stated in the first two paragraphs will be found approximately 
 right, no less in America than in England. A City Theatre ought to 
 have a thoroughly dignified and adequate building assigned to it, free 
 of rent and taxes; but, after the first few years of its working, it 
 ought not, if efficiently managed, to require any further subsidy. 
 
 It seems to us very essential that (as laid down in Sections I 
 and II) the Theatre should be a public institution, owned, and, in the 
 last resort, controlled, by Trustees or Governors representing the com- 
 munity. There is no harm — there may be very great good — in theatres 
 owned and controlled by private art-lovers for the satisfaction of their 
 owm tastes. But these are not such theatres as we have here in view. 
 We suggest that in every great community there should be at least one 
 theatre standing on the same basis as the Public Library, the Museum, 
 or the Art Gallery, among the culture-institutions of the city or State. 
 There are, of course, many ways in which such a theatre might be 
 formally attached to the body politic, without coming too immediately 
 under the control of the party politician. I believe that numerous 
 institutions already exist in the L^nited States, dedicated by private 
 donors to public uses, under conditions that might be applied with 
 very little change to the governance of a City Theatre. Unless I am 
 
 •The term "State Theatre" has in Europe come to mean a theatre supported by the 
 central government; and it can hardly be divested of that sense. Otherwise, it would 
 be an excellent name for a theatre, not supported by. but dedicated to. the State of 
 New York, or Massachusetts, or Pennsylvania, or Illinois, or California, as the case 
 might be.
 
 PREFACE FOR AMERICA Hi 
 
 greatly mistaken, the Carnegie Institute at Pittsburg is a case in 
 point. For the sake of clearness, however, I will ventiire to suggest 
 in detail (on the lines laid do^v•n in our Section II) what would seem 
 to me a possible Board of Trustees for a City Theatre to be established 
 in New York. 
 
 Let us assume that the number — fifteen — proposed in that Section 
 is adliered to. In that case one nomination apiece might be allotted to 
 
 The Governor of IsTew York State, 
 
 Columbia University, 
 
 Cornell University, 
 
 Vassar College,* 
 and two nominations to the Mayor of Xew York. " The remaining 
 nine members" (I quote from Section II) "should, in the first 
 instance, be appointed by the Donor or Donors of the site and building, 
 and as vacancies occurred (by death or resignation) among the Trus- 
 tees thus appointed, the vacancies should be filled up alternately by 
 co-optation (all Members of the Board having power to vote) and 
 by nomination by " — the President of the United States. Need I say 
 that I claim no special virtue for this particular method of constituting 
 the Board ? It may be capable of improvement in a score of ways. 
 Perhaps a larger Board would be preferable — or, it may be, a smaller. 
 Perhaps certain prominent functionaries, such as the President of 
 Columbia University and the Director of the Metropolitan Museum 
 of Art, ought to be ex-ofiicio members of the Board. On such details 
 it would be absurd for me to do more than throw out tentative sugges- 
 tions. The point to be emphasized is merely that some such Board 
 could easily be constituted, not only in New York, but in any great 
 American city, and that it would be at least as likely to work satisfac- 
 torily in the United States as in England. 
 
 All that is said in Section II of the duties of Trustees or Governors, 
 and their relation to the Executive Staff of the Theatre, applies with 
 equal force on both sides of the Atlantic. 
 
 IMaking a leap now to Section XII, I suggest that the plan here 
 set forth for the constitution and administration of the Guarantee 
 
 •Perhaps Tale fniversitj'. being definitely within the New York "sphere of influ- 
 ence." should have one nomination. On the other hand, Princeton. I take it, would 
 rather come, with Bryn Mawr and the University of Pennsylvania, within the circum- 
 scription of Philadelphia; just as Harvard and Wellesley would naturally nominate 
 trustees for a Boston theatre.
 
 iv PREFACE FOR AMERICA 
 
 Fund, for automatically determining, as it were, the success or failure 
 of the enterprise, and for its liquidation in the event of failure, is 
 worthy of careful attention in the United States. There is this differ- 
 ence between the Theatre we are considering and such an establish- 
 ment as the Carnegie Institute, that, whereas, the talents required for 
 successfully conducting the latter are definitely understood and exist 
 in abundance, those required for successfully conducting the former 
 are not yet clearly understood, are certainly rare, and may not always 
 be available. There is as yet no recognized tradition in English- 
 speaking countries for the organization and management of National 
 or City Theatres. Until such a tradition establishes itself, each indi- 
 vidual theatre must be an experimental effort. In most cases, no 
 doubt, the enterprise would have sufficient vitality to profit by experi- 
 ence, however dearly bought, and to proceed through temporary failure 
 to enduring success. But it might conceivably prove, in this or that 
 individual instance, that the Theatre was hopelessly at odds with its 
 environment, that no mere reorganization could meet the trouble, and 
 that the only reasonable coiirse was to abandon the experiment. In 
 view of this possibility, it is cleai'ly expedient that the Donor or Donors 
 should retain some hold upon their benefaction, until it has absolutely 
 proved itself to be a benefaction indeed. Their hold upon the enter- 
 prise should on no account consist of any personal share in the manage- 
 ment. A Donor might of course be a member of the Board of Trustees ; 
 but even this would probably be undesirable. For him to claim, simply 
 as Donor, any control over the enterprise, after the statutes or condi- 
 tions of his gift had been determined, would be disastrous. But these 
 statutes or conditions should certainly foresee the possibility of fail- 
 ure, and should define the claim of the Donor or Donors upon the site 
 and building in the event of that possibility occurring. I think, then, 
 that the method of procedure outlined in Section XII and in Appendix 
 A is at any rate worthy of consideration, wherever such an enterprise 
 is being set on foot. 
 
 The Repertory set forth in Section IV is naturally not in the least 
 like that which we should have sketched had we had an American 
 theatre in view. Indeed it is not the Repertory which we should now 
 forecast, even for an English theatre. Things have moved rapidly 
 since 1904, and several of the authors mentioned on p. 44, whom we 
 then regarded as too " disputable " for inclusion in our somewhat
 
 PREFACE FOR AMERICA v 
 
 pusillanimous list, have now passed quite beyond the disputable stage, 
 and may fairly claim right of entrance to any self-respecting theatre. 
 America, too, has for long been, though in a capricious way, more 
 hospitable to " advanced " drama than England. For this as well as 
 for other reasons, the Repertory would have to be wholly reconstituted 
 before it could be regarded as in any way suitable to American con- 
 ditions. 
 
 The tendency to be guarded against in America — if I may venture 
 to say so — is a too great hospitality towards foreign works,and a lack 
 of reasonable discrimination in favor of native authors. This tendency 
 seems to be gradually correcting itself ; but it is still sufficiently strong 
 to induce me to draw special attention to Regulations 10, 11 and 12 
 on p, 1 33, with the remark that some regulations to a like effect ought 
 to be laid down for the conduct of every American theatre of the type 
 we are discussing. They would require, however, to be very consider- 
 ably modified. For one thing, I would not suggest reciprocity in the 
 matter dealt with in Regulation 12. We, in England, can afford to 
 make no discrimination against modern American plays; T do not 
 think that you, in America, can as yet afford to return the compliment. 
 Perhaps a judicious regulation might be that not less than one-third 
 of the performances of any season should be devoted to plays by modern 
 American authors, and not more than one-third to plays by modern 
 English authors. On the other hand. Regulation 11 might be allowed 
 to stand, with the proviso that English plays over one hundred years 
 old should not be regarded as foreign, but as belonging to the common 
 literature of the two peoples. 
 
 It would, of course, be quite inappropriate to open an American 
 theatre with Shakespeare's four great histories. Every effort should 
 be made, it seems to me, to secure a drama of American history ade- 
 quate to the occasion ; but if no good play of the type were forthcoming 
 (as is quite possible, for inspiration seldom arrives to order) the obvi- 
 ous course would be to fall back upon Hamlet, or Julius Caesar, or A 
 Winter's Tale, and let Shakespeare the world-genius, as distinct from 
 Shakespeare the Briton, consecrate the new Temple of Art. 
 
 But if the individual plays selected for our specimen Repertory 
 have no special meaning for America, the system of alternation laid 
 down in our Regulations 8 and 9 (p. 133) and exemplified in the 
 order of the Repertory (pp. 49-60) is one to which I beg to direct
 
 vi PREFACE FOR AMERICA 
 
 special attention. This system (in effect, though of course not in 
 detail) obtains in all the Kepertory Theatres of the Continent, and is, 
 indeed, essential to the very idea of a Repertory Theatre. It is of the 
 utmost importance to realize that the type of theatre here outlined has 
 nothing in common with the Stock Company Theatres, so frequent in 
 America, at which a different jjlay is presented each week. The artis- 
 tic disadvantages of this system are certainly as great as those of the 
 long run system, and probably greater. It is manifestly inapplicable, 
 indeed, in a theatre which regards the production of new plays as a 
 main part of its functions ; for what author would consent to have his 
 play produced for a single week, and then indefinitely shelved? Al- 
 most equally unsatisfactory is the " short run " system, under which 
 a play is produced for a month or six weeks, and then taken off, with 
 or without the prospect of revival during the following season. If 
 the play is a failure, a four weeks' run is far too long; if it is a 
 success, a six weeks' run is far too short; and it is quite doubtful 
 whether it will recapture on revival its original popularity. The only 
 practical system at a theatre such as we are here considering is the 
 system of alternation, under which a play may, if the public wants 
 to see it, be acted a hundred times in a season, but must not be acted 
 more than (say) four times in a week. From this point of view, then, 
 we think that the ordering of our Eepertory, and the regulations con- 
 cerning it, are worthy of serious attention. 
 
 The discussion in Section VIII of the proper seating capacity for 
 such a theatre ought to have no less validity for America than for 
 England. The gi'cat size of most American theatres, outside New 
 York, is, from the artistic point of view, a serious evil. We hope that 
 our suggestions as to the Fee System in the remuneration of actors 
 and actresses, as to the Pension Fund, and as to the Subscription Sys- 
 tem, may be found more or less useful. Amid all differences of detail, 
 the problems to be solved in America are the same as those which we 
 have attempted to solve for England ; and we may fairly hope that our 
 work will not prove quite valueless to anyone who is applying his mind 
 to that most important and pressing problem : the reasonable organiza- 
 tion of dramatic art in the English-speaking countries. 
 
 WILLIAM ARCHER.
 
 PREFACE 
 
 IN THE FORM OF A LETTER FROM ONE AUTHOR 
 
 to the other 
 
 My dear Archer, 
 
 You want a preface from me — do you ? — to say how- 
 far the three years' experience of theatre management through 
 which I have passed, since this unofficial blue-book was 
 written and printed, has altered, as far as I am concerned, the 
 views expressed in it. It hasn't reaUy altered them at all. 
 The need for a repertory theatre remains the same : no less, 
 and it could not well be greater. But I cannot help think- 
 ing that the public mind, and especially the mind of the 
 theatrical public, has developed a little, and that therefore 
 the possibilities of the project are somewhat differently 
 balanced from what they were when we wrote. Moreover, 
 while experience has not altered my views, it has diversified 
 them ; so that there are one or two amendments to our scheme 
 which I would like to suggest. If you do not agree with 
 them, write another preface stUl to say so. It would only 
 bring the number up to four. 
 
 I could chip here and there at our piles of figures, but 
 any one is welcome to do that. Except in one or two in- 
 stances, their increase or decrease will ultimately depend 
 upon the personality of the theatre's administration. 
 
 I am inclined to think, though, that our estimate for 
 actors' salaries may have been invalidated since we made it
 
 viii PREFACE 
 
 by the increasing effect of what is called the American 
 Invasion. The methods of syndicate and trust have, you 
 know, brought about a breakback competition for the limited 
 amount of assured talent which London possesses, of which 
 the actors included in that limitation have not been slow to 
 take advantage. Small blame to them ! At least I can 
 account in no other way for the great forcing-up of salaries 
 that has been going on for some years now. The more a 
 manager speculates, the more his resources of capital enable 
 him to juggle with the fate of companies and plays, the 
 more is the actor forced into speculation, gambling as he 
 does only with his own personality, now more in demand, 
 now less, and with so little assurance of stability. It will 
 need the establishment, not of one permanent repertory 
 theatre, but of many, and the operation of several years, 
 to steady and correct this debauched market. Meanwhile 
 the imaginary promoters of such a scheme as ours should be 
 made to face present conditions. If any one supposes that 
 these conditions are even to the material advantage of the 
 actor who may seem to be making hay while the sun of 
 speculation shines, let us refer such an apostle of the Happy- 
 go-lucky to our argument upon the point in Section III. 
 The difference to prepare for would be found more in the 
 salaries of actresses than of actors ; and not at the head or 
 tail of our list, but in the middle, where the artistic safety 
 of such a company as this would especially lie, where absolute 
 competence could least afford to be jeopardised. 
 
 I think we should have allowed a definite margin to 
 cover the cost of artistic experiment, which should certainly 
 be demanded of such a theatre. I don't refer so much to 
 the production of experimental plays as to experimental
 
 PREFACE ix 
 
 methods of production. Certainly the artist designer is not 
 called to the service of the theatre in England nearly as 
 much as he should be ; his co-operation in the leading Berlin 
 theatres has had at least the most interesting results. Even 
 when we use him, we are hardly ever content to give him 
 a free hand. He is not necessarily an expensive luxury. 
 Indeed my special plea for him is that at his best he substi- 
 tutes a simple beauty of effect for the aggressive detail which 
 serves, in scenic decoration as in anything, only to cover up 
 poverty of imagination. But he has been kept so long out 
 of this inheritance that time and patience are wanted before 
 he can work freely and at his ease in it ; and in the Theatre 
 time and patience mean money. 
 
 Before the item " Ladies' Modern Dresses " I pause in 
 some doubt. I think our estimates are sufficient. They 
 ought to be sufficient. But then I am deeply conscious of 
 the shortcomings of my judgment in this matter. I always 
 feel that I like to be as unconscious of the cut and colour 
 of clothes upon the stage as I am in the living-room of a 
 house. I am told by persons of great authority that, while 
 this is quite the right feeling to have, such a result is only 
 obtainable by high-priced skill, care, and material. When I 
 dispute such a necessity I am assured that, while my feelings 
 still do me credit, my powers of observation are simply em- 
 bryonic. I certainly recall a most unhappy afternoon at the 
 Court Theatre, when a certain actress, Bernard Shaw, and I 
 passed in review a perfect kaleidoscope of scenery and clothes. 
 Did blue go well against grey in an amber light, or was 
 purple better upon orange when the lights were blue ? Shaw 
 protested to the bitter end that he had an opinion of his 
 own ; but after two or three hours of this torture I was
 
 X PREFACE 
 
 ready to confess that I neither knew green from pink nor 
 cared. I cannot recast that estimate. As I say, it may be 
 a perfectly sane and sound one. I sometimes think that the 
 only reliable figures about ladies' modern dresses are contained 
 in the bills for them. Certainly that department would have 
 to be under the control of an expert, who could decide as 
 quickly and authoritatively upon the colours of a dress and a 
 scene, as can a competent stage-manager upon the construction 
 of a piece of business. And why should not a chief of ward- 
 robe be found (what a figure of imposing mien the title 
 suggests!) who could also keep his expenditure within what 
 a mere man may consider the bounds of reason ? Still, when 
 I picture him informing the leading lady of a four-perform- 
 ance revival of The Importance of being Earnest that her 
 last year's frock would do perfectly well, and when I hear 
 in imagination that leading lady's reply, I am glad that 
 his post — even with that stirring title to it — wiU never 
 
 be mine. 
 
 From one thing this three years' interval between writing 
 and publication has absolved us : the extreme self-denial with 
 which we composed that list of plays to be performed during 
 the opening season. Certainly in those far-off" days you, as 
 Ibsen's sponsor, were under more than suspicion as a dan- 
 gerous theatrical revolutionary. I was known to those who 
 knew me at all as being associated with the shadiest in- 
 terests. I believed that Shakespeare should be played with- 
 out scenery, and I was hand in glove with a crew of 
 impossibilists called the Stage Society. Perhaps we were 
 wise, then, to demand at first only a new and healthy system 
 of existence for our theatre, to prove that it could be 
 brought into being under a management which need have no
 
 PREFACE xi 
 
 distressing gospel to preach, which need not even possess 
 settled artistic convictions. I hope we did not overdo our 
 disinterestedness. I am sure neither of us ever wanted to 
 see a spiritless theatre, be its economic condition never so 
 perfect. Anyhow, even this short lapse of time has been 
 enough on our side — which is, we think, the side of the 
 angels — for us no longer to need to assume such a position. 
 Helping you with this book to-day, I should unhesitatingly, 
 both from motives of good policy and personal taste, advocate 
 the inclusion in our repertory list of every author whom we 
 so carefully excluded four years ago — Ibsen, Hauptmann, 
 d'Annunzio, Shaw, and the rest. I hope I could even find 
 other names to add. 
 
 But one great difference I would propose to make, were 
 we writing the book to-day. I would draw up a second set 
 of figures, suitable to the foundation of an adequate reper- 
 tory theatre in Manchester, Birmingham, or some such pro- 
 vincial centre. For it is to one of these cities, easier to stir 
 to the expression of civic opinion, rather than to monstrous and 
 inarticulate London, centre of all English thought and action 
 though it may claim to be, that I look for the first practical 
 step in theatrical organisation. That there are local tendencies 
 towards a better understanding of the part which might be 
 played in English life by a vitalised English drama cannot, I 
 think, be denied. To promote this understanding is the avowed 
 object of the Dramatic Revival Society sponsored by Mr. W. T. 
 Stead and Mr. F. R. Benson ; and what other meaning is to 
 be attached to the welcome formation of Playgoers' Societies 
 in Manchester, Leeds, and Stockport, or to the outbreak of a 
 perfect fever of Pageantry? Actors and actresses certainly 
 feel that the touring system by which the provincial Theatre
 
 xii PREFACE 
 
 is almost exclusively fed must at last have reached the nadir 
 of its sweated hopelessness ; at least, if there is a lower depth 
 to be touched, no self-respecting worker is anxious to descend 
 it. And when once the formers of opinion in these very- 
 self-respecting communities, in the ^lidlands and further 
 north, have thoroughly realised that the policy of neglect 
 adopted towards this institution, the Theatre, which exists 
 only in public buildings licensed by the citizens for their 
 recreation, has been both illogical and disastrous, and can be 
 brought to see the potentialities of an opposite course, the 
 change will not be very far off. 
 
 For a repertory theatre in Manchester or Birmingham 
 the amendments to our figures might be simple, but would 
 need to be drastic enough to allow for the difference in seat- 
 prices customary there. j^iooo might be cut from the 
 estimate for the general staff, as much as £7000 or ;^8ooo 
 from the salaries of actors and actresses, and ;^20oo or 
 £3000 might be docked elsewhere. The labour of the 
 theatre could hardly be cheapened, nor could the machinery, 
 but to its great disadvantage. The price of any economies 
 would be a reduction in repertory and the necessity of 
 engaging managers and actors with reputations more to 
 make than already made. 
 
 It would be very necessary to guard against the tempta- 
 tion to maintain a large repertory at the expense of an 
 overworked company. Actors of to - day are popularly 
 supposed to enjoy too much leisure. I would undertake to 
 prove that they have not enough, not enough of the right 
 sort any way, to employ it profitably. And with modern 
 drama to interpret, with modem standards to be satisfied, 
 no return to the conditions of the old stock system is possible.
 
 PREFACE xiii 
 
 The experience of the past thirty years condemns them, no 
 less than it condemns itself. The Theatre of the past stood 
 more or less for intellectual and social vagabondage. At 
 present it is being patronised and petted, hardly, many may 
 think, to its greater advantage. But if it is ever to become 
 a part of our civic institutions, its working conditions must 
 be organised as becomes a healthy and stable civil service. 
 And incidentally its servants must be left opportunities to 
 retain that social citizenship which formerly they altogether 
 renounced, and which now the pressure of the prevailing 
 system does not afford them. If they are to depict social 
 life they must be encouraged to enjoy it, not considered 
 and left to become mere emotional acrobats. 
 
 There are many reasons why the first of the new reper- 
 tory theatres could be more easily started in a provincial 
 centre than in London. If the question of endowment were 
 a difficulty, there are existing buildings fit to be utilised. 
 At the worst, (so to speak of a positively happy eventuality) 
 one of these could be leased by a committee and let again 
 to some manager upon a cahier des charges. And even 
 such a truncated version of our scheme as this would, I 
 think, have a very fair chance of success where otherwise, 
 as now, only the stale scraps from London's not too whole- 
 some theatre - table were sparingly doled out. Playgoers 
 there might be more ready to recognise the virtues of acting, 
 vitalised under simpler methods of production, than would 
 the pampered London public. The present effect upon 
 playgoing habits of the custom of a weekly change of bill 
 at the theatres, would, while it lasted, and until a better 
 custom took hold, tend to increase the size of the average 
 audience under a repertory system, and to make a method
 
 xiv PREFACE 
 
 of subscription more acceptable. And would not the policy 
 of a management so placed be further from the reach of 
 the influence of Fashion ? Of all the vitiating influences 
 upon the Theatre in London, has not this been the worst, 
 with its demand for sentiment, smartness, insincerity, and 
 shallow thought, and its lack of reasonable interest in any 
 art? As a Londoner I regret my prophecy, but I think it 
 will not be until shamed into action by other cities' good 
 fortune, that we shall have our central repertory theatre. 
 
 Here, then, is my preface, my dear Archer. I wish I 
 could think that, in sending it you, I in any way restored 
 the balance of our collaboration in this book. I remember 
 well (will you allow me to tell you ?) how encouraged and 
 gratified I was, by your asking me to help you in it. 
 Whatever there is in it of mine, I dedicate very whole- 
 heartedly to you. — Yours, 
 
 H. GRANVILLE BARKER. 
 
 August, 1907.
 
 PREFACE 
 
 (1904) 
 
 There has hitherto been one enormous obstacle to the estab- 
 lishment of a National Theatre in England. However will- 
 ing a man or body of men might be to give a new impulse to 
 the art of the theatre, and place England abreast of France 
 and Germany in respect of theatrical organisation, he or they 
 could have no definite idea how to set about it. A pubhc 
 park, a picture-gallery, or a free library is very easily created, 
 and, once created, it practically "runs itself." There are a 
 hundred recognised models for its organisation and manage- 
 ment. But an Endowed Theatre is, in England, a wholly 
 unfamiliar piece of mechanism, and the management of it an 
 unknown art; while there are many reasons why no foreign 
 institution of the kind could be imitated in detail with any 
 hope of success. There is no clear-cut channel, as it were, in 
 which liberality and public spirit can easily flow in the direc- 
 tion of theatrical reform. It is scarcely an exaggeration to say 
 that you can buy a free library or a picture-gallery ready- 
 made, and present it as a "going concern" to whatever 
 community you please. But the man who desired to en- 
 dow a Theatre would have first to invent it— a laborious 
 task, for which he would probably have no preparation and 
 no facilities. 
 
 In the foUowing pages we take this task oflf his hands. We
 
 xvi PREFACE 
 
 present, for the first time in England, a detailed Scheme, with 
 Estimates, for the creation, organisation, and management of a 
 National Theatre. We are far from believing that our plan is 
 perfect in all its details. It might even happen that every crank 
 and lever in our design would have to be somewhat modified 
 before the machine could run smoothly and satisfactorily. But 
 we believe that, in merely outlining the organisation, and sug- 
 gesting the natural interplay of its parts, we have made an 
 essential step in advance. We have substituted clear and 
 definite for vague and formless ideas. 
 
 It is needless to discuss at any length the abstract desirability 
 of the institution we have outlined. Many of our readers are 
 doubtless already convinced on that point ; others will, we hope, 
 gradually reaUse the uses of the institution as they study its 
 details. We present in our Appendix some extracts from the 
 very considerable literature published during recent years, in 
 which the theatrical situation and the theory of theatrical 
 endowment are discussed. 
 
 To assert the urgent need for an Endowed Theatre is not 
 necessarily to adopt a wholly pessimistic view of the existing 
 condition of the English drama and stage. On the contrary, 
 the present writers are convinced that dramatic authorship, at 
 any rate, has greatly advanced of recent years, though there is 
 reason to fear that hostile conditions are beginning to check that 
 advance. We also admit that the stage owes much, in many 
 ways, to the actor-manager and the long run. Both of these 
 institutions have their merits ; and a National Theatre, while 
 excluding them from its own economy, would in no sense be 
 hostile to them. What is harmful is their present predominance 
 over the whole field of theatrical enterprise. In the interests 
 both of authorship and of acting, a fair proportion of Repertory
 
 PREFACE xvii 
 
 Theatres ought to co-exist with the actor-managed and long-run 
 theatres ; and in order to set the repertory system firmly afoot, 
 a certain measure of endowment is necessary. 
 
 It follows from what we have said that we do not regard the 
 National or Central Theatre here outlined as, in itself, a sufficient 
 cure for all that is amiss in our theatrical life. Even if it stood 
 alone, it would do incalculable service ; but the most useful of 
 all its functions, perhaps, will be that of supplying an incentive 
 and model to similar enterprises in provincial cities, in the 
 colonies, and in America. The acted drama ought to be, and 
 indeed is, one of the great bonds of union between all the 
 Anglo-Saxon peoples ; but at present, unfortunately, it may be 
 said to "draw the whole English-speaking world together in 
 the bonds of a racial vulgarity." 
 
 In the provinces and beyond the seas. Repertory Theatres 
 would no doubt be designed on many different scales, according 
 to the circumstances and resources of each particular locality. 
 A much less ambitious theatre than that which is here outlined 
 would be adequate to the needs of many provincial towns. We 
 do not, however, profess to give any estimates for minor theatres. 
 Our forecasts and figures refer to a Central Theatre, to be situated 
 in London, and organised on such a scale as to justify it in 
 assuming, without incongruity or grandiloquence, the rank of a 
 National Theatre, worthy of the metropolis of the Empire. At 
 the same time, we hope and believe that our Scheme and Esti- 
 mates will prove helpful to the organisers of Repertory Theatres 
 on whatever scale. It is easy to " take in " a garment that is 
 cut too large ; difficult, if not impossible, to "let out" one that 
 is cut too small. 
 
 An enterprise on a large scale — short of extravagance or 
 ostentation — would have a far gi-eater chance of succeeding and
 
 xviii PREFACE 
 
 establishing itself in a permanent and honourable position than 
 an enterprise on a small scale, however ably conducted. It is 
 essential to break away, completely and unequivocally, from 
 the ideals and traditions of the profit-seeking stage ; and it 
 is essential that the new system should have sufficient re- 
 sources to give it time to establish itself and take hold upon 
 the public. Moreover, the National Theatre must be its oivn 
 advertisement — must impose itself on public notice, not by 
 posters and column advertisements in the newspapers, but by 
 the very fact of its ample, dignified, and liberal existence. 
 It must bulk large in the social and intellectual life of 
 London. There must be no possibility of mistaking it for 
 one of those pioneer theatres which have been so numerous 
 of late years, here and elsewhere, and have in their way done 
 valuable work. It must not even have the air of appealing 
 to a specially literary and cultured class. It must be visibly 
 and unmistakably a popular institution, making a large appeal 
 to the whole community. So manifest does this appear to us 
 that we would strongly deprecate any effort on a small scale, 
 until it shall be absolutely apparent that no eflfort on the scale 
 here indicated is within the range of practical politics. A 
 struggling enterprise, with narrow resources, might prove a 
 mere stumbling-block in the path of theatrical progress at 
 large. Its failure would be disastrous, and its partial success 
 only less so. 
 
 It will be seen that the Theatre we propose would be a 
 National Theatre in this sense, that it would be from the 
 first conditionally — and, in the event of success, would become 
 absolutely — the property of the nation. It may be asked why, 
 in that case, we do not suggest going direct to the Govern- 
 ment (which would, of course, mean to Parliament) for the
 
 PREFACE xix 
 
 money required. The reason is simply that we believe it 
 would be waste of time. It is not to be expected that, at 
 the present stage of affairs, Parliament should vote money for 
 the estabUshment of a theatre in London or elsewhere. We 
 must look to private liberality to present a Central Theatre 
 to London and to the Empire. That is not only the most 
 probable, but, on the whole, the most desirable event. In 
 the provinces it is otherwise. There one would hope that 
 municipalities would in many cases undertake the urgent duty 
 of bringing wholesome and rational theatrical entertainments 
 within the reach of the people. The successful establishment 
 of a Central Theatre in London would most probably be fol- 
 lowed by legislation, empowering municipalities to do what is 
 required of them in this respect. At present their powers are 
 ill-defined and inadequate ; and the same remark applies to 
 the powers of local bodies within the metropolitan area. A 
 Central Theatre would not by any means supply all the 
 higher theatrical needs even of London alone. But it ought 
 to lead the way in the reform of our theatrical system ; and 
 the establishment of it ought to be, and probably will be, 
 effected by the public spirit of individual citizens. 
 
 Our estimates, it will be seen, refer exclusively to dramatic, 
 as distinct from operatic, performances. We axe by no means 
 hostile to the idea of a subsidised Opera-House ; but we hold 
 that the drama claims precedence, inasmuch as England pos- 
 sesses a national drama, to be housed in a National Theatre, 
 but does not as yet possess a national opera. Some of our cal- 
 culations may possibly be of use to the promoters of an operatic 
 scheme ; but the conditions of the two arts are so radically 
 different that it is almost impossible to reason from one to the 
 other. There is no doubt, however, that the success of a
 
 XX PREFACE 
 
 National Theatre would greatly simplify the task of those who 
 are agitating for a subsidised Opera-House. 
 
 We venture to request the reader of the following pages to 
 suspend judgment upon details until he has taken a general 
 view of the whole Scheme. Many points which may at first 
 seem obscure or questionable will, we hope, become clearer 
 and perhaps more convincing as the project develops. We 
 would also beg him, in criticising our proposals, to distin- 
 guish between essential matters — matters of principle — and 
 merely illustrative details. For example, in our list of a 
 season's repertory, the reader will very likely find several 
 plays which he, personally, does not greatly long to see, at a 
 National Theatre or elsewhere. If he holds that the class of 
 play should not be admitted to the Theatre, we wiU give our 
 best consideration to his criticism ; but if his objection is 
 merely to the individual play, we suggest that to urge it 
 would be to waste time. The repertory includes more 
 than one play for which we ourselves cherish no personal 
 enthusiasm. No theatre can live entirely on plays which 
 appeal equally to every one. In any season's repertory of the 
 Th^atre-Frangais or the Burgtheater, the reader would cer- 
 tainly find several plays which to him seemed tedious or 
 otherwise objectionable. If the repertory we have outlined 
 exactly represented either our own personal taste or the 
 reader's, the presumption would be that it was badly chosen. 
 Helpful criticism, then, will confine itself to the discussion 
 of our principles of selection, and will regard the particular 
 plays set down merely as the representatives of their respec- 
 tive classes of dramatic literature. If our scheme were to be
 
 PREFACE xxi 
 
 realised to-morrow, it is more than probable that half the 
 plays of our suggested repertory would be struck out and 
 others substituted for them ; though there is not much pro- 
 bability that the changes would bring the repertory into 
 closer accord with the personal taste of any individual 
 
 reader. 
 
 There never was, and there never will be, an ideal theatre. 
 The theatre is too complex and delicate a machine, depending 
 on the harmonious co-operation of too many talents and influ- 
 ences, ever to reach perfection for more than a passing moment. 
 The very greatest theatres at their greatest periods have been 
 severely criticised, not, as a rule, without reason. The reader, 
 we are sure, will not let his craving for what is ideally desir- 
 able render him careless of what is practically desirable as an 
 improvement upon existing conditions. And he will not fail 
 to bear in mind, we trust, that it is no magical recipe we are 
 offering, no instant and miraculous cure for all the shortcom- 
 ings of our theatrical life, but merely a plan for an institution 
 which, being based on sound artistic principles, may develop 
 far beyond immediate probabilities or possibilities, and may 
 give a healthy impulse to theatrical progress throughout the 
 English-speaking world.
 
 POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 
 
 (1904) 
 
 The book now in the reader's hands is a second — one might 
 even say a third or fourth — edition. The original draft has 
 been revised and re-revised by many expert critics, and has 
 been modified in numerous particulars, greatly to its advan- 
 tage. There was scarcely a figure in our original estimates 
 which was not, by some authorities, declared to be too high, 
 by others, too low. In this conflict of evidence, we have 
 naturally chosen what seemed to be the better and more 
 strongly supported opinion ; but our rule has always been, 
 "When in doubt, increase rather than diminish." It would 
 be absurd to suppose that, even now, all our estimates are 
 precisely accurate ; but we question whether they can be 
 brought much nearer to accuracy save by the test of practical 
 experiment. 
 
 One or two critics have thought our figures too low all 
 round,^ and have suggested that the annual outlay would be 
 nearer ;^8o,ooo than ;^7o,ooo, requiring an average receipt 
 of ;^2 20 a performance to cover it. We believe that they 
 had in view a type of theatre very different from that which 
 we have outlined. It is not a combination under one roof 
 of His Majesty's, the St. James's, and the Haymarket that 
 
 ' We have increased them at several points since this opinion was expressed, 
 but not very materially.
 
 POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE xxiii 
 
 we desire to see achieved — not a theatre which shall apply 
 a subsidy to competing, by their own methods, with the un- 
 subsidised theatres — but one which shall show what artistic 
 results are possible under a wholly different system. What 
 is wanted, in our judgment, is an object-lesson to the English- 
 speaking world of the possibility of a thoroughly dignified 
 and delightful playhouse, worthily presenting the best English 
 (and some foreign) dramatic literature, at the cost of com- 
 paratively small pecuniary sacrifice on the part either of indi- 
 viduals or of the community. The Theatre we wish to see 
 is one that can be imitated (with modifications) in any of 
 the great cities of the provinces or the Empire, not one which 
 defies imitation. We conceive it as a thing to be desired in 
 itself, no doubt, but also as the starting-point of a great move- 
 ment. Therefore we regard economy not merely as a necessity 
 likely to he forced upon the Theatre for lack of lavish endow- 
 ment, hut as the indispensable means to an artistic end. 
 
 We must plead guilty to a certain inconsistency in the 
 structure of the scheme. While the repertory sketched out 
 in Section IV. is admittedly a first-season repertory, the 
 financial estimates do not apply to the first season of the 
 Theatre, but assume it to be a fully-established " going 
 concern." The inconsistency was inevitable. It is impossible 
 to foresee the repertory of the future, whereas the finances of 
 the future can, and must, be forecast. The reader will bear 
 in mind, then, that the figures here given might in many 
 cases have to be exceeded during the first few seasons. For 
 instance, actors might have to be engaged at an age at which 
 they could scarcely hope, in the nature of things, to reap 
 much benefit from the Pension Fund. In that case their 
 salaries would either be higher than we have forecast, or the
 
 xxiv POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 
 
 Pension Fund regulation by which an actor does not become 
 "pensionable" till after ten years' service (see pp. 137, 138) 
 would have to be relaxed in their favour. To take another 
 instance, the estimate for historical costumes might have to 
 be exceeded for a few seasons, until a thoroughly complete 
 wardrobe had been built up. Our estimates, in short, repre- 
 sent rather what ought to be aimed at than what can be 
 attained at a single bound. The losses on initial seasons 
 which we anticipate on pp. 116, 117, would be quite as 
 likely to arise from excess of expenditure as from defect of 
 receipts. 
 
 The labour involved in running a Eepertory Theatre, with 
 constant changes of programme, is no doubt considerable, 
 but must not be over-estimated. Continental experience has 
 amply proved that with complete machinery, good organisa- 
 tion, and a well thought-out routine, all difficulties are easily 
 overcome. Our estimates provide for a staff of about 235 
 people permanently attached to the Theatre, exclusive of 
 supernumeraries and other persons intermittently employed. 
 As the stage is assumed to be fitted with the most modern 
 labour-saving appliances, this staff can scarcely be regarded 
 as inadequate. At the same time, we not only admit, but 
 emphasise the fact, that the success of the scheme must 
 depend on honest and ungrudging work on the part of all 
 concerned. The work, moreover, must be steady and unre- 
 mitting — not feverish and fitful. It will show some deficiency 
 of method or temper in the management if the employees, as 
 a body, do not ere long come to feel the stimulus of corporate 
 spirit and loyalty to the institution.
 
 POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE xxv 
 
 We append some notes on various Sections, in their order, 
 arising out of criticisms which reached us too late to be dealt 
 with in the text. 
 
 Section II 
 
 Page lo. It is suggested that the right to nominate a 
 Trustee should be conferred upon the Actors' Association, 
 as the representative body of the theatrical profession. This 
 proposal should at any rate be earnestly considered when 
 the time comes for constituting the Board. Perhaps the 
 number of the Board might be raised to seventeen, one nomina- 
 tion being accorded to the Actors' Association and one to the 
 Society of Authors. Or one of the nominations assigned 
 to some other body might be transferred to the Actors' 
 Association. 
 
 Page 1 6. Several critics have thought the salary of ;^iooo 
 allotted to the Business Manager too high, and have suggested 
 ;^700 or ;^8oo. Our reply is to quote the following passage 
 from a theatrical scheme of a somewhat similar nature drawn 
 up several years ago by a man of very wide experience in 
 management, which has been privately communicated to us: 
 "In the administration, one essential feature would be to 
 have a careful checking of the prices of all materials and 
 goods supplied, timber, canvas, &c. &c. ; to see that every- 
 thing was got at the lowest trade price, with all discounts 
 taken off, and that no commissions were offered to, solicited 
 or received by, any official or employee. For this purpose 
 a very smart and reliable official, an expert in such matters, 
 would have to be retained." For such a man, ^looo a year 
 seems no extravagant salary.
 
 xxvi POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 
 
 Section III 
 
 It is thought by some critics that we underrate the diffi- 
 culty of permanently attaching to the Theatre actors of talent 
 and individuality. " As soon as a young man makes a little 
 success," we are told, " an American impresario will offer him 
 ;^50 a week, and off he will go." As a matter of fact, such 
 cases are so rare as to be practically negligible. It is only 
 an exceptional combination of circumstances that renders a 
 young English actor particularly desirable to an American 
 impresario. No doubt, however, attempts would be made, 
 by English as well as American managers, to secure the 
 services of young artists of talent at higher salaries than the 
 Theatre could afford ; and in some cases these attempts would 
 be successful. It is not pretended that the management would 
 have no difficulties, no disappointments, to encounter. No 
 man who has to deal with other men (and women) has ever 
 escaped occasional worries and vexations ; and least of all has 
 the Director of a theatre any chance of being exempt from 
 such contrarieties. This Theatre, however, would have special 
 claims upon the loyalty of its actors. For one thing, our 
 proposed furlough system would help the Director to retain 
 desirable talents without calling upon them for superhuman 
 renunciation. But the main point to be noted is that the 
 Theatre — so long, at least, as it remained the only Reper- 
 tory Theatre in London — would offer unrivalled opportunities 
 to a young actor of talent and ambition. When he had 
 made a marked success in one part, he could count on 
 speedily following it up in other advantageous characters ; 
 whereas, under present conditions, an actor who is not his own 
 manager knows that, even after the most striking success, he
 
 POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE xxvii 
 
 may sink into obscurity again for years before he finds another 
 part that offers him the smallest opportunity. There are few 
 actors who would not value the advantages offered by this 
 Theatre, not only in continuity of employment, but in the 
 certainty of achieving distinction proportionate to their talent. 
 
 The simple fee-system suggested in this Section (pp. 
 20-26) is not the only one possible. At the Eoyal Theatre, 
 Copenhagen, a much more complicated system is in operation, 
 and is said to answer very well. Seven and a half per 
 cent, of the gross receipts of each performance go to the 
 actors in fees. Moreover, the actors, according to their 
 status, and the parts according to their length, are divided 
 into four classes, and the actual fee paid represents an 
 average, so to speak, between the class of the actor and the 
 class of his part. The highest fee will fall to an actor of 
 the first class playing a part of the first class ; an actor of 
 the first class playing a part of the third class will receive 
 a considerably smaller fee, but considerably larger, again, 
 than will fall to an actor of the third class playing a part 
 of the third class. We are told that, in spite of its apparent 
 complexity, this system works simply in practice. It is quite 
 possible that some adaptation of it might be found advan- 
 tageous at the National Theatre ; but it does not seem worth 
 while, at this stage, to discuss the question at length. Two 
 peculiarities of the system may be noted: (i) It gives the 
 performers a direct interest in the receipts of each evening; 
 (2) it renders a play with few parts much more profitable 
 to the actors than a play with many parts. The former 
 peculiarity might or might not prove an advantage ; the latter 
 is surely a disadvantage. 
 
 At the Th^atre-Franjais, the feux, regulated by Napoleon,
 
 xxviii POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 
 
 amount to ten francs a performance for every actor, small or 
 great. For matindes, which were not foreseen by Napoleon, 
 the fee is fifty francs. This rough-and-ready system is felt 
 to be a serious disadvantage, since it leads to constant 
 demands for congas on the part of members of the company 
 who wish to give flying performances at provincial theatres, 
 thus earning far more than they can possibly earn when on 
 duty in Paris. When Repertory Theatres are established in 
 the provincial cities of England, the question will doubt- 
 less arise whether actors of the National Theatre are to be 
 allowed to accept provincial engagements on their "off" 
 nights. Probably such engagements should be altogether 
 prohibited. The service of the Theatre could not but suffer 
 by them ; and if the Director were empowered to make any 
 exception to the rule, he would always be harassed by 
 applications for one or two nights' leave, nine-tenths of 
 which it would be his duty to refuse. 
 
 Section V 
 
 It is sometimes asked why such frequent changes of bill 
 are necessary — why one play should not be performed for a 
 week or a fortnight at a time, thus considerably reducing 
 the amount of stage-labour required ? We reply that this 
 system is unworkable in practice ; that, so far as we 
 can learn, it nowhere obtains ; and that it would be 
 certain speedily to degenerate into the long run. It is 
 essential, in order to make the most of a successful pro- 
 duction (whether new or old), that it should be kept con- 
 stantly, though not continuously, in the bills. What author 
 would consent to have his play acted for (say) a fortnight,
 
 POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE xxix 
 
 then taken off while two other pieces were acted for a week 
 apiece, then resumed for a week, then dropped for a wek ; 
 and so on? It is clearly preferable, both from the artistic 
 and the business point of view, that it should be played four 
 or five times a week (as often, in fact, as the regulations of 
 the Theatre will permit) for an indefinite series of weeks, 
 during which its name and its success are constantly before 
 the public eye. If it were possible to work a Repertory 
 Theatre satisfactorily on the plan of changing the bill week 
 by week instead of day by day, it is almost inconceivable 
 that none of the German Repertory Theatres should have 
 adopted it. 
 
 Section VII 
 
 The last item under the head of " General Expenses " 
 p. 71) calls for some explanation. It runs as follows : — 
 ••Special Production Expenses, ;^i569." By "Special Pro- 
 duction Expenses" we mean any extra outlay that may be 
 incurred in connection with new plays or revivals which 
 demand unusual elaboration either in costumes or in sceneiy, 
 and perhaps some " overtime " work in rehearsal. When once 
 the Theatre was in full working order, the last-mentioned 
 cause of expense should seldom come into play. [It will be 
 observed that in Section VI., p. 67, ^542, los. is set down 
 for extra payments in connection with dress rehearsals.] On 
 the other hand, a play requiring special costumes, historical 
 or fantastic, might at any time be produced, and in such 
 a case some extra expenditure would have to be sanctioned. 
 During the first four or five years, when some half-dozen 
 Shakespearean plays were each season being added to the 
 repertory, expenses of this nature might be considerable.
 
 XXX POSTSCRIPT-PROLOGUE 
 
 But when once the twenty-five plays on the regular Shake- 
 spearean list (see p. 39) had been added to the stock, there 
 would probably not be more than three or four productions 
 in a season that would demand any extraordinary outlay. 
 We believe then that, taking one season with another, ;i^i5oo 
 is a sufficient allowance under this head. The £(i<^ added 
 to this estimate is not, we admit, due to nicety of calcula- 
 tion, but to our desire to avoid certain troublesome and 
 costly readjustments of accounts. 
 
 Appendix B 
 
 Page 137. According to Rule III. of the Pension Fund 
 regulations, the term of service necessary before an actor or 
 actress becomes "pensionable" is ten years. This term might 
 possibly prove to be unnecessarily and inconveniently long. 
 We are disposed to think that a six years' term of service 
 would be sufiicient — that a performer should become pension- 
 able on entering upon his or her third consecutive engage- 
 ment, each engagement being, of course, for three years. In 
 this case an actor's pension-claim would amount to 12 per 
 cent, of his salary after six years, instead of 20 per cent, 
 after ten years ; and the rate of yearly increase would pro- 
 bably remain as set forth in Rule V., p. 138. This re- 
 arrangement might involve somewhat earlier and somewhat 
 larger drafts upon the Pension Fund than we had anticipated ; 
 but there seems to be no doubt that if the Theatre were at 
 all prosperous, the income of the Fund, under the arrange- 
 ment we suggest on p. 135, would be equal to all claims 
 upon it.
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 In the Form of a Letter from One Author to the Other . . . vii-xiv 
 Xeed for a National Theatre — Large-scale Effort v. Small-scale Effort 
 
 — State Aid c. Private Munificence xv-xxi 
 
 Postscript-Prologue . • xxii-xxx 
 
 SECTION I 
 
 Scope of our Enquiry — Limits of desirable Endowment — A Special 
 Building indispensable — Probable Cost of Site and of Building — 
 Site might be provided by a Public Body — The Guarantee Fund — 
 General Forecast of Expenses . . . . . • . . 1-9 
 
 SECTION II 
 
 The Board of Ti-ustees — ^Its Constitution and Functions — The General 
 
 Staff — The Reading Committee — Salaries of the General Staff . 10-16 
 
 SECTION III 
 
 Actors and Actresses — Methods of Selection — Payment by Salary and 
 Fees — Convenience of Fee System — Conditions of Engagement 
 — Salary List — Material and Artistic Advantages offered by the 
 Theatre to its Company — Summary of Performers' Salaries , . 17-35 
 
 SECTION IV 
 
 Hepertory for a Specimen Season — The Theatre not a Pioneer Theatre 
 — Principles of Selection — Shakespeare — The Elizabethan Drama — 
 Restoration Comedy — Eighteenth-Century Comedy — Early Victorian 
 and Mid- Victorian Plays — Modern Revivals — Xew Plays — Foreign 
 Plays, Classical and Modern — Analysis and Schedule of Repertory 36-60 
 
 SECTION V 
 Expenses in Front of the House — Refreshments — Music , , . 61-65
 
 xxxii CONTENTS 
 
 SECTION VI 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Expenses behind the Scenes — System of Producing 66-70 
 
 SECTION VII 
 
 General Expenses : Scenery, Dresses, Lighting, Advertising, ifec. 7 x-7 7 
 
 SECTION VIII 
 
 The Auditorium — Seat Capacity and Money Capacity — Prices — Subscrip- 
 tion (Abonnement) Sj'stem ...,•.. 78-88 
 
 SECTION IX 
 Relation of the Theatre to Living Authors — Royalties . . . 89-95 
 
 SECTION X 
 
 The Training-School — Principles and Regulations — A possible Dramatic 
 
 College 96-102 
 
 SECTION XI 
 
 General Summary of Expenses — Receipts required to meet Expenses — 
 
 Possibilities and Probabilities — Order of Procedure . . . 103-111 
 
 SECTION XII 
 
 The Guarantee Fund — The Amount required — Provisions for its Ad- 
 ministration — How to Wind up in Case of Failure — How to Apply 
 the Surplus in Case of Success — The Sinking Fund . . , 1 12-124 
 
 APPENDICES 
 
 A. Dkaft of Statutes and Regulations 127-134 
 
 B. Pension Fund Suggestions i3S-i39 
 
 C Subscription and Booking Ststem 140-148 
 
 D. Casts of Plays ......... 149-166 
 
 E. The Theory of Theatrical Endowment : Extracts from 
 
 Speeches and Articles ....... 167-177
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 SECTION I 
 
 Scope of our Enquiry — Limits of Desirable Endowment — A Special Building 
 indispensable — Probable cost of Site and of Building — Site might be 
 provided by a Public Body — The Guarantee Fund — General Forecast of 
 
 Expenses. 
 
 The Theatre to which the following scheme and estimates 
 refer is conceived to be a free gift to the Nation, represented 
 by a Board of Trustees. Assuming that the theatre-building, 
 with an initial stock of scenery, costumes, furniture, and other 
 requisites, is placed, free of rent, taxes, and insurance premium, 
 at the disposal of the management, our purpose is to ascertain 
 as accurately as may be the probable yearly cost of presenting 
 a worthy repertory in a worthy fashion. Dividing, then, the 
 total outlay by the number of performances given in the 
 season,^ we learn the nightly average of receipts required to 
 render the Theatre independent of any endowment beyond that 
 involved in its freedom from the burden of rent, &c. 
 
 This method we have adopted not only for the sake of 
 simplicity, but because we believe that the measure of endow- 
 
 • We have calculated for a season of forty-six weeks, from the middle of September 
 to the end of July, thus leaving six weeks for holidays, for repairs and cleaning, and 
 for preparations for the new season. It is questionable whether so long a recess would 
 be found necessary, and whether it might not be advisable to keep the Theatre open 
 during August. It will be observed that in a repertory theatre, actora and actresses 
 can have their necessary holidays without involving the closing of the Theatre. All 
 salaries payable in weekly sums, we have calculated at fifty weeks. 
 
 A
 
 2 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 ment implied in freedom from rent, taxes, &c., is about the 
 right one. We believe, on the one hand, that it is impossible 
 worthily to present a worthy repertory at a playhouse held on 
 the onerous terms which now prevail. But we believe, on 
 the other hand, that if a theatre, freed from the burden of 
 rent, &c., cannot at least clear its working expenses season 
 by season, the probable deduction is that the management 
 must either be culpably extravagant or conducted on some 
 mistaken principle. A theatre which appeals to no public, or 
 to a very narrow one, cannot be a National Theatre in any true 
 sense of the word. It is well, then, that the management 
 should have to keep steadily before its eyes the necessity of 
 making its rent-and-tax-free theatre otherwise self-supporting. 
 A Guarantee Fund would have to be provided to meet the 
 possibility of losses, and for a few initial seasons it might 
 even have to be drawn upon. But if, when the institution 
 had had time to get into working order, its receipts still fell 
 considerably below its expenses, that fact might be taken as 
 showing that it was either misconceived or mismanaged. The 
 method of dealing with this eventuality would have to be 
 prescribed in its Statutes. Suggestions as to the possible 
 winding-up of the Theatre will be found in Section XII., and 
 in the Draft Statutes on p. 130. 
 
 One thing it is important to make clear at the outset, 
 namely, that our estimates presuppose a theatre-building wholly 
 different fr-om any now existing in London. We believe that 
 such an enterprise would be almost impossibly handicapped in 
 any building not specially designed for this particular purpose. 
 At all events, our estimates are based on the assumption that 
 the stage is provided with aU the most recent labour-saving 
 machinery ; that there is a rehearsal-room, reproducing the pro-
 
 THE BUILDING 3 
 
 portions of the stage, and ample wardrobe and property rooms, 
 behind the scenes ; that a scenery store is provided as near the 
 Theatre as County Council regulations -will allow ; that the audi- 
 torium, though not unduly large, is so arranged that every seat 
 has a full view of the stage, no one seat in any given portion of 
 the house being notably preferable to any other seat ; that the 
 heating and ventilating appliances are as perfect as science 
 can make them ; that the space between the rows and the 
 mechanism of the seats make movement practicable without 
 discomfort; and that a spacious vestibule and Saloon,^ with 
 refreshment-rooms, smoking-rooms, and cloak-rooms, are pro- 
 vided for the comfort of the audience. These things we hold 
 indispensable to the success of a National Theatre. 
 
 It is evident from what we have stated that before the 
 enterprise can be set on foot there are three things to be 
 provided : 
 
 1. The Site. 
 
 2. The Building. 
 
 3. The Guarantee Fund. 
 
 There is no reason why all three should not be provided by 
 one and the same Donor. We hope to show in the sequel 
 that no fabulous wealth is required to face the whole outlay 
 and the whole risk. Nevertheless, the three constituent parts 
 of the enterprise are quite distinct from one another, and 
 might be furnished by different Donors and on somewhat 
 different terms. The ideal event, perhaps, would be that 
 the whole institution should be due to the munificence of one 
 
 ' We use the word Saloon, for want of a better, to designate the hall (in French 
 the foyer) where the audience gathers between the acts for fresh air and conversation. 
 In the Theatre here outlined (as will appear in Section V.) it might also be called the 
 Music-Room.
 
 4 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 man. Many difficulties and delays would thus be obviated ; 
 and such a conspicuous example of public spirit could not 
 but have the happiest effect. If no one man, however, can 
 be found to undertake the duty, we suggest that the most 
 probable, and perhaps the most desirable, partition of the 
 enterprise would be as follows : that the Site should be pro- 
 vided by a public body, the Building by an individual Donor, 
 and the Guarantee Fund by a number of private contributors. 
 
 It is impossible to arrive at a definite estimate of the pro- 
 bable cost of the site and the theatre-building. The price of 
 any given site could be ascertained only after negotiations, 
 which it would be idle to set on foot until there was some 
 immediate prospect of actually acquiring it ; and the cost of 
 the building would in great measure depend on the nature 
 of the site. Therefore, the figures given in the following 
 paragraphs must be taken as rough approximations, formed, 
 however, after consultation with competent authorities. 
 
 Though the auditorium would be of moderate dimensions 
 (see Section VIII.), the area occupied by the whole building — 
 vestibule, staircases, Saloon, refreshment-rooms, corridors, stage, 
 dressing-rooms, and all appurtenances and offices — would neces- 
 sarily be very considerable. The regulations of the County 
 Council now (very properly) require that half the boundary- 
 line of every theatre shall stand free from other buildings ; 
 and it would be most desirable that the National Theatre 
 should occupy a site still more open and self-contained, so to 
 speak, than the regulations demand. On the other hand, 
 though the Theatre ought not to be placed in a what may be 
 called an out-of-the-way locality, it is not in the least neces- 
 sary that it should occupy a site on one of the great theatrical 
 thoroughfares. It would not be one of the theatres which
 
 THE SITE 5 
 
 rely for a considerable proportion of their nightly audiences 
 upon the floating hotel population, and the mere chance 
 passer-by. Any reasonably central and accessible situation 
 would suit its purposes. It need not compete with speculators 
 for such sites as would have a special value for commercial 
 managers. It is to be remembered in this connection that 
 facilities for rapid transit are yearly increasing in London, 
 and that tubes, subways, and motor-omnibuses will soon 
 bring within the practicable radius sites which, at the present 
 moment, might seem inconvenient. 
 
 Taking all these circumstances into consideration, we con- 
 clude that the inside figure for the value of the site would 
 be ^50,000, the outside figure ^100,000. A site which could 
 at a pinch be made available could probably be obtained for 
 the former sum, an almost ideal site for the latter sum. Taking 
 the mean between the two, we may put down the probable 
 value of the site at ^75,000. 
 
 We say the "value" rather than the "price" of the site, 
 for it does not at all follow that this price would have to be 
 paid. Though we believe it impracticable to go to Parliament 
 for the whole sinews of war, we see no reason why, if the 
 theatre - building and the Guarantee Fund were definitely 
 promised, the Government or the County Council should not 
 make over to the enterprise one of the sites at their disposal, 
 on more favourable terms than could be obtained in the open 
 market. It is probable that in the County Council, at any 
 rate, such a proposition would receive a good deal of support ; 
 and the parliamentary power to grant a site could probabh' be 
 obtained without much difficulty. In granting a site, of course, 
 a public body, no less than a private Donor, would make precise 
 stipulations as to the reversion of its gift in the event of the
 
 6 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 enterprise failing, and the Theatre being applied to ordinary 
 commercial uses. Suggestions as to the nature of the pro- 
 visions to be made in view of such an event will be found in 
 Section XII. 
 
 As to the theatre-building, the inside estimate of its cost 
 may be placed at ^50,000, the outside estimate at ;if 80,000.* 
 This would include the installation of a perfectly equipped 
 stage, the cost of which would be about ;^ 10,000. We suggest 
 that while architectural dignity without, and safety and comfort 
 within, would of course be essential, little or nothing should, in 
 the first instance, be expended on costly decorative materials. 
 The architect should design the details of the interior with 
 a special view to their being gradually enriched by the gifts of 
 individual Donors who, appreciating the value of the Theatre 
 as an artistic and social institution, might desire to enhance 
 its beauty at this point or at that. One such Donor might put 
 in a marble staircase, another a mosaic floor to the vestibule, 
 a third might present busts to occupy empty niches, a fourth 
 might fill with appropriate paintings the medallions and panels 
 of the auditorium. Not until the institution had proved its 
 value should money be expended on mere ornament, beyond 
 what is essential to seemliness, cheerfulness, and a general sense 
 of comfort. The Theatre should not, at the outset, be a palace 
 of art, but neither should it be a gaunt and depressing barrack. 
 
 As above indicated, we think that the provision of the 
 
 • The Donor would also have to provide, roughly speaking, three-fourths of the 
 scenery, costumes, &c., required for the opening season, so that the outlay chargeable 
 to the season's account should be approximately that of an ordinary year, when the 
 Theatre was in its normal working order. This initial equipment, as appears in 
 Section VII., would probably cost something under ;£ 16,000. The cost of armour, 
 weapons, musical instruments, &c., might bring this sum up to ^20,000 ; while another 
 £2000 or ;i{^4ooo might have to be provided for salaries payable before the opening 
 of the Theatre. Thus the whole gift of the Donor of the building might amount, in 
 round numbers, to ;^io5,ooo.
 
 GUARANTEE FUND 7 
 
 Building, as distinct from the Site and the Guarantee Fund, 
 ought to be undertaken by one individual Donor. Unlike the 
 two other constituent parts of the enterprise, the building is 
 a visible, tangible entity, an organism, a work of art. It is, 
 therefore, fitting that it should be the record and monument 
 of one great effort of public spirit, rather than of many small. 
 An " Ex Done " inscription should of course occupy the place 
 of honour in the vestibule ; and that such an inscription may 
 in itself be a work of art, its centre-point must be one name, 
 not a catalogue of many. The civic pride which impelled the 
 Romans to write their names in letters of bronze on the edifices 
 with which they adorned the city was no ignoble sentiment, nor 
 unworthy of imitation.' 
 
 The Guarantee Fund, on the other hand, might advantage- 
 ously be provided in comparatively small sums, by a large body 
 of contributors. The reason is simple : the more numerous are 
 the people interested in the success of the Theatre, the more 
 likely is it to succeed. The Donor, under the arrangement we 
 propose, would gain in money by the failure of the enterprise. 
 In the event of success, his gift, conditional at the outset, would 
 become absolute ; whereas, in the event of failure, a certain 
 proportion of his outlay would, on the liquidation of the enter- 
 prise, come back to him. But as the success of the enterprise 
 would mean the complete reimbursement of the Guarantors,* 
 they would have a direct interest in furthering its welfare. 
 
 ' A box, opposite or adjacent to the Royal Box, should be the property of the 
 Donor and his heirs in perpetuity ; but when once the mechanism of the Theatre had 
 been set in motion, this should be the sole personal privilege claimed or enjoyed by 
 the Donor. 
 
 * We use the words '' Guarantors " and " Guarantee Fund " for the sake of con- 
 venience, though the money would have to be, not only promised, but fully paid-up. 
 It would, then, be of the nature of a loan, bearing no interest, and repayable in full or 
 in part according to circumstances.
 
 8 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 The Guarantors might have a voice in the appointment of the 
 first Board of Trustees ; but it is more probable that the Board 
 would be appointed before the Guarantee Fund was formed. In 
 any case, when once the Board of Trustees was appointed and 
 had entered on its duties, neither the Donors of the_ Site, the 
 Donor of the Building, nor the Guarantors should have any 
 power of interference with the government of the institution. 
 A set of Statutes should be drawn up and accepted by the Trus- 
 tees, clearly prescribing their duties, and the course to be taken 
 by them in all possible eventualities of success or failure. 
 When once the machinery of government, as provided by the 
 Statutes, was fairly set in motion, the influence of the Donors 
 and Guarantors ^ on the conduct of the Theatre would be neither 
 more nor less than that of any other members of the outside 
 public. The Statutes should at any time be alterable by Act 
 of Parliament, and by Act of Parliament only. It would always 
 be open to any dissatisfied party to agitate for an Act of Recon- 
 stitution. The difficulty of obtaining it would perhaps be no 
 more than a reasonable safeguard against idle and mischievous 
 meddling. 
 
 For reasons set forth at length in the following pages, we 
 think that the Guarantee Fund ought to amount to ;i^ 150,000. 
 The conditions under which the Guarantors ought to provide 
 it are discussed in Section XII. 
 
 It will be seen, then, that our estimate of the total sum 
 required to set a National or Central Theatre afoot with every 
 probability of success (as success is above defined) amounts to 
 ;^3 30,000. The Site would represent ;^7 5,000 ; the Building 
 
 ' The question of inducements to the Guarantors is discussed in Section XII,, 
 p. 1 23, the conclusion arrived at being that it is unnecessary and practically impos- 
 sible to offer them any material advantage as a spur to their public spirit.
 
 TOTAL RISK 9 
 
 and equipment, ^105,000; and the Guarantee Fund, ;£i50,ooo. 
 We have admitted that the Site and Building estimates (but not 
 the Guarantee Fund estimate) are rough approximations. Sup- 
 posing that we are ^50,000 out in our reckoning, and that a 
 total of ^380,000 proved to be necessary, is that a sum which 
 should have any terrors for the wealth and public spirit of 
 England 1 
 
 In the event of success, the artistic, social, and even poli- 
 tical benefits of the institution would be very cheaply bought. 
 It would restore the English drama to that honourable place 
 among the intellectual achievements of the race which it has for 
 so long forfeited, and it would be a radiating centre of the best 
 artistic influences. In the event of utter failure, on the other 
 hand, the whole of the ;^38o,ooo would not be, so to speak, 
 thrown into the sea, as more than twice that amount would be 
 in the loss of a single battleship. As will be seen in Section 
 XII., we calculate that, if the enterprise entirely failed, and 
 had to be liquidated under the conditions set forth in the 
 Statutes, all contributors to it would "stand to lose" from 50 to 
 60 per cent, (but not more) of their respective contributions.
 
 SECTION II 
 
 The Board of Trustees — Its Constitution and Functions — The General Staff — 
 The Reading Committee — Salaries of the General Staff. 
 
 As before stated, the ownership and ultimate government (as 
 distinct from the management) of the institution should be 
 vested in a Board of Trustees.' The Board, we suggest, should 
 consist of fifteen members, and should be thus constituted : — The 
 right to nominate one member should be permanently vested in 
 each of the following bodies : — 
 
 The University of Oxford. 
 The University of Cambridge. 
 The University of London. 
 The Royal Academy. 
 
 The right to nominate two members should be vested in the 
 London County Council. The remaining nine members should, 
 in the first instance, be appointed by the Donor or Donors of the 
 site and building, and as vacancies occurred (by death or resig- 
 nation) among the Trustees thus appointed, the vacancies should 
 be filled up alternately by co-optation (all members of the Board 
 having power to vote), and by Royal nomination, under the 
 advice of the Prime Minister. 
 
 The function of the Trustees should be somewhat analogous 
 to that of the Trustees of the British Museum. They should 
 
 ' Further details concerning the constitution and duties of the Board of Trustees 
 will be found in the Draft Statutes, Appendix A.
 
 THE TRUSTEES ii 
 
 not, as a rule, meet oftener than once a quarter, or even twice 
 a year, though the President should have power to convene 
 extraordinary meetings on the written request of one-third of 
 the Board. 
 
 The Trustees should appoint a Director and General Staff (to 
 be hereafter specified), but all other appointments and engage- 
 ments should be made by the Director alone. 
 
 The Trustees should receive and pass (if necessary, with re- 
 servations and censures) the Director's quarterly or half-yearly 
 report, artistic and financial. They should also serve as the 
 sole Court of Appeal from the decisions of the Director. 
 Should the Trustees, on crucial questions, give a decision 
 adverse to the Director, it would probably be held tantamount 
 to asking for his resignation. 
 
 It cannot be too clearly understood that the Trustees would 
 have no executive power except through the medium of the 
 Director. It would be his duty either to give effect to their 
 views, or to try to bring them over to his ; and, failing in that 
 (on questions of importance), to resign. 
 
 The Director and other members of the General Staff would 
 have a right to appear in person before the Trustees, and (if 
 necessary) express and defend their views. It would be for the 
 Trustees themselves to decide by what method of representation 
 other persons should, individually or collectively, appear before 
 them. 
 
 If it be asked whether it would be possible to find in 
 England fifteen men, of such position as to qualify them for 
 the office of Trustee, who should at the same time possess any 
 special knowledge of theatrical matters, we reply that no special 
 knowledge is required. There might probably be one or two 
 men-of-the-theatre on the Board — such men as Sir Henry
 
 12 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Irving, Sir Squire Bancroft, Mr. John Hare or Mr. W. S. 
 Gilbert — but even such a leavening of the mass would not be 
 indispensable. The function of the Board is merely to serve 
 as a safeguard against abuses, and to ensure that, in a general 
 way, the Theatre shall faithfully serve the pui-poses for which 
 it is designed. Such duties belong rather to men of general 
 culture and knowledge of the world than to theatrical experts. 
 The Trustees of the British Museum are not required to be 
 specialists in archaeology, or bibliography, or numismatics, or 
 palaeontology. The Trustees of the National Theatre would, 
 as we have said, confer upon experts the whole executive 
 control of the institution ; and, this done, their business would 
 simply be to take care that the experts did not abuse their 
 position or otherwise belie the confidence reposed in them. 
 A meddlesome body of Trustees might, indeed, do a great 
 deal of harm ; but there is no reason to anticipate any special 
 difficulty in finding men for the office who would fill it with 
 tact and judgment. 
 
 Though we purposely refrain from any attempt to draw out a 
 list of probable Trustees, we cannot but suggest that if the Prince 
 of Wales would consent to accept a nomination to the Board, 
 he would naturally be elected its first President. 
 
 The General Stafi", to be appointed by the Trustees, would 
 consist of five officials : — 
 
 (i) The Director, who should have absolute control of every- 
 thing in and about the Theatre, engagement of actors, casting of 
 parts, &c., &c., excepting only the selection of plays. For this 
 purpose, he would have one vote in a Reading Committee of
 
 THE GENERAL STAFF 13 
 
 three, to be hereafter provided for. In all other matters, there 
 would be no appeal from the authority of the Director, except to 
 the Trustees. 
 
 (2) The Literary Manager, an official answering to the 
 German Dramaturg. His duties should be to weed out new 
 plays before they are submitted to the Reading Committee ; to 
 suggest plays for revival and arrange them for the stage ; to 
 follow the dramatic movement in foreign countries, and to 
 suggest foreign plays suitable for production ; to consult with 
 the scene-painter, producers, &c., on questions of archaeology, 
 costume, and local colour. 
 
 The Literary Manager would be a member of the Reading 
 Committee, but in all other matters would be subordinate and 
 responsible to the Director. 
 
 (3) The Business Manager, who would (subject to the 
 Director) control the whole financial working of the Theatre, 
 keep its accounts, sanction all expenditure, and check the 
 estimates of subordinate officials. He should make a quarterly 
 or half-yearly financial report to the Trustees, to be counter- 
 signed by the Director. 
 
 (4) TJie Solicitor, who should act as Secretary to the Board 
 of Trustees, and advise the Trustees in the investment of the 
 Guarantee Fund, Sinking Fund, &c., and the Director on con- 
 tracts and other legal matters connected with the management 
 of the Theatre. He would not be expected to give more than 
 a portion of his time to these duties. 
 
 (5) The Reading Committee Man, a third member of the 
 Reading Committee, who ought to have no other function in 
 connection with the Theatre, and to be, so far as possible, out- 
 side its atmosphere. He would not be expected to give more 
 than a portion of his time to the work of the Committee.
 
 14 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 It should be strictly enjoined that no play should be 
 accepted which had not been read or heard by all three Com- 
 mittee-men, and fully discussed in Committee. If at any time 
 two members of the Committee constituted themselves a per- 
 manent majority, and systematically overruled or ignored the 
 views of the third member, it would be the duty of the third 
 member to present a minority report to the Trustees, calling 
 their attention to this abuse. The result might or might not be 
 a reconstitution of the Committee. 
 
 When once a play was selected for production or revival ^ by 
 a majority of the Committee, it would be the duty of the Director 
 to take measures for placing it on the stage within a reasonable 
 time. For the casting of parts, fixing the date of production, 
 &c., &c., he alone would be responsible. It would also lie with 
 him to determine how often it should be repeated ; though in 
 time, no doubt, a custom would arise by which the amount of 
 the receipts produced by a play, together with their upward or 
 downward tendency, would be taken as almost automatically 
 prescribing its continuance or discontinuance. 
 
 It is evident that the Director might conceivably wreck the 
 fortunes of a play which he disliked ; but even if loyalty to his 
 colleagues did not check this tendency, care for his own reputa- 
 tion would not permit its frequent indulgence. At the same time 
 it would be only natural and not undesirable, that his colleagues 
 should be chary of forcing a production upon him, very much 
 
 ' A non-copyright play, once produced, would be considered as forming part of the 
 current repertory {repertoire courant) for that season and the two seasons following, 
 the Director having the right to put it up for performance at any time, without con- 
 sulting the Reading Committee. But after these seasons had elapsed, it would have 
 to be re-considered and re-sanctioned by the Committee before it could be again 
 performed. When re-sanctioned, its lease of life would be renewed for another three 
 years, and so on. The rule as to copyright plays ia discussed in Section IX.
 
 READING COMMITTEE 15 
 
 against his will. He would, in fact, have a sort of suspensive 
 veto upon any given production, to be overruled only in cases 
 which, to his colleagues, seemed matters of principle. 
 
 It has been suggested by a critic of high authority that the 
 Director should be accorded a certain amount of independent 
 power with regard to the production of plays — that, for instance, 
 he should have the right to nominate, on his own responsibility, 
 one new play out of every six, or to produce one new play in 
 every season, or in every two seasons, without consulting his 
 colleagues. After earnest consideration, we regard this as 
 inadvisable, for two reasons. In the first place, the right, when 
 exercised, would show the Reading Committee divided against 
 itself; whereas it should be a point of honour that the delibera- 
 tions of the Committee should be entirely secret, that its re- 
 sponsibility should be undivided, and that no one (except, in 
 case of necessity, the Trustees) should ever know who voted 
 for, and who against, a particular play. Towards the out- 
 side public, the Committee should present an appearance of 
 unanimity, which could not be preserved were it known that 
 one of its members had, under any circumstances, the right of 
 disregarding or overruling the other two. In the second place, 
 we believe that the natural preponderance of the Director in 
 the Committee would be quite sufficient to secure all the 
 desirable ends to which the proposed additional power could 
 be applied. To put it briefly, a strong Director would never 
 require to use the power, while a weak Director ought not to 
 be entrusted with it. For these reasons we do not incorporate 
 this proposal in our scheme, but put it on record as a possibility. 
 
 The Reading Committee would probably in many cases call 
 the Business Manager into consultation ; but, while his views 
 might naturally influence their decision, he should have no vote.
 
 i6 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 We suggest that the salaries of the General Staff should be 
 as follows : — 
 
 Salaries of General Staff. 
 
 The Director i . . . 
 The Literary Manager ^ 
 The Business Manager ^ 
 The Solicitor 
 The Reading Committee Man 
 
 Total 
 
 1000 
 
 looo 
 3oo2 
 
 300 
 
 ;^46oo 
 
 • Entitled to privileges of Pension Fund. 
 
 2 This sum is a mere guess. The duties of the other members of the General Staff 
 may be clearly foreseen and their value estimated ; but the amount of work that would 
 be required of the Solicitor can only be vaguely conjectured.
 
 SECTION III 
 
 Actors and Actresses — Method of Selection — Payment by Salary and Fees — 
 Convenience of Fee System — Conditions of Engagement — Salary List — 
 Material and Artistic Advantages offered by the Theatre to its Company 
 — Pension Fund — Summary of Performers' Salaries. 
 
 In estimating the number of actors and actresses required, the 
 method we pursued was this : Having before us as complete a 
 list as possible of artists of known qualifications, we selected 
 from it a provisional company of those whom we thought desir- 
 able and probably available for service in such an enterprise. 
 Then we drew up a provisional repertory of plays, and proceeded 
 to cast the parts in them from our provisional company, filling 
 every part of the slightest importance with an actor whom we 
 conceived to be qualified for it, and leaving only the very small 
 parts to be filled by younger actors whom it was needless for us 
 to individualise/ Where we found an actor utilisable in one 
 or two plays of our repertory, but no more, we struck him out 
 and substituted for him an actor qualified for these parts and 
 for others as well. Where we found it impossible to cast a part 
 adequately from among our provisional company, we added a 
 fresh name to our list, sometimes transferring to the new-comer 
 the parts previously allotted to another actor, who thus had to 
 make way for him ; but in other cases realising that we needed 
 him to fill a gap in our company, and must in so far add to its 
 number. By this process of selection and exclusion we secured, 
 as we trust, the survival of the fittest. It is to be noted that in no 
 
 1 They are designated in the casts (Appendix D) as Mr. A., Mr. B., Miss M., 
 Miss N., &c., &c. 
 
 17 B
 
 i8 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 case did we strike out a play from our repertory because of a diflB- 
 culty in casting it. Feeling that our company ought to be equal to 
 any play which was in itself suited to the Theatre, we regai'ded 
 the difficulty as a reason, not for omitting the play, but for altering 
 or adding to our company.^ Then, again, we had to make sure, 
 by arranging our repertory night by night, that we were not 
 overworking our company, but might rely upon their being, not 
 only artistically, but physically, equal to the tasks we imposed 
 on them. To this end we drew out a table for the first three 
 months of the season, showing at a glance what work each 
 actor was doing, day by day and week by week. Our particular 
 care was to avoid so arranging the dates of new productions that 
 the actors engaged in them should not have adequate time for 
 rehearsal — to avoid, for instance, placing two new productions 
 in consecutive weeks, in both of which heavy parts were assigned 
 to the same actors. These considerations involved many, not 
 unlaborious, readjustments, now of casts, and again of the order 
 of the repertory. But having gone thus minutely into the first 
 three months of the season, we did not think it necessarj' to 
 map out the remaining months in equal detail. It is possible 
 that, in the order of the repertory set forth for these latter 
 months, some inconvenient collocations might, on close scrutiny, 
 be found to occur. But we have assured ourselves that, given 
 the company we have selected, or a company equivalent to it, 
 cautious adjustment can always obviate such difficulties.^ 
 
 1 It may be remarked that the narrowness of opportunity afforded to most of our 
 popular actors under the present system, places in the way of any speculative casting 
 diificulties which, after a time, would be cons-iderably lessened in the actual working 
 of a Repertory Theatre. 
 
 - It must be remembered, too, that, within reasonable limits, the employment of 
 understudies is not only admissible but desirable, by way of giving experience to the 
 younger members of the company. This point is more fully discussed on p. 31.
 
 THE COMPANY 19 
 
 We are confident, then, that the forty-two actors and twenty- 
 four actresses of om* hypothetical company would be enough, 
 yet not much more than enough, for the adequate presentation 
 of the repertory we have sketched.^ Twelve of the actors and 
 eight of the actresses we assume to be young people as yet 
 unknown. The others (thirty actors and eighteen actresses) 
 are all artists of established reputation. For many reasons, we 
 cannot give their real names : mainly because we have no right 
 to make public the private information we have received as to 
 their probable salaries. We have, therefore, given them fictitious 
 names, in order that any one examining the scheme may be able 
 to ascertain the nature and amount of the work we require of 
 each member of the company. It is not in the least essential 
 to estimating the merits of the scheme that the actual identity 
 of any of the artists in question should be known. It might 
 quite well happen that, if the Theatre were started to-morrow, 
 not one of these particular actors and actresses would be en- 
 gaged. Not one of them, at any rate, would be indispensable. 
 We could supply the place of each twice over at least, without 
 going beyond the list of known and probably available artists. 
 The names we have given, then, may be taken as representing 
 types rather than individuals. It matters not what particular 
 actor or actress we had in mind ; he (or she) merely represents 
 a more or less numerous class of artists capable of doing approxi- 
 
 1 The Comedie-Fran^aise in 1903 consisted of 15 male and 9 female sociHaires, 
 14 male and 17 female pensionnaires — 55 in all, as against our 66. Probably a good 
 many performers analogous to those 12 actors and 8 actresses whom we assume to be 
 " young people as yet imknown," are reckoned as supernumeraries at the Theatre- 
 Fran^ais, and not included in the official list. It is also to be noted that few plays 
 acted at the Thiiatre-Fiaii^ais require such large casts as a Shakespearean tragedy or 
 history. The company of the Vienna Burgtheater in 1902 appears to have consisted 
 of about 44 actors and 33 actresses ; but more than half of the actresses were very 
 rarely employed.
 
 20 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 mately the same work, and procurable at approximately the same 
 remuneration. 
 
 The income of all actors and actresses regularly attached to 
 the Theatre for terms of not less than three years — as distinct 
 from subordinate and probationary performers on yearly en- 
 gagements — would consist partly of a fixed annual salary, 
 partly of fees paid for each performance in which he or she 
 took part. This system of feux, as it is called at the Thdatre- 
 Francais, commends itself for several reasons. It is almost 
 universal at repertory theatres on the Continent ; and though 
 it is more or less unfamiliar in England, we were confirmed in 
 our intention of adopting it on finding that an English expert 
 whom we consulted — a man with an unrivalled knowledge of 
 "the profession" — instantly declared for it of his own accord, 
 without any prompting from us. Under this system, as we 
 apply it, an actor's contract with the Theatre would secure him 
 a certain salary, and a certain guaranteed number of perform- 
 ances, at a given fee for each performance. He could thus 
 count upon a minimum income, whether he actually gave so 
 many performances or not. In some cases the actual number 
 of performances would fall below the guarantee ; more often it 
 would rise above the guarantee. It will be seen that, in the 
 season actually sketched, twenty-two of the actors and sixteen 
 of the actresses give more than their guaranteed number of per- 
 formances (in some cases nearly twice as many), while seven 
 actors and two actresses give fewer, and one actor gives exactly 
 the guaranteed number. These results — arrived at without any 
 " cooking," for we decided the number of appearances we thought 
 it reasonable to guarantee each performer before ascertaining 
 how often we would actually employ him or her — may be taken 
 as representing pretty fairly the probabilities of an actual season.
 
 FEE SYSTEM 21 
 
 The chief advantages of the fee system may be briefly 
 stated as follows : — 
 
 (i) It counteracts the tendency to "slackness" which, 
 human nature being what it is, occasionally besets any worker 
 who finds himself in a secure position, in which his earnings 
 cannot be increased by zeal or diminished by perfunctoriness. 
 
 (2) It enables the management to adjust the earnings of 
 a performer to his practical usefulness more readily than by 
 actual alteration of his salary. The rule would be that a 
 salary, once attained, should not be reduced. But at each 
 renewal of engagement, though the salary might of course be 
 increased, the main issue between the management and the 
 performer would be the regulation of the amount of the fee 
 to be paid and the number of performances to be guaranteed. 
 The system, in fact, provides an elastic margin of great con- 
 venience. It is specially desirable to meet the case of 
 performers whose usefulness to the Theatre may for a time 
 be very great, but is, in the nature of things, more or less 
 transient. Thus it will be seen that one or two actresses on 
 our list earn very large fees in proportion to their salary, which, 
 indeed, is nearly doubled by their fee income. In these cases 
 the salary may be taken as representing the permanent value 
 of their talent, the fees as representing the temporary value 
 of their personality. When their existing contract expired, 
 or at the end of another three years' term, the management 
 might possibly reduce the number of guaranteed performances. 
 On the expiry of yet another term, the amount of fee might 
 have to be reduced. These adjustments would probably be made 
 with much less friction than a reduction of salary, and might, 
 moreover, meet the justice of the case with greater nicety. 
 
 (3) The pension due to an actor must almost inevitably
 
 22 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 be regulated by the salary he is earning at the time when 
 he is disabled or superannuated, or when he leaves the com- 
 pany. If, then, there is no fee system, and a decline in the 
 performer's value to the Theatre must be met by a reduction 
 in his or her salary, cases might not infrequently arise in 
 which a performer would positively suffer a diminution of 
 pension by remaining a member of the company — the extra 
 percentage earned by additional years of service being cancelled, 
 or more than cancelled, by the reduction of the salary on 
 which the pension was to be calculated. The inconveniences of 
 such a system will be apparent to any one who reads the pen- 
 sion regulations (Appendix B). An actress, for example, who 
 might be drawing a salary of ;^900 at the age of thirty, would 
 know that at fifty she might command no more than a third 
 of that sum. The result would be that the moment there was 
 a question of reducing her salary even by ;^50, she would 
 leave the Theatre. By doing so, she would be in a position 
 to claim, at the superannuation age (fixed, in our scheme, at 
 fifty-five for women), at least 20 per cent, of ;i^900 ; whereas, 
 by remaining in the service of the Theatre till she reached 
 the superannuation age, she might find her claim reduced to 
 something like 60 per cent, of ;^300 — that is to say, a 
 pension no larger, and possibly smaller, than that which 
 would have been due to her had she left the Theatre between 
 the ages of thirty and thirty-five. Such a system would be 
 manifestly absurd ; and still more impossible would it be to 
 make the pension of a performer calculable, not on the salary 
 he was last earning, but on the highest salary he had ever 
 earned. All these difficulties vanish if we make the salary 
 on which the pension is to be calculated a stable minimum 
 of value, so to speak, which may increase but cannot diminish.
 
 FEE SYSTEM 
 
 23 
 
 while fluctuations in the performer's value are expressed solely 
 in what we have called the elastic margin. 
 
 (4) Another advantage of the fee system is that it places 
 the requisite limitation upon the Director's theoretical power 
 to cast any actor for any part, however small. It is some- 
 times mentioned as one of the great merits of continental 
 repertory theatres (and especially of the Meiningen Company) 
 that the leading actors are required on occasion to take the 
 humblest parts, and that the same artist may be found play- 
 ing Hamlet to-night and a footman to-morrow. If this were 
 true, it would be a very foolish and even inartistic arrange- 
 ment. At the National Theatre no actor should be engaged 
 for any special " line of business," nor should any actor have 
 the right to refuse a part assigned him by the Director ; but 
 the fee system would afford a sufficient guarantee that the 
 Director would not wantonly cast any artist for a part mani- 
 festly below his or her talent and status. It would be sheer 
 waste to make an actor whose fee for each performance was £st, 
 undertake a part which could be equally well filled by an 
 actor whose fee was only £\ ox £\, los. 
 
 The period of engagement for a regular member of the 
 company would be three years, renewable in similar periods. 
 Not until he attains a three years' engagement does a per- 
 former begin to qualify for admission to the privileges of the 
 pension fund. One of the difficulties in such an enterprise is 
 to make the company so far stable as to ensure their playing 
 together to the best advantage, without giving any one such 
 absolute fixity of tenure as to enable him to decline into mere 
 officialism and mechanical routine. This end is probably best 
 attained by a system of comparatively short engagements, 
 qualified by a traditional understanding that the policy of the 
 Theatre is best suited by permanence of service, and that an
 
 24 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 actor who has once proved his value and established his 
 position, will not be parted with unless it be for good and 
 sufficient reason. On the other hand, as a certain change of 
 employment is often desirable to prevent an artist from getting 
 into a rut and becoming stale, it should be at the discretion 
 of the Director to allow a performer an occasional furlough 
 for a definite period, so that, without severing his connection 
 with the Theatre, or forfeiting any advantage of pension or 
 seniority accruing from continuity of service, he might accept 
 a special engagement at another theatre. It would not be 
 desirable that an actor, in joining the Theatre with the inten- 
 tion of devoting his life to it, should feel himself for ever 
 debarred from playing a part outside it, however peculiarly it 
 might be adapted to his talents. Loyalty is best secured by a 
 sense of reasonable freedom. Moreover, the National Theatre 
 should try to live on good terms with the private theatres 
 around it, and the Director should be free, on fitting occasion, 
 to do a brother manager a courtesy. 
 
 The following tables show at a glance the remuneration 
 allotted in our budget to the actors and actresses of the com- 
 pany. Opposite the name of each performer will be found (i) 
 his or her fixed salary ; (2) the amount of the fee payable for 
 each performance ; (3) the number of performances guaranteed 
 by contract ; (4) the total income thus guaranteed to the 
 performer; (5) the number of performances actually given by 
 him or her in our specimen season ; (6) the total income 
 actually earned by the performer in the season in question. 
 It may be noted that the incomes at the upper end of the scale 
 might in practice be slightly reduced, while those lower down 
 might be slightly augmented, by the fact that a leading per- 
 former might now and then have to give up a part for a few 
 nights to an understudy.^ 
 
 • See footnote, p. 31.
 
 SALARIES 
 
 25 
 
 SALARIES 
 
 ACTORS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 so 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 a S 
 
 Income 
 
 
 _-. C 
 
 Actual 
 
 
 Salary. 
 
 Fee. 
 
 li 
 
 Guaranteed. 
 
 Is 
 
 Income. 
 
 
 
 
 (?0 
 
 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ s. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 Mr. Kingsway . 
 
 900 
 
 5 
 
 75 
 
 1275 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 1400 
 
 
 
 Mr. Aldwych . 
 
 800 
 
 5 
 
 75 
 
 1175 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 1175 
 
 
 
 Mr. Langham . 
 
 700 
 
 5 ° 
 
 75 
 
 1075 
 
 
 
 83 
 
 1115 
 
 
 
 Mr. Mark T,a,ne 
 
 500 
 
 3 ° 
 
 100 
 
 800 
 
 
 
 138 
 
 914 
 
 
 
 Mr. Ludgate . 
 
 500 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 149 
 
 649 
 
 
 
 Mr. Wimpole . 
 
 400 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 500 
 
 
 
 123 
 
 523 
 
 
 
 Iklr. Fenchurch. 
 
 400 
 
 I 10 
 
 100 
 
 55° 
 
 
 
 no 
 
 565 
 
 
 
 Mr. Barbican . 
 
 400 
 
 I 10 
 
 75 
 
 512 
 
 10 
 
 74 
 
 512 
 
 10 
 
 ]Mr. Bryanston . 
 
 400 
 
 I 10 
 
 75 
 
 512 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 55° 
 
 
 
 Mr. Holborn . 
 
 400 
 
 I 10 
 
 75 
 
 512 
 
 10 
 
 74 
 
 512 
 
 10 
 
 Mr. Somerset House 
 
 400 
 
 I 
 
 75 
 
 475 
 
 
 
 116 
 
 516 
 
 
 
 Mr. PaUmall . 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 156 
 
 456 
 
 
 
 Mr. Tower Hill 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 170 
 
 470 
 
 
 
 Mr. Savile Rowe 
 
 300 
 
 I 10 
 
 100 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 112 
 
 468 
 
 
 
 Mr. Gracechurch 
 
 300 
 
 I 10 
 
 75 
 
 412 
 
 10 
 
 lOI 
 
 451 
 
 10 
 
 Mr. Clement Dane . 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 72 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 Mr. Throgmorton 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 118 
 
 41S 
 
 
 
 Mr. Hyde Park 
 
 300 
 
 I 10 
 
 100 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 130 
 
 495 
 
 
 
 'Mr. Cornhill . 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 82 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 Mr. White Hall 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 91 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 Mr. Bethnal Green . 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 131 
 
 431 
 
 
 
 Mr. Smithfield 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 100 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 97 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 Mr. Knightsbridge . 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 140 
 
 320 
 
 
 
 Mr. Temple Barre . 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 106 
 
 303 
 
 
 
 Mr. Farringdon 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 118 
 
 309 
 
 
 
 Mr. Paternoster 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 96 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 Mr. Lothbury . 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 131 
 
 315 
 
 10 
 
 Mr. Finsbury . 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 ICO 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 169 
 
 334 
 
 10 
 
 ilr. Longacre . 
 
 250 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 127 
 
 313 
 
 10 
 
 Mr. Euston 
 
 250 
 Totj 
 
 10 
 il 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 126 
 
 313 
 
 
 
 (^14,900 
 
 
 
 ii5.73° 
 
 
 
 Actors who receive n( 
 
 ) fees : — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Messrs. A., B., C, 
 
 D., (4) a 
 
 t ;^2So a 
 
 year 
 
 , , 
 
 
 • 
 
 ;^I,000 
 
 
 
 Messrs. E., F., G., 
 
 H., (4) a 
 
 t ;^2oo a 
 
 yeai- 
 
 . 
 
 
 , 
 
 Soo 
 
 c 
 
 Messrs. I., J., K., '. 
 
 L., (4) a1 
 Tote 
 
 il of Men' 
 
 year 
 
 s Sali 
 
 iries and Fee 
 
 s ;< 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 ^18,130 
 

 
 26 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 ACTRESSES 
 
 
 
 
 
 M . 
 
 
 X 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 Income 
 
 c 
 
 Actual 
 
 
 Salary. 
 
 Fee. 
 
 s s 
 
 ■2 - 
 
 Guaranteed. 
 
 
 Income. 
 
 
 
 
 
 r. 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 5. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 Miss Elcho 
 
 700 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 1075 
 
 91 
 
 "55 
 
 
 
 Miss Belvoir . 
 
 600 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 975 
 
 72 
 
 975 
 
 
 
 Miss Mentmore 
 
 500 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 725 
 
 106 
 
 818 
 
 
 
 Mrs. Penshurst 
 
 400 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 475 
 
 89 
 
 489 
 
 
 
 Miss Knole 
 
 400 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 475 
 
 78 
 
 478 
 
 
 
 Mrs. Dalmeny . 
 
 400 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 45° 
 
 41 
 
 45° 
 
 
 
 Miss Inveraray. 
 
 300 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 35° 
 
 57 
 
 357 
 
 
 
 Miss Tintagel . 
 
 300 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 45° 
 
 94 
 
 582 
 
 
 
 Miss Walmer . 
 
 300 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 400 
 
 99 
 
 498 
 
 
 
 Miss Blenheim . 
 
 250 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 400 
 
 82 
 
 496 
 
 
 
 Miss Longleat . 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 300 
 
 94 
 
 344 
 
 
 
 Miss Haddon Hall . 
 
 250 
 
 
 10 
 
 50 
 
 325 
 
 87 
 
 380 
 
 10 
 
 Miss Ai'undel . 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 300 
 
 86 
 
 336 
 
 
 
 Miss Carnarvon 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 300 
 
 52 
 
 352 
 
 
 
 Mrs. Pevensey 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 300 
 
 64 
 
 314 
 
 
 
 Miss Alnwick . 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 250 
 
 81 
 
 281 
 
 
 
 Miss Chatsworth 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 250 
 
 70 
 
 270 
 
 
 
 Miss Hatfield . 
 
 200 
 Tofcd 
 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 250 
 
 72 
 
 272 
 
 
 
 ;£8o5o 
 
 ;^8847 
 
 10 
 
 Actresses who receive 
 
 no fees 
 
 ; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Misses M., N., 0., 
 
 (3) at ^ 
 
 "200 
 
 a yea 
 
 r . 
 
 • ■ 
 
 , 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 Misses P., Q., R., ( 
 
 3)at;^ 
 Total 
 
 150 a year 
 of Ladies 
 
 'Sal. 
 
 iries and Fee 
 
 3 
 
 45° 
 
 
 
 ;^9897 
 
 10 
 
 The question now arises : Have we formed a fairly correct 
 estimate of the income (salary plus fees) which would be de- 
 manded by the actors we have in view, or their equivalents ? As 
 the remuneration of the performers is necessarily the largest 
 item in a theatrical budget, the practical merits of our scheme 
 must in great measure depend on the answer to this question. 
 
 We have, of course, founded our estimate on the best infor-
 
 ACTORS' SALARIES 27 
 
 mation available to us as to the actual earnings at the present 
 moment of the artists in question. Their earnings, not their 
 nominal weekly salary ; that is a totally different matter. An 
 actor's income-tax return, based on an average of three years, is 
 in the majority of cases not at all what the outside public is apt 
 to imagine on learning that Mr. So-and-So's salary is such-and- 
 such an imposing sum per week. To reduce this statement to 
 its true proportions, we should have to learn how many weeks 
 in the year Mr. So-and-So is on an average employed. The 
 economic account of the matter seems to be this : On the one 
 hand, the profession is greatly overcrowded, so that there ai"e 
 always far more nominally qualified actors wanting parts than 
 there are parts to be filled. This would, in the case of an ordi- 
 nary' employment, bring wages to the lowest subsistence level 
 for a man of the class required. But, on the other hand, a 
 manager is not like an ordinary employer who " takes on " 
 without selection any " hands " who have attained a certain 
 standard of skill. On the contrary, he selects very carefully the 
 actor whom, of all those available, he considers best fitted for a 
 particular part ; and in relation to that particular part, the actor 
 comes to have something like a monopoly value. He can de- 
 mand any salary that is not so extravagant as to make the next- 
 best man seem preferable. But when once he has played this 
 part, months or years may elapse before another presents itself, 
 for which his physical or mental characteristics give him this 
 monopoly value ; and if he has not a monopoly value, his 
 competition value is very small indeed, and he may find " no 
 buyers " even at a miserably low figure. The employments in 
 a theatre which can be filled, like a place at a power-loom, 
 by any one who has served a mechanical apprenticeship, are, 
 in fact, filled by " hands " (so to speak) at that lowest sub-
 
 28 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 sistence wage which is regulated by the pressure of applicants 
 for any post in a theatre, however insignificant.^ These are the 
 actors who are never heard of. The actors who command any 
 considerable weekly salary, command it on account of their 
 special fitness for a particular part ; and, as a general rule, the 
 parts for which they are specially fit present themselves so rarely, 
 that an actor's earnings during a run of two or three months will 
 often represent his whole income for a year or more. Even when 
 an artist has risen to the level of reputation at which his mere 
 name in the bill is of considerable value, apart from his special 
 fitness for a given part, he is by no means sure of continuous 
 engagements. Actors of great personal popularity will fre- 
 quently drop out of work for months at a time without any 
 assignable reason. An actor's vogue among the managers (as 
 distinct from the public) is subject to a sort of mysterious perio- 
 dicity. That is one of the main reasons why so many are eager 
 to " go into management" for themselves. 
 
 Our first business, then, was to estimate the average income, 
 over a period of from three to five years, actually earned by any 
 artist whom we wished to include in our company. In some 
 cases, at the lower end of our list, this income would be so small 
 that the sum we felt it right to allot would probably represent 
 an increase rather than a diminution of the actor's total earn- 
 ings, even apart from the further advantages offered him. 
 About the middle of the list, some of the incomes we allot are 
 probably very much the same as the average incomes actually 
 earned by the performers in question. But if we have levelled 
 
 ' Even the " subsistence wage " can be, and often is, lowered by the fact that the 
 " blackleg " is so prominent in the economy of a certain class of management — the man 
 or woman who has other means of livelihood, and is willing to appear on the stage 
 for derisory sums, or for nothing, or even to pay for the privilege.
 
 FIXITY OF TENURE 29 
 
 up at the lower end of the list, we have on the whole levelled 
 down at the middle and upper end, and that for three reasons — 
 first, on account of the permanence of employment offered ; 
 second, on account of its more dignified and agreeable condi- 
 tions ; third, on account of the participation in the pension 
 fund, secured after ten years' service. Let us consider these 
 three points in their order. 
 
 The first has already been dealt with in the paragraph re- 
 ferring to conditions of engagement. Very few actors under 
 the present system have their position ensured for even the three 
 years which would, in this Theatre, be the minimum term for 
 every performer who had passed the probationary stage. It is 
 seldom that an actor can see his way ahead beyond "the run of 
 the piece " in which he is engaged.^ He may be pretty confi- 
 dent of soon finding another engagement ; but confidence is not 
 the same thing as certainty. Moreover, as above stated, the 
 majority of actors find their demand with managers run in 
 longer or shorter cycles. At one time they will have to refuse 
 offers which come pouring in upon them ; at another time, for 
 no apparent reason, and without any change in their status with 
 the public, the managers will seem to have forgotten their exist- 
 ence. In the main, stage employment belongs to that least 
 satisfactory and most unwholesome class — casual labour. That 
 many actors — indeed, all actors of a type desirable at such a 
 theatre as this — will make considerable sacrifices to escape from 
 this precarious and demoralising condition, is not for a moment 
 doubtful. Even a three years' engagement would, to the mass 
 of the profession, mean comparative fixity of tenure ; while, as 
 
 ' It shovdd be noted, however, that within the past few years it has become more 
 and more the practice of some managers to give the leading members of their company 
 yearly engagements.
 
 30 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 above stated, the rule should be that, in the absence of some 
 definite reason to the contrary, the actor might expect to remain 
 for much longer terms, or even to the end of his career, in the 
 service of the Theatre. At the same time it must be noted 
 that a "definite reason to the contrary" would not alvpays 
 imply misconduct or even slackness on the actor's part. The 
 need for bringing " new blood " into the company would now 
 and then involve dispensing with the services of an actor 
 against whom nothing could be alleged save that his place 
 might be better filled by another man. But if the Theatre 
 were sufficiently prosperous to permit of the maintenance of a 
 company somewhat larger than strict necessity demanded, the 
 bringing in of "new blood" would not always imply the 
 supplanting of older talents, but might merely involve some 
 reduction in the fee-income of an actor who would have 
 to share his parts with a younger recruit. The system of 
 furloughs, judiciously applied, would also help to keep the 
 company large and representative, yet not overgrown. 
 
 In the second place, even apart from its greater security, the 
 actor's position would be much more agreeable, both socially 
 and artistically, than it is apt to be under the present system. 
 He would be able to settle down among his household gods — 
 an advantage more appreciated than some people might imagine 
 among actors of the present day. He would not be liable at 
 any moment to finding himself compelled, lest worse befall him, 
 to accept a provincial, American, or colonial engagement, and 
 "hve in his boxes" for months or years. The charms of a 
 nomadic existence soon pall on the actor, and there are few who 
 would not stretch a good many points for the sake of an assured 
 position in London, even apart from any prestige that might 
 eventually attach to association with the National Theatre.
 
 CONDITIONS OF WORK 31 
 
 The conditions of work, too, would be far more agreeable than 
 they generally are at present. Rehearsals, indeed, would be 
 numerous, but being always conducted in a Theatre which was, 
 so to speak, the actor's second home, the inconvenience and 
 fatigue attaching to them would be minimised. And if re- 
 hearsals occupied a good many of his days, performances, on 
 the other hand, would not occupy all his evenings. He would 
 not feel himself a slave every night of his life from seven o'clock 
 to midnight. The actors in most frequent employment — 
 who would be those playing the minor and less fatiguing parts 
 — would have two or three free evenings in every week ; while 
 actors playing leading parts would seldom have to give more 
 than four performances a week, and often not so many.^ Even 
 supposing that a performer appears five times in a week, the 
 difference between five performances and the eight " shows " 
 which he is now expected to give in a successful play means 
 the difference between pleasant artistic activity and monotonous 
 mechanical toil. Taking the company all round, it would 
 be seldom indeed that an actor or actress would not have three 
 
 1 It may here be pointed out that understudying in this Theatre will be neither so 
 perfunctory nor so thankless a task as it generally is in the existing state of things. It 
 will not, as at present, be illness or accident alone that gives an understudy a chance of 
 proving his quality. The conduct of the Theatre will often render it impossible to 
 retain complete an original cast for every performance of a play. If an actor is rehears- 
 ing a great new part — Hamlet, for example — he may be compelled to spare his strength 
 for the first night by giving up to his understudy his part in any play which may be 
 announced for performance on one of the two or three nights immediately preceding 
 that fixed for the new production. The Director would have the right to insist on his 
 doing so if the service of the Theatre seemed to demand it. Again, if an actor were 
 playing a heavy part in a very successful production which was repeated four times a 
 week, some of his parts in the other plays presented during the same weeks would, no 
 doubt, fall to his understudies. Indeed, if an understudy should show marked ability 
 in a part at the one full understudy rehearsal which each play will receive, the Direc- 
 tor would make a point of finding an opportunity or opportunities for him to play it 
 in public. The wise Director will always be looking among his rank and file for the 
 leaders, and the ripe and accomplished talents, of the future.
 
 32 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 evenings in the week (including Sunday) free for study, recrea- 
 tion, or social life. It would be in every way good for the actor 
 to be enabled to enlarge the circle of his social relations, and 
 escape from the constant companionship of those of his own 
 calling. 
 
 The artistic advantage to the actor arising from variety of 
 employment is generally admitted, yet not fully realised. 
 Beyond all doubt, the supersession of the old stock company 
 by the long run system has done a veiy real service to the 
 stage. It has encouraged a finish, both in play-writing and 
 acting, which the older conditions never allowed. It has 
 broken a tradition of slovenliness. But the system — or rather 
 its exclusive prevalence — is now over-reaching itself. The old 
 system, under which the physical fitness or unfitness of an 
 actor for a part was apt to be entirely ignored, has been 
 replaced by a new system under which physical fitness is 
 regarded as the one thing needful. Under the old system 
 talent and skill were expected to work impossibilities ; under 
 the new system little is left for them to do. An author who 
 wants to cast a part, ransacks London and the provinces for 
 a man or woman who can " look " it, and trusts to his own 
 or the producer's coaching to supply the place of talent and 
 skill. As there are no fixed companies and only a few long 
 engagements, his freedom of choice is almost unlimited ; yet 
 authors complain (quite justly) that, with the whole " profes- 
 sion " at their command, it is frequently impossible to get 
 important characters in their works even moderately well 
 played. What is the reason ? Simply that the absolute 
 tiuidity of the theatrical world, enabling an actor to appear 
 always in parts which he can get through on the strength of 
 his mere personality, leads to the atrophy of whatever talent
 
 PENSION FUND 33 
 
 he may possess. Being cast only for parts for which his 
 personality is obviously suited, he is tied down to one line 
 of work, never attains any suppleness or versatility, and at 
 last becomes stale and uninteresting, even in the parts to 
 which he is so closely confined. Constant mechanical repeti- 
 tion of one type of character hardens his peculiarities into 
 mannerisms. Even if his performance of a part be not 
 mechanical from the outset, the intolerable monotony involved 
 in seven or eight repetitions a week soon grinds all spontaneity 
 out of it ; and it is not only his performance of that part that 
 suffers, but his capability for others. 
 
 The fluidity of the theatrical world, besides checking the 
 development of the individual actor, impairs, in the majority 
 of productions, the harmony of the general effect. It pre- 
 vents the formation of any of those artistic homes where the 
 members of the family are in habitual sympathy one with 
 another. A permanent company, formed, so to speak, by 
 natural selection and the survival of the fittest, used to each 
 other's methods, and working in harmony, may be trusted to 
 give a far sounder performance of any play than the most 
 brilliant "scratch" company that can be got together. 
 
 Finally, the advantages of the Pension Fund, with the 
 
 provision it assures in case of disablement or superannuation, 
 
 cannot but appeal to the better class of actor. A suggested 
 
 pension scheme will be found in Appendix B, p. 135. It is, 
 
 necessarily, too complex to be summarised with any advantage, 
 
 but not, we hope, to be understood by any one who will read 
 
 its articles carefully. Whether it is so devised as to be 
 
 practicable and attractive is not for us to determine. We 
 
 have not the least doubt, at any rate, that a practicable scheme 
 
 can be devised ; and we have the best authority for believing 
 
 c
 
 34 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 that the advantages of a pension fund would be keenly appre- 
 ciated by the class of actors whom the Theatre would seek 
 to attract. 
 
 We have every confidence, then, that the services of those 
 actors of whom our hypothetical company is composed, or of 
 their equivalents, could be secured for approximately the sums 
 we have allotted to them. It is to be observed that such an 
 institution cannot hope, and does not desire, to keep within 
 its limits the born " star," the man or woman who is obviously 
 capable of attaining world-wide renown or notoriety. Rachel, 
 though no doubt the glory of the Com^die Franjaise, came 
 very near being its ruin ; and it was fated that Sarah Bern- 
 hardt and Coquelin should fly off from that organisation as 
 soon as they fully realised the value, in sovereigns, dollars, 
 marks, and roubles, of their personality and talent. We do 
 not pretend that our company contains a Sarah Bernhardt 
 or a Coquelin ; nor, if one of its members developed any 
 such conspicuous virtuosity, should we expect him or her to 
 remain within the bounds of the institution. But it is quite 
 possible to possess distinguished talent, and even genius, 
 without the power, or the wish, to set the world on fire. It 
 should be noticed that some of the class of actors who now 
 are, or aspire to be, actor-managers, would, if such a theatre 
 existed, be quite content with the career it offered them. The 
 craving to become an actor-manager is, in many cases, not 
 prompted by any overweening ambition, but by the necessity 
 for escaping from the predominance of other actor-managers. 
 
 The lower ranks of the company would be filled by young 
 probationers (those designated in our salary-lists and casts by 
 initials only), who would be engaged for not more and not 
 less than a season at a time, and would be remunerated by
 
 SUMMARY OF SALARIES 35 
 
 Balaries alone, without fees. They would fill the small parts 
 in plays requiring a very large cast, would understudy, and, 
 in exceptional cases, would play what may be called mute 
 character-parts — the leading figures in a mob, &c., &c. 
 
 For populace, armies, &c., a certain number of professional 
 "supers" would have to be employed. An estimate under 
 this head will be found below. For what are technically 
 known as "extra gentlemen and ladies" — courtiers, &c., in 
 classical plays, guests and background-figures who "walk on" 
 in modem plays — the management ought to be able to rely 
 upon the pupils of the Training School which would be attached 
 to the Theatre. It would, indeed, be one of the chief advan- 
 tages this school could offer its pupils, that they would be 
 admitted to some, at any rate, of the rehearsals of the Theatre, 
 and by appearing in supernumerary parts, would be enabled 
 to acquire the habit of the scene. The question of the Train- 
 ing School is further discussed in Section X. 
 
 Summary of Salaries Payable to Performers. 
 
 Thirty actors on three-years' engagements 
 (salaries and fees) ^ . . . . . 
 
 Twelve actors on short engagements, who do 
 not receive fees ..... 
 
 Eighteen actresses on three-years' engage- 
 ments (salaries and fees) ^ . 
 
 Six actresses on short engagements, who do 
 not receive fees ...... 
 
 Supermaster and Supernumeraries (including 
 payment for rehearsals) ^ . ... 
 
 ' Entitled to privileges of Pension Fund. 
 
 ' It is assumed that the pupils of the Training School would serve without salary 
 as extra ladies and gentlemen. 
 
 ;^i5.73o 
 
 
 
 
 
 2,400 
 
 
 
 
 
 8,847 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 1,050 
 
 
 
 
 
 750 
 
 
 
 
 
 28.777 
 
 10 
 

 
 SECTION IV 
 
 Repertory for a Specimen Season — The Theatre not a Pioneer Theatre — 
 Principles of Selection — Shakespeare — Elizabethan Drama — Restoration 
 Comedy — Eighteenth-Century Comedy — Early Victorian and Mid-Vic- 
 torian Plays — Modern Revivals — New Plays — Foreign Plays, Classical 
 and Modern — Schedule of Repertory. 
 
 A FEW words must be said as to the composition of the reper- 
 tory for our specimen season. And here, at the outset, there 
 is a misconception to be guarded against. 
 
 It is not an " Advanced " Theatre that we are design- 
 ing. The great subsidised theatres of the Continent are not 
 "advanced" theatres. It is not their business to be far ahead 
 of the time, but to be well abreast of it. Sometimes, no doubt 
 (as in the case of the Berlin Schauspielhaus), they fail even in 
 that duty ; but, as a rule, they perform it reasonably well. They 
 follow, more or less cautiously, more or less eclectically, in the 
 wake of the " advanced " theatres ; and that is as it should be. 
 Outposts are necessary to the army of progress ; but no army 
 can be all outposts ; and where the main body is out of touch 
 with its pioneers, they pioneer in vain. The Theatre we have 
 here in view forms part, and an indispensable part, of the main 
 army of progress. It will neither compete with the outpost 
 theatres nor relieve them of their functions. It is the business 
 of the outposts to press on, to try this path and that, sometimes 
 to blunder, and find themselves in an untenable position, or in 
 a " No Thoroughfare." The main body, profiting by their ex- 
 perience, tries to avoid their errors ; and through this division 
 
 36
 
 REPERTORY 37 
 
 of labour the general advance goes on steadily and securely, 
 with no risk of a serious set-back. There can be no doubt that 
 the extraordinary headway which the German drama has made 
 during the past fifteen years is due to the influence of the 
 pioneer theatres in clearing the way for the main body ; but it 
 is the advance of the main body that gives the outpost work its 
 national, and even European, significance. The work of our 
 English pioneer theatres, often admirable in itself, has been 
 in great measure robbed of its significance by the fact that they 
 have scarcely ever been in touch with the main army. The 
 National Theatre would keep a sympathetic eye upon the work 
 of the outpost theatres, and would itself experiment in due 
 measure. A wise management would show its wisdom mainly, 
 perhaps, in knowing when to experiment and when to hold its 
 hand. But experiment would not be its primary function. Its 
 aim would be to recruit and foster an intelligent, not neces- 
 sarily an " advanced," public. But intelligent members of the 
 " advanced " public would find plenty to interest them in its 
 workings. 
 
 This distinction between the National Theatre and the 
 pioneer theatre it seemed well to emphasise at the outset, as 
 any failure to realise it could only lead to misunderstanding 
 and disappointment. 
 
 The main principles we had in view, in sketching our speci- 
 men repertor}', were that it should be national, representative, 
 and popular. 
 
 The national note we struck at the very outset in presenting, 
 in chronological sequence, the central and most continuous portion 
 of Shakespeare's great epic of English history, as it has justly 
 been called. To attempt the production in one week of four of 
 the most exacting plays of the world's literature — plays with
 
 38 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 exceptionally heavy casts and exceptional requirements in the 
 way of scenery and costumes — was clearly to put a great strain 
 on the resources of the Theatre. We assumed, however, that 
 there would be ample time for preparation (much more, of 
 course, than there would be, under ordinary circumstances, be- 
 tween one season and another) ; and we felt that the importance 
 of the occasion should be marked, not by one big production, in 
 which the National Theatre could not hope to compete with 
 private theatres in scenic attraction, but by a sustained artistic 
 effort on a great scale, such as no private theatre could reason- 
 ably attempt. We felt, too, that, in opening with a single 
 Shakespearean production, the management might not un- 
 naturally be tempted to aim at a degree of scenic luxury — as 
 opposed to appropriateness — inconsistent with the idea of the 
 Theatre ; whereas the very magnitude of the effort demanded 
 in presenting a cycle of four plays, would render almost impera- 
 tive from the first the observance of a just standard of dignified 
 moderation. The cycle would, therefore, be as characteristic in 
 a technical sense as in a literary sense it would be appropriate. 
 
 Our other Shakespearean productions we selected on the 
 following grounds : The Tempest as a beautiful poem, much 
 neglected of late years ; The Taming of the Shrew as a popular 
 farce, showing the more prosaic and commonplace side of the 
 poet's genius ; and Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and As You Like 
 It, simply as immortal masterpieces which no English theatre 
 can make too great haste to establish in its repertory. The 
 number of Shakespearean productions — nine — we believe to be 
 approximately justified by an analysis of the roll of Shakespeare's 
 works in relation to the circumstances of the case. The con- 
 ventional Shakespearean canon consists of thirty-seven plays. 
 Of these, one — Titus Andronicus — is wholly unpresentable on
 
 SHAKESPEARE 39 
 
 the modern stage ; while six — Troihis and Cressida, Timon of 
 Athens, Pericles, and the three parts of Henry VI. — can only 
 be presented, with doubtful advantage, after heroic curtailment 
 and manipulation. We do not say that they ought never to be 
 attempted ; but they cannot possibly take a permanent place in 
 the repertory of any theatre. Then, again, of the remaining 
 plays, five would probably be found fitted only for occasional 
 revival at long intervals : The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The 
 Comedy of Errors, and Love's Labour's Lost, as immature pro- 
 ductions ; All's Well that Ends Well, as likewise immature (in 
 spite of re-touching), and inacceptable in theme ; and Henry 
 VIIL., as a formless pageant play, which has very little claim to 
 rank as Shakespeare's. There remain, then, twenty-five plays, 
 which ought never to be suffered for long to drop out of the re- 
 pertory of an English National Theatre. If six, on an average, 
 were revived in every season, the whole list (save one) would be 
 gone through once in four years ; while in each season certain 
 plays, carried forward from the season or seasons before, would 
 be considered, not as revivals, but as belonging to the permanent 
 substratum of the repertory — what is called in France the 
 repertoire courant. We take it, then, that in this initial season 
 three plays may be regarded as representing the Shakespearean 
 element in this permanent substratum, while the remaining six 
 are about equivalent to the normal revivals of a normal season. 
 
 We do not, of course, suggest that the number of Shake- 
 spearean productions in a season would be regulated with 
 mathematical accuracy ; nor do we assume that our analysis of 
 the plays will command universal assent. All we suggest is 
 that on some such analysis, and on some such principle of 
 rotation, the Shakespearean work of the Theatre would pro- 
 bably have to be founded.
 
 40 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Shakespeare apart, the Elizabethan drama has fallen into 
 such total disuse that the attempt to reanimate for the theatrical 
 public a representative selection of plays, though absolutely 
 imperative upon the management, would have to be gone 
 about slowly and cautiously. We believe that there are 
 probably a dozen — perhaps even a score — of the plays of 
 Shakespeare's contemporaries that have still the breath of 
 theatrical life in them. Careful experiment will ultimately 
 separate them from the mass. But in a first season, and until 
 the main lines of the repertory are firmly established, we felt 
 that it would be unwise to devote much time and energy to 
 such experiments. Out of several Elizabethan plays which 
 we considered — some of them in themselves more interesting 
 than Every Man in his Humour — we chose Ben Jonson's 
 comedy as being probably the least experimental. Its theatrical 
 qualities have been tested in comparatively recent years — 
 notably by that company of distinguished amateurs of which 
 Charles Dickens was the inspiring genius. 
 
 The plays of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth 
 century would, for notorious reasons, require very careful 
 handling. Some of them, however, might doubtless be made 
 available for the modern stage ; and having satisfied ourselves 
 that Congreve's Love for Love could be presented with com- 
 paratively slight curtailment — stopping far short of mutilation 
 — we thought there could be no doubt that the first place 
 belonged to it, as the representative play of its period. 
 
 In the later eighteenth century there is no lack of 
 presentable material ; but the three undoubted masterpieces of 
 the period are so familiar that there seemed to be no particular 
 hurry for adding them to the repertory. On the other hand. 
 The Critic has not been seen for something like half a century,
 
 MODERN REVIVALS 41 
 
 except in a truncated form, and at " benefit " performances 
 when unlimited clowning was the order of the day. We 
 selected it, then, from among several competitors, as the 
 representative for this season of the Georgian Age. 
 
 The choice of a play to represent the first half of the nine- 
 teenth century was by no means easy, though the embarrass- 
 ment was scarcely one of riches. At last we fixed upon 
 Money — of course to be dressed, and so far as possible acted, 
 after the manner of the early Victorian period. Our choice 
 was finally determined by the consideration that, the Mid- 
 Victorian period being inevitably represented by its one master- 
 piece, Caste, we should be able to insert between the two, 
 Mr. Pinero's delightful comedy, Trelawny of the Wells, and 
 thus give, in a sort of comedy cycle, illustrations of the old 
 rhetorical and new realistic methods, with a fanciful, yet not 
 unfaithful, history of the transition between the two. 
 
 It is unnecessary to go at length into the reasons which 
 prompted our selection of recent English plays. Of most of 
 these pieces we may say, as we said of the actors in the 
 company, that they are to be taken as types rather than as 
 individuals. All of them are subject to stage-right, and in 
 some cases permission to revive them might not be obtain- 
 able. But if this one or that failed us, there would be no 
 lack of others to fall back upon. It would be more difficult, 
 perhaps, to explain the absence of certain plays and authors 
 from the list than to justify the presence of any play which 
 appears on it. Why, for instance, are Mr. Pinero's farces 
 unrepresented ? Why do the names of Mr. J. M. Barrie, 
 Mr. Stephen Phillips, Mr. H. V. Esmond, Mr. Anthony Hope, 
 Mr. Louis Parker, Captain Robert Marshall, Mr. H. H. Davies, 
 nowhere appear ? The answer is simple — namely, that there
 
 42 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 are only so-and-so many nights in a season, and that it is 
 impossible within the limits of one year to sample a whole 
 literature. Besides, some of the authors whose names are 
 absent from our list of revivals may be lurking in disguise 
 under the rubric of New Plays. 
 
 Though, in selecting modern plays for revival, we have in 
 the main deferred to the generally expressed theatrical taste 
 of the past ten or twelve years, we do not wish to imply an 
 opinion that this taste is all that can be desired, or that it 
 would be specially fostered by the National Theatre. On the 
 contrar}', we believe that the "society play" — the drama of 
 "frocks and frills" — bulks far too largely on the stage of 
 to-day ; and one of the chief advantages of the National 
 Theatre would lie in its providing an escape from the con- 
 ditions which at present are thought to impose this type of 
 play upon both managers and authors. There is no doubt 
 that a large section of the public is being gradually alienated 
 from the theatre by a sense of the monotony of the fare pro- 
 vided ; and as we were bound to choose from among existing 
 plays, we could not help, in some measure, reproducing that 
 monotony. But after a few seasons, when the repertory had 
 been recruited by the new productions of the Theatre, the 
 sameness would disappear. It would be the object of the 
 Theatre, not to perpetuate the dramatic tradition of the past 
 ten years, but largely to widen the range of subjects and 
 methods open to the dramatist. It would produce some, no 
 doubt, of the plays that are written to-day, but also many that 
 are not; and it would aim at reconciling to the drama many 
 people who are now more or less estranged from it. 
 
 One play only among our revivals has not had its theatrical 
 quality tested by performance at a regular London theatre —
 
 NEW PLAYS 43 
 
 to wit, Mr. W. B. Yeats's Countess Cathleen. This we 
 included, not only because of its rare beauty, but because we 
 felt that the representative character of the repertory demanded 
 that the new Irish drama should hold an honourable place in 
 it. We regretted our inability to find an American play that 
 seemed suited for revival ; but as the great majority of 
 American plays are unprinted, or were, at all events, inacces- 
 sible to us, our failure to discover one must by no means be 
 taken as meaning that no such play exists. Perhaps, too, 
 America may be represented among the New Plays. 
 
 With regard to these, it must be distinctly understood 
 that they are quite imaginary. It was obvious that a season 
 in which no provision was made for new plays would not be 
 typical. We had, then, to leave room for what seemed a fair 
 number of new productions ; but in no case had we in mind 
 any existing unacted play ; nor did we mentally assign any one 
 of them to an individual dramatist. Thus the larger or smaller 
 number of performances allotted to each new play indicates 
 merely our forecast of average probability, not any judgment 
 as to the greater or smaller attractiveness of any particular 
 author's work. 
 
 It seemed to us evident that, although in any National Theatre 
 the national drama must hold by far the most prominent place, 
 yet the dramatic literature of foreign nations ought also to be 
 represented in due proportion. As regards the classical litera- 
 ture of France, the apparent impossibility of rendering the 
 Alexandrine by any tolerable English equivalent restricts within 
 narrow limits the material from which it is possible to choose. 
 We at last fixed upon Moli^re's Don Juan as perhaps the 
 greatest of his prose works, and one which can certainly be 
 made effective in its English dress. Several German classics
 
 44 NATIONAL THEATRE ' 
 
 we had under consideration, but failed to find room for any of 
 them in this season's repertory. Of modern plays, we chose 
 Dumas's Francillon as representing what may be called the 
 Second Empire theatre at its best (though it was produced 
 under the Republic) ; Brieux's La Robe Rouge as a characteris- 
 tic and easily transplantable specimen of the French drama of 
 to-day ; Johannisfeuer as the most poetic, and at the same time 
 one of the most interesting of the plays of Sudermann ; and 
 Pelleas and Melisande as that play of Maeterlinck's which 
 had most clearly proved its theatrical quality. But in the case 
 of the foreign, as well as of the English modern plays, our selec- 
 tion is to be regarded as merely illustrative. There were many 
 others which we might equally well have chosen, and of which 
 the one actually selected must be taken as a type. 
 
 One adaptation, A Pair of Spectacles, has slipped into our 
 repertory almost by inadvertence. It holds an exceptional posi- 
 tion, being, in fact, a fairy tale, as much at home in England as 
 in France. The rule would be, of course, that foreign plays 
 should be translated, not adapted. 
 
 We have purposely excluded from this specimen repertory 
 all plays of the class which may be called disputable, designing 
 to show that there was ample material at the command of the 
 Theatre without travelling beyond the range of universally 
 accepted classics, and modern work which has proved its at- 
 tractiveness for the English public. For this reason the names 
 of Tolstoy, Gorky, Ibsen, Bjornson, Hauptmann, D'Annunzio, 
 and Bernard Shaw do not figure in our list of authors. That 
 some of these writers' works would before long find house-room 
 in the Theatre we can scarcely doubt ; but we have shown that 
 a rich and varied, if not a thoroughly representative, repertory 
 can be formed without them. Nothing, as we have pointed out,
 
 ONE-ACT PLAYS 45 
 
 can be more mistaken than the idea that a National Theatre 
 ought to be, or would be, a forcing-house for the esoteric 
 drama. 
 
 It would be a principle of the Theatre that front-pieces and 
 after-pieces should be as well cast and as carefully treated as the 
 plays which fill the main part of the programme. We have 
 allowed for two new one-act plays and five revivals. All the 
 revivals, except Mr. Frederick Fenn's Judged by A2)pearances, 
 may seem to be of a rather serious type. The reason for this is 
 that the plays which were short enough to require a front-piece 
 were mostly of the lighter order, and seemed to demand, by way 
 of contrast, somewhat graver companionship. We had no de- 
 sign of excluding the bright comedietta or even the rattling farce, 
 supposing it to possess any real humour or ingenuity. We in- 
 tended to include in the repertory one other one-act play of a 
 very serious type — Sudermann's Fritzchen. It was omitted, 
 through an oversight, until our calculations were almost com- 
 pleted ; and then, as it was not indispensable, we did not think 
 it worth while to undertake the long series of corrections that 
 would have been necessary had we restored it to its place. 
 
 [Schedule of Eepkrtory
 
 46 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 SCHEDULE OF REPERTOKY. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Num- 
 
 Author. 
 
 Play. 
 
 First Per- 
 
 Last Per- 
 
 ber of 
 
 formance. 
 
 formance. 
 
 Perfor- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 mances. 
 
 I. Shakespeare 
 
 King Richard II. . 
 
 Sept. 15 
 
 July 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 2. „ . . 
 
 King Henry IV., Ft. I. . 
 
 ,. 17 
 
 )» 
 
 18 
 
 12 
 
 3- >. . • 
 
 King Henry IV., Pt. II. 
 
 „ 18 
 
 Apr. 
 
 24 
 
 5 
 
 4- ,, . • 
 
 King Henry V. 
 
 „ 20 
 
 July 
 
 21 
 
 10 
 
 5. Pinero 
 
 The Benefit of the Doubt 
 
 .. 23 
 
 1) 
 
 24 
 
 12 
 
 6. Henley & Stevenson 
 
 Beau Austin . 
 
 ,, 29 
 
 Dec. 
 
 17 
 
 7 
 
 7. 1 (New Play) . 
 
 Saint Cecilia . 
 
 Oct. 7 
 
 July 
 
 22 
 
 41 
 
 8. GUbert . 
 
 Tom Cobb 
 
 » 17 
 
 Nov. 
 
 15 
 
 6 
 
 9. Congreve . 
 
 Love for Love 
 
 3' 
 
 July 
 
 27 
 
 9 
 
 10. Chambers 
 
 The Tyranny of Tears . 
 
 Nov. 7 
 
 Nov. 
 
 20 
 
 4 
 
 11. Moliere . 
 
 Don Juan 
 
 „ 21 
 
 July 
 
 29 
 
 7 
 
 12. 1 (New Play) . 
 
 The Flight of the Duchess 
 
 .. 25 
 
 Dec. 
 
 30 
 
 10 
 
 13. Wilde . 
 
 The Importance of being 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Earnest . 
 
 Dec 6 
 
 Jan. 
 
 31 
 
 5 
 
 14. Shakespeare 
 
 The Tempest . 
 
 ,, 12 
 
 Aug. 
 
 I 
 
 31 
 
 15. Labiche & Grundy . 
 
 A Pair of Spectacles 
 
 Jan. 6 
 
 Jan. 
 
 17 
 
 3 
 
 16. Shakespeare 
 
 The Taming of the Shrew 
 
 „ 17 
 
 July 
 
 30 
 
 13 
 
 17. Sudermann 
 
 Johannisfeuer 
 
 „ 21 
 
 Feb. 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 18 1 (New Play) . 
 
 The Backwater 
 
 >. 31 
 
 )) 
 
 II 
 
 4 
 
 19. Sheridan . 
 
 The Critic 
 
 Feb. 7 
 
 July 
 
 20 
 
 9 
 
 20. Yeats 
 
 The Countess Cathleen . 
 
 >. 13 
 
 J) 
 
 31 
 
 6 
 
 21. Jones 
 
 The Liars 
 
 » 23 
 
 1) 
 
 28 
 
 9 
 
 22. Shakespeare 
 
 Hamlet .... 
 
 „ 28 
 
 J) 
 
 25 
 
 19 
 
 23. ? (New Play) . 
 
 The Chiltern Hundreds . 
 
 Mar. 6 
 
 Aug. 
 
 I 
 
 43 
 
 24. Dumas fils 
 
 Francillon 
 
 .. 25 
 
 July 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 25. Robertson 
 
 Caste .... 
 
 April 6 
 
 )} 
 
 16 
 
 7 
 
 26. Shakespeare 
 
 Romeo and Juliet . 
 
 » 17 
 
 n 
 
 18 
 
 13 
 
 27. Brieux 
 
 La Robe Rouge 
 
 May 2 
 
 it 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 28. Jonsou 
 
 Every Man in his Humour 
 
 8 
 
 jy 
 
 25 
 
 7 
 
 29. ? (New Play) . 
 
 Hodge and the Vicar 
 
 .) 15 
 
 June 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 30. Carton 
 
 Lady Hunt worth's Ex- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 periment . 
 
 26 
 
 July 
 
 10 
 
 7 
 
 31. Shakespeare 
 
 As You Like It 
 
 June 3 
 
 J) 
 
 23 
 
 9 
 
 32. Pinero 
 
 Trelawny of the Wells . 
 
 ., 9 
 
 if 
 
 15 
 
 6 
 
 33. Maeterlinck 
 
 Pelleas and Melisande . 
 
 >. 19 
 
 )) 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 34. Bulwer Lytton 
 
 Money .... 
 
 July II 
 
 >) 
 
 14 
 
 2 
 
 
 Total . 
 
 363 
 
 ON 
 
 E-ACT AND TWO-ACT PLAYS. 
 
 
 
 Gilbert . 
 
 Sweethearts. 
 
 
 
 Yeats 
 
 The Land of Heart's Desire 
 
 
 
 Tennyson 
 
 The Falcon. 
 
 
 
 Hcrz and Wills 
 
 lolanthe. 
 
 
 
 Fenn 
 
 Judged by Appearances. 
 
 
 
 ? (New Play) 
 
 At the Dock Gates. 
 
 
 
 ? (New Play) 
 
 The Spartan. 
 

 
 REPERTORY CLASSIFIED 
 
 The specimen Repertory may be analysed as follows : — 
 
 New Plats : Performances. 
 
 Saint Cecilia . . . . . . 41 
 
 The Flight of the Duchess . 
 The Backwater . 
 The Chiltern Hundreds 
 Hodge and the Vicar 
 
 47 
 
 Elizabethan Comedy : 
 
 Every Man in his Humour . . 
 
 Restoration Comedy: 
 
 Love for Love ..... 
 Eighteenth Century Comedy : 
 
 The Critic 
 
 Nineteenth Century Comedy (before 1870) : 
 
 Caste ...... 
 
 Money ...... 
 
 Modern English Plays (since 1870) : 
 The Benefit of the Doubt . 
 Beau Austin .... 
 Tom Cobb .... 
 
 The Tyranny of Tears 
 The Importance of being Earnest 
 The Countess Cathleen 
 The Liars ..... 
 Lady Huntworth's Experiment . 
 Trelawny of the Wells 
 
 10 
 4 
 
 43 
 
 Revivals : 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hhakespeare : 
 
 King Eichard IL . 
 
 
 12 
 
 King Henry IV., Pt. I. 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 King Henry IV., Pt. II. 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 King Henry V. 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 The Tempest 
 
 
 
 
 31 
 
 The Taming of the Shrew 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 Hamlet 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 Romeo and Juliet 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 As You Like It 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 106 
 
 124 
 
 12 
 
 7 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 6 
 
 9 
 7 
 6 
 
 62
 
 48 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Eevivals : Pebformancbs. 
 
 Foreign Classic: 
 
 Don Juan ....... 7 
 
 Modern Foreign Plays : 
 French : 
 
 A Pair of Spectacles .... 3 
 
 Francillon ...... 10 
 
 La Robe Rouge ..... 7 
 
 Pelleas and Melisande .... 6 
 
 German : 
 
 Johannisfeuer 
 
 30 
 
 Grand total . 363* 
 
 It thus appears that 326 performances are devoted to 
 English plays — 37 to foreign plays; 106 performances are 
 devoted to new plays, 257 to revivals; 124 performances are 
 devoted to Shakespeare, 34 to old English plays, other than 
 Shakespeare, and 62 to revivals of recent English plays. 
 
 Our own criticism of this specimen season would be that 
 Shakespeare occupies rather too much space in it, and new 
 plays rather too little. Perhaps, in a normal season, the 
 
 * It may be of interest to summarise the repertory-list of the Tlieiitre-Frangais 
 during the season 1902-1903. Seven new plays in three or four acts were produced, 
 and were performed respectively 4, 5, 12, 16, 40, 41, and 84 times. Five new one-act 
 plays were produced. There were 6 important revivals, the plays in question being 
 performed respectively 2, 7, 8, 12, 14, and 15 times ; and there were 7 revivals of one- 
 act plays. Then, in the repertoire courant were included 14 tragedies, 32 comedies 
 in three, four, or five acts, and 19 comedies in one or two acts. Of the longer [days in 
 the repertoire cotirant, 3 were acted only once, 3 twice, 3 thrice, 5 four times, 8 five 
 times, 3 six times, 4 seven times, 4 eight times, i nine times, 5 ten times, 2 eleven 
 times, 2 twelve times, i thirteen times, i fourteen times, and i seventeen times. It 
 thus appears that 59 plays in three acts and over were performed, as against our 34, 
 and 31 plays in one or two acta, a^ against our 7. To account for these differences it 
 may be noted that the Theatre-Frangais gives 70 or 80 more performances in the year 
 than we have reckoned for, and that performances of two or three pieces in one 
 programme are the rule rather than the exception. It is quite common for a five- 
 act classical tragedy and a three-act or even five-act comedy to compose a single 
 programme.
 
 REPERTORY 
 
 49 
 
 lOO 
 
 proportions would be reversed — that is to say, about 
 Shakespearean performances would be given, and from 130 to 
 150 performances of new plays. As for the other elements 
 in the repertory, we believe that their proportions are pretty 
 fairly adjusted ; though the space given to non-Shakespearean 
 classics is smaller than it would probably become when the 
 repertory was thoroughly established. 
 
 We now give the order of performances, day by day, for 
 our specimen season of forty-six weeks : — 
 
 REPERTORY. 
 
 [When a play is performed for the first time, its name is printed in dark 
 type; when for the last time, in italics. An asterisk attached to the title of a 
 play shows that a front-piece or after-piece is given along with it.] 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Oct 
 
 Monday 
 
 IS . . . 
 
 . King Richard II. 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 16 . . . 
 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 17 (aft.) . 
 
 1st King Henry IV. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 18 . . . 
 
 . 2nd King Henry IV. 
 
 Friday 
 
 19 . . . 
 
 
 Saturday 
 
 20 (aft.) . 
 
 King Henry V. 
 
 Monday 
 
 22 . . . 
 
 . Richard II. 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 23 . . . 
 
 . The Benefit of the Doubt. 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 24 (aft) . 
 
 . The Benefit of the Doubt, 
 ist Henry IV. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 25 . . . 
 
 2nd Henry IV. 
 
 Friday 
 
 26 . . . 
 
 . The Benefit of the Doubt 
 
 Saturday 
 
 27 (aft) . 
 
 . Richard II. 
 Henry V. 
 
 Monday 
 
 29 . . . 
 
 . Beau Austin.* 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 30 . . . 
 
 . Beau Austin.* 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 I (aft) . 
 
 . ist Henry IV. 
 
 The Benefit of the Doubt. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 2 . . . 
 
 . Henry V. 
 
 Friday 
 
 3 • . . 
 
 . The Benefit of the Doubt (5th 
 time).
 
 50 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Oct. Saturday 4 (aft.) . 
 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 6 . . 
 
 7 ■ • 
 
 8 (aft.) 
 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 9 • • 
 
 10 . . 
 
 11 (aft.) 
 
 1» 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 13 • • 
 
 14 . . 
 
 15 (aft.) 
 
 >> 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 16 . . 
 
 17 . . 
 
 18 (aft.) 
 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 
 20 . . 
 
 21 . . 
 
 »» 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 22 (aft.) 
 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 23 ■ • 
 
 24 . . 
 
 25 (aft.) 
 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 27 . . 
 
 28 . . 
 
 29 (aft.) 
 
 Nov. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 30 . . 
 
 31 • • 
 
 I (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 3 . . 
 
 ,, Tuesday 4 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 5 (aft.) 
 
 2nd Henry IV. 
 
 Beau Austin.* 
 
 The Benefit of the Doubt 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilisi. 
 
 Beau Austin. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (5th 
 
 time). 
 Richard II. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia, 
 Beau Austin (5th time). 
 The Benefit of the Doubt. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia, 
 Tom Cobb,* 
 Tom Cobb.* 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (loth 
 
 time). 
 Richard II. (5th time). 
 Tom Cobb.* 
 ist Henry IV. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Benefit of the Doubt. 
 The Benefit of the Doubt. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 Heni-y V. (5th time). 
 Tom Cobb.* 
 Tom Cobb * (sth time). 
 
 Love for Love,* 
 
 Richard II. 
 
 Love for Love.* 
 
 Love for Love.* 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (15th 
 
 time). 
 Henry V.
 
 REPERTORY 
 
 51 
 
 Nov. Thursday 6 . 
 
 „ Friday 7 . . 
 
 ,, Saturday 8 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 10 . 
 
 ,, Tuesday 11. . 
 
 „ Wednesday 12 (aft.) 
 
 „ Thursday 13 . . 
 
 „ Friday 14 . . 
 
 „ Saturday 15 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 17 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 18 . . 
 
 ,, Wednesday 19 (aft.) 
 
 Thursday 20 . . 
 
 Friday 21 . 
 
 Saturday 22 (aft.) 
 
 Monday 24 . . 
 Tuesday 25 . . 
 
 Wednesday 26 (aft.) 
 
 Thursday 27 . 
 Friday 28 . . 
 
 Saturday 29 (aft.) 
 
 Dec. Monday 
 
 Tuesday 2 . 
 
 Wednesday 3 (aft.) 
 
 Love for Love.* 
 
 The Tyranny of Tears. 
 
 Love for Love (sth time). 
 
 New Play. Saint CecUia. 
 
 New Pky. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 ist Henry IV. (5th time). 
 
 ist Henry IV. 
 
 The Tyranny of Tears. 
 
 The Benefit of the Doubt (loth 
 
 time). 
 Love for Love.* 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 Tom Cohh * (6th time). 
 Richard II. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Tyranny of Tears. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (20th 
 
 time). 
 The Tyranny of Tears 
 
 time). 
 Don Juan.* 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 Don Juan.* 
 New Play. 
 New Play. 
 
 Duchess. 
 
 Don Juan.* 
 New Play. 
 
 Duchess. 
 Don Jiian.* 
 New Play. 
 
 Duchess. 
 New Play. 
 
 Duchess. 
 Henry V. 
 New Play. The Flight of the 
 
 Duchess (5th time). 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 New Play. The Flight of the 
 
 Duchess. 
 Richard II. 
 
 (4th 
 
 Saint Cecilia. 
 
 The Flight of the 
 
 The Flight of the 
 
 The Flight of the 
 The FHght of the
 
 52 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Dec. Thursday 4 . . . 
 
 Friday 5 . . . 
 
 Saturday 6 (aft.) . 
 
 Monday S . . , 
 
 Tuesday 9 . . , 
 
 Wednesday 10 (aft.) 
 
 „ Thursday 11 . 
 „ Friday 12 . . 
 
 „ Saturday 13 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 15 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 16 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 17 (aft.) 
 
 „ Thursday 18 . . 
 
 „ Friday 19 . . 
 
 ,, Saturday 20 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 22 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 23 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 24 (aft.) 
 
 „ Thursday 25 . . 
 
 „ Friday 26 (aft.) 
 
 „ Saturday 27 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 29 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 30 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 31 (aft.) 
 
 Jan. Thursday i . . 
 
 „ Friday 2 . . 
 
 New Play. The Flight of the 
 
 Duchess. 
 ist Henry IV. 
 Don Juan * (5th time). 
 
 The Importance of being 
 Earnest. 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 New Play. The Flight of the 
 Duchess. 
 
 The Importance of being Ear- 
 nest.* 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 Beau Austin.* 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (25th 
 
 time). 
 New Play. The Flight of the 
 
 Duchess. 
 The Tempest. 
 Don Juan.* 
 The Tempest. 
 Beaii, Austin * (7th time). 
 The Importance of being Earnest.* 
 The Tempest. 
 
 The Importance of being Earnest.* 
 Love for Love.* 
 The Tempest (5th time). 
 The Tempest. 
 The Benefit of the Doubt. 
 
 (Christmas Day). 
 ist Henry IV. (Boxing Day). 
 The Tempest 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Tempest. 
 The Tempest. 
 New Play. The Flight of the 
 
 Duchess (loth time). 
 The Tempest (loth time). 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Tempest. 
 The Tempest.
 
 REPERTORY 
 
 53 
 
 Jan. Saturday 3 (aft.) . 
 
 Feb. 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 5 • • • 
 
 6 . . . 
 
 7 (aft.) . 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 8 . . . 
 
 9 . . . 
 10 (aft.) . 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 
 12 . . . 
 
 13 . . . 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 14 (aft.) . 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 15 • • • 
 
 16 . . . 
 
 17 (aft.) . 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 19 . . . 
 
 20 . . . 
 
 21 (aft.) . 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 22 . . . 
 
 23 . . . 
 
 24 (aft.) . 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 26 . . . 
 
 27 . . . 
 
 28 (aft.) . 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 29 . . . 
 
 30 . . . 
 
 31 . . . 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 
 2 . . . 
 
 3 • • • 
 
 Wednesday 4 (aft.) 
 
 Richard II. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 A Pair of Spectacles.* 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 The Tempest (15th time). 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 Love for Love.* 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (30th 
 
 time). 
 The Tempest. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 A Pair of Spectacles.* 
 The Tempest (20th time). 
 A Pair of Spectacles* (3rd time). 
 The Taming of the Shrew. 
 The Tempest. 
 The Taming of the Shrew. 
 The Tempest. 
 Johannisfeuer. 
 The Taming of the Shrew. 
 The Tempest. 
 Johannisfeuer. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Tempest. 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Tempest (25th time). 
 The Taming of the Shrew. 
 Johannisfeuer. 
 The Tempest 
 The Importance of being Earnest * 
 
 (5th time). 
 
 New Play. The Backwater. 
 
 New Play. The Backwater. 
 The Taming of the Shrew (5th 
 
 time). 
 The Taming of the Shrew. 
 Johannisfeuer (4th time).
 
 54 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Feb. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 5 • • • 
 
 . New Play. The Backwater. 
 
 >» 
 
 Friday 
 
 6 . . . 
 
 . New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 11 
 
 Saturday 
 
 7 (aft.) . 
 
 . The Tempest. 
 The Critic* 
 
 t> 
 
 Monday 
 
 9 . . . 
 
 . The Taming of the Shrew. 
 
 ij 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 lO . . . 
 
 . The Critic* 
 
 I) 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 II (aft.) . 
 
 • New Play. The Backwater (4th 
 time). 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (3sth 
 
 time). 
 
 fi 
 
 Thursday 
 
 12 . . . 
 
 . The Critic* 
 
 it 
 
 Friday 
 
 13 . . . 
 
 . The Countess Cathleen. 
 
 »> 
 
 Saturday 
 
 14 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 The Tempe.st. 
 
 »> 
 
 Monday 
 
 16 . . . 
 
 . New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 11 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 17 . . . 
 
 . The Countess Cathleeu. 
 
 i» 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 18 (aft.) . 
 
 . The Critic* 
 ist Henry IV. 
 
 If 
 
 Thursday 
 
 19 . . . 
 
 . The Countess Cathleen. 
 
 »> 
 
 Friday 
 
 20 . . . 
 
 . New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 i> 
 
 Saturday 
 
 21 (aft.) 
 
 . The Taming of the Shrew. 
 The Critic * (sth time). 
 
 I) 
 
 Monday 
 
 23 . . . 
 
 . The Liars. 
 
 11 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 24 . . . 
 
 . New Play. Saint Cecilia. 
 
 » 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 25 (aft.) . 
 
 . The Countess Cathleen. 
 The Critic* 
 
 II 
 
 Thursday 
 
 26 . . . 
 
 . The Liars. 
 
 II 
 
 Friday 
 
 27 . . . 
 
 . The Taming of the Shiew. 
 
 II 
 
 Saturday 
 
 28 (aft.) . 
 
 . The Liars. 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 !arch 
 
 Monday 
 
 2 . . . 
 
 . The Critic* 
 
 II 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 3 • •• 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 II 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 4 (aft.) . 
 
 . The Liars. 
 
 Tlie Countess Cathleen (5th time). 
 
 II 
 
 Thursday 
 
 5 • • • 
 
 . Hamlet. 
 
 •1 
 
 Friday 
 
 6 . . , 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltem 
 Hundreds. 
 
 •1 
 
 Saturday 
 
 7 (aft.) . 
 
 . Hamlet. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 » 
 
 Monday 
 
 9 . . . 
 
 . Hamlet (5th time).
 
 REPERTORY 
 
 55 
 
 March. 
 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 10 . 
 
 11 (aft.) 
 
 Thursday 
 
 Friday 
 
 Saturday 
 
 Monday 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 Thursday 
 Friday 
 
 12 . . 
 
 13 • ■ 
 
 14 (aft.) 
 
 16 . . 
 
 17 . . 
 
 18 (aft.) 
 
 19 . . 
 
 20 . 
 
 Saturday 21 (aft.) 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 Thursday 
 Friday 
 
 23 • • 
 
 24 . . 
 
 25 (aft.) 
 
 26 . . 
 
 27 . . 
 
 Saturday 28 (aft.) 
 
 April. 
 
 Monday 
 Tuesday 
 Wednesday 
 
 30 . . 
 
 31 • . 
 
 I (aft.) 
 
 The Chiltern Hun- 
 
 The Chiltern Hun- 
 
 The Liars (5 th time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 New Play, 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play. 
 
 dreds (5th time). 
 
 The Critic* 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 The Liars. 
 
 Richard II. (loth time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 ist Henry IV. (loth time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (loth time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 The Taming of the Shrew (loth 
 time). 
 
 Francillon. 
 
 Francillon. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play, 
 dreds. 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 New Play, 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play. 
 
 dreds (15th time) 
 
 Francillon 
 
 Hamlet (loth time) 
 
 The Chiltern Hun- 
 
 The Chiltern Hun- 
 
 The Chiltern Hun-
 
 56 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 April. Thursday 2 . . 
 „ Friday 3 . . 
 
 „ Saturday 4 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 6 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 7 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 8 (aft.) 
 
 „ Thursday g . . 
 ,, Friday 10 . . 
 
 „ Saturday 1 1 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 13 (aft) 
 „ Tuesday 14 . . 
 „ Wednesday 15 (aft.) 
 
 ,, Thursday 16 . . 
 „ Friday 17 . . 
 
 „ Saturday 18 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 20 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 21 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 22 (aft.) 
 
 ,, Thursday 23 . . 
 
 „ Friday 24 . . 
 
 „ Satiu-day 25 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 27 . . 
 
 2nd Henry IV. 
 
 New Play. The ChUtern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Francillon. 
 
 Caste.* 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 Caste.* 
 
 (Good Friday.) 
 
 Francillon (5th time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (20th time). 
 
 Hamlet. (Easter Monday.) 
 
 The Taming of the Shrew. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 The Liars. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Francillon. 
 
 Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 Caste.* 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Richard II. (Shakespeare 
 Week.) 
 
 The Tempest. 
 
 The Taming of the Shrew, 
 
 ist Henry IV. 
 
 Hamlet. (Shakespeare's birth- 
 day.) 
 
 2nd Henry IV (^th. time). 
 
 Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 Henry V. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds.
 
 REPERTORY 
 
 57 
 
 April. 
 
 May. 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 28 
 
 . . . 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (25th time). 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 29 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. The ChUtern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 Francillon. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 30 
 
 • ■ 
 
 , Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 Friday 
 
 I 
 
 
 . Hamlet. 
 
 Saturday 
 
 2 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 La Robe Rouge. 
 
 Monday 
 
 4 
 
 . 
 
 La Robe Rouge. 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 5 
 
 
 . The Liars. 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 6 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . Hamlet (15th time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dred.s. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 7 
 
 > • • 
 
 . La Robe Rouge. 
 
 Friday 
 
 8 
 
 
 . Every Man in His Humour. 
 
 Saturday 
 
 9 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 Romeo and Juliet (5th time). 
 
 Monday 
 
 II 
 
 • . • 
 
 . Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 12 
 
 . . . 
 
 . New Play. The ChUtern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 13 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . Caste.* 
 Hamlet. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 14 
 
 
 . Every Man in His Humour. 
 
 Friday 
 
 IS 
 
 
 . New Play. Hodge and the 
 Vicar. 
 
 Satui-day 
 
 16 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . La Robe Rouge. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (30th time). 
 
 Monday 
 
 18 
 
 . . . 
 
 . New Play. Hodge and the 
 Vicar. 
 
 Tuesday 
 
 19 
 
 ■ ■ • 
 
 , Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 Wednesday 
 
 20 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 Every Man in His Humour. 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Thursday 
 
 21 
 
 • ■ • 
 
 , New Play. Hodge and the Vicar. 
 
 Friday 
 
 22 
 
 • • • 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Saturday 
 
 23 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. Hodge and the Vicar. 
 Hamlet.
 
 58 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 tfay. Monday 
 
 25 
 
 . 
 
 . La Robe Rouge (5th time). 
 
 „ Tuesday 
 
 26 
 
 . . . 
 
 . Lady Huntworth's Experi- 
 ment. 
 
 „ Wednesday 
 
 27 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 New Play. Hodge and the 
 Vicar (5th time). 
 
 „ Thursday 
 
 28 
 
 • 
 
 . Lady Huntworth's Experiment. 
 
 „ Friday 
 
 29 
 
 . . . 
 
 . New Play. Hodge and the 
 Vicar. 
 
 „ Saturday 
 
 30 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 Every Man in His Humour. 
 
 June. Monday 
 
 I 
 
 • • • 
 
 Lady Huntworth's Experiment. 
 
 „ Tuesday 
 
 2 
 
 • • • 
 
 . New Play. Hodge and the 
 Vicar. 
 
 „ Wednesday 
 
 3 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 As You Like It. 
 
 „ Thursday 
 
 4 
 
 • • • 
 
 . As You Like It. 
 
 „ Friday 
 
 5 
 
 • • • 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (3sth time). 
 
 „ Saturday 
 
 6 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . Francillon. 
 As You Like It. 
 
 „ Monday 
 
 8 
 
 • • • 
 
 . Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 „ Tuesday 
 
 9 
 
 
 . Trelawny of the Wells. 
 
 „ Wednesday 
 
 10 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . New Play. Hodge and the Vicar 
 (8th time). 
 Lady Huntworth's Experiment. 
 
 „ Thursday 
 
 II 
 
 . . • 
 
 . Trelawny of the Wells. 
 
 „ Friday 
 
 12 
 
 • • • 
 
 . Every Man in His Humour (5th 
 time). 
 
 „ Saturday 
 
 13 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . As You Like It. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 „ Monday 
 
 IS 
 
 . . 
 
 . Trelawny of the Wells. 
 
 „ Tuesday 
 
 16 
 
 • • • 
 
 . New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 „ Wednesday 
 
 17 
 
 (aft.) . 
 
 . As You Like It (5 th time). 
 Trelawny of the Wells. 
 
 „ Thursday 
 
 18 
 
 . • 
 
 . Caste (5th time). 
 
 „ Friday 
 
 '9 
 
 • • 
 
 . Pelleas and Melisande.
 
 REPERTORY 
 
 59 
 
 June. Saturday 20 (aft.) 
 
 Monday 
 
 
 Tuesday 23 . . 
 Wednesday 24 (aft.) 
 
 
 Thursday 25 . . 
 Friday 26 . . 
 
 »j 
 
 Saturday 27 (aft.) 
 
 
 Monday 29 . . 
 Tuesday 30 . . 
 
 iiy- 
 
 Wednesday i (aft.) 
 
 >> 
 
 Thursday 2 . . 
 
 
 Friday 3 . . 
 Saturday 4 (aft.) 
 
 Monday 6 . . 
 
 Tuesday 7 . . 
 
 Wednesday 8 (aft.) 
 
 Thursday 9 . . 
 
 Friday 10 . 
 
 Saturday n (aft.) 
 
 Monday 13 , . 
 
 Tuesday 14 . . 
 
 Wednesday 15 (aft.) 
 
 Thursday 16 . . 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Romeo and Juliet (loth time). 
 
 Lady Huntworth's Experiment 
 (loth time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (40th time). 
 
 Pelleas and Melisande.* 
 
 Trelawny of the Wells (sth 
 time). 
 
 Pelleas and Melisande.* 
 
 As You Like It. 
 
 As You Like It. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 
 Pelleas and Meli.sande.* 
 
 Eomeo and Juliet. 
 
 Pelleas and Melisande * (5th 
 time). 
 
 Every Man in His Humour. 
 
 Lady Huntworth's Experiment. 
 
 La Robe Rouge. 
 
 Pelleas arid Mdisande* (6th 
 time). 
 
 Francillon. 
 
 As You Like It. 
 
 La Robe Rouge (7 th time). 
 
 Romeo and Juliet. 
 
 Lady Huntworth's Experiment 
 (7th time). 
 
 Caste.* 
 
 Money. 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds. 
 Money (2nd time). 
 Richard II. (12th time). 
 Trelawny of the Wells (6th time). 
 Caste* (7th time).
 
 6o 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 July. Friday 17 . . 
 
 ,, Satui'day 18 (aft.) 
 
 „ Monday 20 . . 
 
 „ Tuesday 21 . . 
 
 „ Wednesday 22 . . 
 
 Thursday 23 . . 
 Friday 24 . . 
 
 Saturday 25 (aft) 
 
 Monday 27 . . 
 Tuesday 28 . . 
 Wednesday 29 (aft.) 
 
 Thursday 30 . , 
 
 „ Friday 
 Aug. Saturday 
 
 31 
 
 I (aft.) 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (40th 
 time). 
 
 ist Henry IV. (12th time). 
 
 Romeo and Juliet (13th time). 
 
 The Critic * (9th time). 
 
 Henry V. (loth time). 
 
 New Play. Saint Cecilia (41st 
 time). 
 
 Francillon (loth time). 
 
 As You Like It (9th time). 
 
 The Benefit of the Doubt (12th 
 time). 
 
 Evert/ Man in His Humour (7th 
 time). 
 
 Hamlet (19th time). 
 
 Love for Love (9th time), 
 
 Tlie Liars (9th time). 
 
 The Tempest (30th time). 
 
 Don Juan* (7th time). 
 
 The Taming of the Shrew (13th 
 time). 
 
 The Countess Cathleen (6th time). 
 
 New Play. The Chiltern Hun- 
 dreds (43rd time). 
 
 The Tempest (31st time).
 
 SECTION V 
 
 Expenses in Front of the House — Refreshments — Music. 
 
 In presenting our estimate of expenses " in front of the 
 house," we have only one comment to make. The reader 
 who examines our proposed system of Subscription Booking 
 (Appendix C) may be disposed to think that it will demand 
 a larger booking-office staff than we have allowed. After 
 giving the matter careful thought, however, we believe that this 
 is not the case. When once the system was in working order, 
 the subscription seats could be allotted and distributed very 
 quickly. Monday afternoon (according to our arrangement in 
 Rule 7, p. 142) would, doubtless, be a busy time at the 
 Theatre ; and the services of the whole secretarial staff, 
 except the Director's Secretary, might have to be requisi- 
 tioned ; but the work of the remainder of the week would 
 be proportionately lightened. On the whole, we believe that 
 the system would mean economy in box-office work rather 
 than the reverse. 
 
 Salaries ix Front of the House. 
 
 Acting Manager 1 ....... jC3°° ° 
 
 Box-office : — 
 
 ist Clerk 1 250 o 
 
 2nd Clerk 1 ....... 200 o 
 
 3rd Clerk- ....... 75 o 
 
 ' Entitled to privileges of Pension Fund. 
 - Also Upper Circle Money-taker.
 
 62 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Salaries in Front of the Hoi 
 
 "SE — ( 
 
 •ontinued. 
 
 
 Secretarial Staff : — 
 
 
 
 Director's Secretary 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 Two Typists at ^2 a week . 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 Two Typists at j£i, 10s. a week 
 
 
 
 ISO 
 
 
 
 Three Money-takers at ;^i a week . 
 
 
 
 150 
 
 
 
 Five Check-takers at ;^i a week^ . 
 
 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 Housekeeper 
 
 
 
 125 
 
 
 
 Ten Cleaners at los. 6d. a week - . 
 
 
 
 262 
 
 10 
 
 Three Firemen at ^2 a week . 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 Hall Porter 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 
 
 Assistant to Hall Porter . 
 
 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 Twelve Ushers at i6s. a week . 
 
 
 
 4S0 
 
 
 
 Eight Cloakroom Attendants at i6s. a week 
 
 
 320 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 • 
 
 £zzn 
 
 10 
 
 The Refreshment Rooms ought, if properly managed, to 
 bring in a substantial revenue. The extravagant prices and 
 execrable quality of the refreshments supplied at most London 
 theatres constitute one of the scandals and stupidities of the 
 present system. At many theatres the refreshment-contractor 
 is also licensed to demand sixpence for a playbill covered 
 with advertisements, and for the privilege of depositing an 
 overcoat or umbrella at the cloak-room. All these abuses 
 would of course be done away with. The refreshment-room 
 would no longer be a mere drinking-bar, but more like a 
 comfortable and well-managed tea-room — with a license. At 
 the theatre bar of to-day, nothing is to be had to eat, except, 
 perhaps, a few macaroons and stale sponge-cakes. This is 
 a great mistake. At afternoon performances, in particular, 
 
 ' Men in uniform, employed at the end of the performance as linkmen. 
 
 - This (current) rate is too low ; but as 7 or 8 of the cleaners would also be em- 
 ployed as dressers (see p. 67) the figure here stated is probably in excess of what would 
 actually have to be paid under this head, even if the wages for cleaning alone were 
 considerably increased.
 
 MUSIC 63 
 
 there would certainly be a good demand for light eatables 
 of many descriptions, attractively and comfortably served, at 
 moderate prices. The management would, of course, keep 
 this department in its own control ; and as the public would 
 be in every way encouraged to leave the auditorium between 
 the acts, the refreshment-rooms would doubtless do a thriving 
 trade. We believe that we are within the mark in estimating 
 the profit at _^iooo a year, which sum we accordingly set off 
 against our total expenses. (See p. 103.) 
 
 In many continental theatres, part of the ground-floor of the 
 building is occupied by a cafd-restaurant, distinct from the 
 theatre, and usually let to a private caterer. Such a restaurant, 
 whether let or retained in the hands of the management, would 
 be a very desirable adjunct to this Theatre, as it would be found 
 a great convenience by those habitual frequenters whom the 
 management ought to make every endeavour to attract. (See 
 remarks on the subscription system, pp. 85 and 140.) The 
 site might or might not be large enough to allow of the in- 
 clusion of a restaurant in the building ; and even if it were 
 large enough, there seems to be some doubt as to whether the 
 County Council regulations would not stand in the way of the 
 scheme. This double uncertainty naturally debars us from 
 reckoning on the restaurant as a source of revenue ; but should 
 it prove possible it would certainly prove profitable. 
 
 Salaries of Musical Staff. 
 
 Conductor ^ . jQ 600 
 
 Twelve Bandsmen at ^150 a year . . . 1800 
 Twelve Bandsmen at _;^ 1 25 a year . , . 1500 
 
 Total , , ;!£^39oo 
 * Entitled to privileges of Pension Fund.
 
 64 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 At the Th^S.tre-Fran§ais, and indeed at most of the leading 
 theatres of France and Germany, interact music is altogether 
 dispensed with. We considered the possibility of following 
 this example, but decided not to do so. The innovation would, 
 no doubt, be welcomed by many people ; but the majority would 
 as yet be opposed to it. Nor, in a theatre where Shakespeare 
 was constantly in the bill, would the abolition of interact music 
 mean any considerable economy. In most of Shakespeare's plays 
 a certain amount of music is absolutely indispensable. A com- 
 petent musical staff would therefore have to be provided ; and 
 any attempt to secure the services of this stajQf intermittently, for 
 Shakespearean nights alone, would result in inefficiency without 
 economy. It must therefore be a permanent staff; and there 
 would clearly be no economy in leaving it unemployed on nights 
 when its services were not absolutely necessary. At the same 
 time, there is no doubt that many people sincerely dislike to have 
 irrelevant music thrust upon them between the acts of a play 
 which demands no musical accompaniment. By way of meeting 
 all tastes, then, we propose that only " incidental music " — that 
 is, music specially composed for a play, and believed to be par- 
 ticularly appropriate to it — shall be performed by the orchestra 
 in its usual place in the auditorium (or beneath the stage) ; and 
 that, when plays are being given which neither possess nor admit 
 of " incidental music," the orchestra shall play between the acts, 
 not in the auditorium, but in the Saloon.^ This system will have 
 the advantage of giving people an extra inducement to leave the 
 auditorium between the acts ; while those can always remain in 
 it who do not wish to have the continuity of their emotion in- 
 terrupted — or their conversation drowned — by music. In order 
 
 ' An overture, before the rise of the curtain, might or might not be performed in 
 the auditorium.
 
 MUSIC 65 
 
 that this system may work satisfactorily, the Saloon must be 
 designed in two storeys, as it were — the main hall being devoted 
 to the occupants of the stalls and first circle, while the galleries 
 or loggias round it shall accommodate the public of the upper 
 tiers. Refreshments, as above indicated, would be served in 
 rooms opening off the Saloon. If the system were properly 
 carried out, audiences would soon come to regard the interacts, 
 not as necessary inflictions, but as a substantive element in the 
 pleasures of the evening.
 
 SECTION VI 
 
 Expenses behind the Scenes — System of Producing. 
 
 In this Section we estimate the salaries of all employees behind 
 the scenes, other than those who appear on the stage. Salaries 
 alone are included ; the cost of materials, &c., in the Scene-room 
 and Wardrobe departments will be found in the next Section, 
 under the head of " General Expenses." 
 
 Salaries behind the Scenes. 
 
 Stage-Manager! 
 
 Head-Prompter and Librarian ^ . . . 
 
 Three Under-Prompters at £ioo a year . 
 TwoCall-Boys. ... ... 
 
 Two Producers 1 at ;^7 50 a year 
 Producing fees to actors who may undertake produc 
 tions ........ 
 
 Scene-Room StaflP : ^ — 
 
 Principal Scenic Artist* .... 
 
 Second Scenic Artist 1 .... 
 
 Two Labourers at ^^75 a year . 
 Wardrobe Staff :— 
 
 Chief of Wardrobe * .... 
 
 First Assistant ^ 
 
 Second Assistant ..... 
 
 Wardrobe Mistress ^ .... 
 
 Extra workers not permanently employed 
 
 ^600 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 1500 
 
 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 150 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 700 
 
 
 
 ' Entitled to privileges of Pension Fund. 
 
 ^ The Principal Scenic Artist would have the right to take pupils. 
 
 66
 
 BEHIND THE SCENES 
 
 Salaeies behind the Scenes — continued. 
 
 Carpenter's Staff : ' — 
 
 Master Carpenter^ .... 
 
 Six Daymen at ^^i, 4s. a week 
 
 Five Nightmen ' at _;^i a week 
 
 Twenty Nightmen at i6b. a week 
 Property Staff : — 
 
 Property Master and Modeller ' 
 
 Head Dayman ..... 
 
 Three Daymen at _;^i, 4s. a week 
 
 Seven Nightmen at i6s. a week 
 Engineer's Staff : — 
 
 Chief Electrician ^ . . . . 
 
 One Dayman at ^2, los. a week 
 
 One Cleaner at ;^i, 4s. a week . 
 
 Six Nightmen at 1 6a a week . 
 Fifteen Dressers at 16s. a week 
 Extra payments to Nightmen and Dressers for an 
 
 average of 2 dress-rehearsals a week 
 Stage-Doorkeeper 2 ..... 
 Assistant Stage-Doorkeeper * . 
 
 67 
 
 Total 
 
 £230 
 
 
 
 360 
 
 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 Soo 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 125 
 
 
 
 180 
 
 
 
 280 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 125 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 
 
 160 
 
 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 542 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 75 
 
 
 
 £\o,2Ti 10 
 
 It will be observed that for the production of pla3's we 
 have provided by the appointment of two " Producers " and 
 the allotment of a sum for special fees to actors of the com- 
 pany who may undertake occasional productions. The assign- 
 ment of certain productions to actors of the company (who, 
 
 ' To those accustomed to the mechanical conditions generally prevalent in English 
 theatres, the Carpenter's Staff and Property Staff may seem unduly small. It must 
 be remembered that we assume the stage to be fitted with labour-saving appliances, at 
 present scarcely known in England, and that we contemplate a considerable simplifi- 
 cation of the scenery that will have to be handled. See Section VII. p. 72. More- 
 over, the more permanent conditions of employment which would obtain in this as in 
 other dejiartments of the Theatre would in time, perhaps, get rid of some of the labour- 
 wasting specialisations of function which now exist. 
 
 2 Entitled to privileges of Pension Fund. 
 
 ' Two headmen on stage, two headmen in flies, one headman in cellar. 
 
 * Also employed in front of the house.
 
 68 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 of course, must in no case themselves have any part in the 
 productions in question) has this advantage among others, that 
 it enables the management to obtain variety in methods of 
 production, while attaching to the Theatre actors of great value 
 in particular parts, whose range might be too limited to assure 
 them adequate employment without the aid of a supplemen- 
 tary activity, such as that of producing. Such actors are often 
 good producers of difficult plays, and, as a leaven to the 
 general mass, may prove of great value to the Theatre. The 
 number of performances guaranteed to such an actor in his 
 contract would be small, but it should be understood that his 
 whole income would be brought up to a certain minimum, 
 either by extra performances or by the fees for one or two 
 productions. Experience would soon show how these fees 
 could most conveniently be regulated — whether in the shape 
 of a lump sum for each production, or a fee for each full 
 rehearsal. 
 
 Of the two Producers, one would probably be mainly 
 employed upon rhetorical and costume plays, the other upon 
 modern and realistic plays. It is needless to speculate 
 whether this would grow into a hard-and-fast distinction. 
 
 Though the functions of the Producer include what is 
 commonly • known as stage-management — the regulation of 
 entrances, exits, positions, business, &c. — the Stage-Manager, 
 properly so called, is wholly distinct from the Producer of 
 a play. 
 
 The routine of a play's production will be somewhat as 
 follows : — Upon the decision of the Heading Committee to 
 produce or revive a play, the date of its first performance 
 will be fixed (approximately at any rate) by the Director, 
 probably in consultation with the Business Manager and the
 
 PRODUCING 69 
 
 Stage-Manager. The Director will then select a Producer, 
 and the book of the play will be handed over to him. One 
 of the three under-prompters will also be allotted to him as his 
 lieutenant, to take charge of all the minor details. Although 
 the Producer must, of course, be in constant touch with the 
 Stage-Manager, the latter's active responsibility for the pro- 
 duction will not begin until it reaches the dress-rehearsal period. 
 The Stage-Manager's lieutenant, the Head-Prompter, being in 
 charge of the stage and rehearsal-room, will have to arrange the 
 time-table of rehearsals. 
 
 The Director will cast the play in consultation with the 
 Producer. When the Producer has thought out his scheme 
 of production, he will again consult with the Director, and 
 this time also with the Stage-Manager, the Scene-Painter, 
 and the head of the wardrobe. At this juncture the Pro- 
 ducer's ideas will be liable to criticism and modification, the 
 last word on any disputed point lying always with the Director. 
 The plan of production will at this stage be laid down in 
 as much detail as possible. 
 
 Eehearsals will begin, and although the Director, over- 
 seeing everything, may attend one or two, he will probably 
 reserve all official criticism till a later period. The Producer, 
 at all events, wiU be solely responsible for the play until the 
 dress- and scene-rehearsals begin. The Stage-Manager's con- 
 trol of the play begins with the first fuU-dress rehearsal. He 
 is responsible for all the mechanical work on the stage. The 
 Producer retains artistic authority, subject to the official criti- 
 cism of the Director. 
 
 No excision or alteration in the text of a play may be 
 made, either before or after production, except in consulta- 
 tion between the Producer and the Director. In the case of
 
 70 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 an original modern play, the author's rights in this matter — 
 and on all other matters concerning the production — will of 
 course be determined, by his contract with the Theatre. 
 
 Some authors will no doubt produce their own plays. In 
 such cases they might either be treated in all respects as 
 official producers; or an actor-producer might be assigned to 
 them as advisory assistant. 
 
 The Producer's responsibility for a play does not end 
 with its production. He must if possible attend any extra 
 rehearsals occasioned by a change of cast, or by a perfor- 
 mance taking place after an interval of some weeks. He 
 remains until the end of the season artistically in charge of 
 a play which he has produced. 
 
 Understudy rehearsals would be conducted by the Head- 
 Prompter, assisted by the under-prompter attached to the 
 play. It would be the Head-Prompter's duty, as Librarian, 
 to have in charge, after production, the prompt copies and 
 scene-models of a play, and he would be expected to make 
 himself acquainted with the main lines of its business. He 
 should be able to conduct a plain rehearsal of any play in 
 the repertory — such a rehearsal as would give a newcomer ease 
 among an established cast. 
 
 There should be one full understudy rehearsal of every 
 play, which the Producer of the play should attend. 
 
 In the case of revivals of plays performed in past seasons, 
 the Producer would of course have access to all existing 
 prompt-books. He must, however, create a prompt-book of 
 his own, which will be endorsed with his name, and will re- 
 main the property of the Theatre. The careful and intelligent 
 marking of these books would be a most important matter.
 
 SECTION VII 
 
 General Expenses : Scenery, Dresses, Lighting, Advertising, &c. 
 
 Under the head of General Expenses we include all items of 
 outlay, both before and behind the scenes, which do not take 
 the form of salaries, and are chargeable to the profit-and-loss 
 account of the Theatre. It will be remembered that rates, taxes, 
 insurance premium, and the cost of repairs to the building, fix- 
 tures, furniture, machinery, &c. (as distinct from scenery and 
 properties employed on the stage), are assumed to be covered 
 by the endowment of the Theatre. They are met (according to 
 our scheme — see Section XII.) by the interest on the Guarantee 
 Fund. If at any time the Guarantee Fund fell so low that the 
 interest on it did not cover these items of outlay, the deficit 
 would have to be charged to the General Expenses. 
 
 Geneeal Expenses. 
 
 Scenery (materials and making) , 
 Furniture and Properties .... 
 Costumes : — 
 
 Modern Plays (ladies' dresses) 
 
 Costume Plays (materials) . , 
 Wigs (contract) ...... 
 
 Electric Light (whole house) at jC^o a week 
 Electric limes (average of 15' lights, at i8s. a week 
 Heating, and (if necessary) gas . 
 Advertising ...... 
 
 Printing (repertory-lists for Subscribers, window-bills, 
 playbills, booking-sheets, and tickets), at ;^i2 a week 
 Stationery and Petty Cash (postages, &c.),at_;^2oa week 
 Special Production Expenses (see p. xxi) 
 
 Total 
 
 7« 
 
 each) 
 
 838 
 
 2,480 
 960 
 
 350 
 
 1,500 
 
 67s 
 
 150 
 
 2,500 
 
 600 
 
 1,000 
 
 1.569 
 
 • ;>^i4,oSO
 
 72 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Our estimate of expenses connected with scenery may seem 
 surprisingly low, in contrast to the gigantic outlay which 
 managers are said to incur in placing, for example, a great 
 " Shakespearean revival " on the stage. There is generally 
 some exaggeration in these rumours ; but it is no doubt pos- 
 sible for a manager to spend a great deal of money in having 
 scenery specially built and painted, by contract, for each new 
 production at his theatre — scenery which is largely unadaptable 
 to any other production, and unusable on any other stage than 
 his own. Storage, too, is so expensive that, unless a scene is 
 quite certain to be used again in very much its original shape, 
 it does not pay to keep it ; and the result is that a large propor- 
 tion of the scenery painted in London to-day is sold, after its 
 first " run " is over, for its value in wood and canvas. But this 
 wasteful method is not that actually employed at the most suc- 
 cessful theatres, and it would certainly not be employed at the 
 Theatre we are outlining. 
 
 Scenery might be " made," * under the supervision of a second 
 Master Carpenter, in workshops belonging to the Theatre ; but 
 it is doubtful whether this would mean any economy upon the 
 contract price here allowed for. It would be painted by the 
 regularly employed scene-room staflF. Moreover, waste would be 
 reduced to a minimum by the plan of building to certain standard 
 proportions every piece of scenery and every " rostrum " or other 
 structure used on the stage (which must have no " rake " in it), 
 thus securing great interchangeability of parts. In the course of 
 an average year's working, then, at least as much labour would 
 probably go to the repainting and adapting of old scenery as to 
 the manufacture of new. It is quite possible to have scenery of 
 
 ' It is scarcely necessary to point out the distinction between the making of a scene 
 — its construction in wood and canvas — and the painting of it.
 
 SCENERY 73 
 
 great beauty and perfect appropriateness without having recourse 
 to those massive and costly constructions with which the stage 
 is now so often encumbered. The ideal to be aimed at is not 
 that the disclosure of the scene, on the rise of the curtain, should 
 be greeted with " Oh's ! " " Ah's ! " and rounds of applause, 
 but that, as the action progresses, the audience should feel, 
 perhaps subconsciously, the unobtrusive harmony of the scenic 
 background. 
 
 The method by which our estimate is attained is this : We 
 have calculated the number of scenes necessary for the mounting 
 of the first year's repertory, and find them to be (approximately) 
 eighty-six full sets and thirty front cloths. The cost of " mak- 
 ing " (as distinct from painting) the sets would vary considerably, 
 but after careful inquiry we believe that we may fairly average 
 it at ;^6o a set ; while the front cloths could be made at ^5 each. 
 This gives us a total of ^5160 for the making of sets, and ;^I50 
 for the making of cloths — in all, ;^53io. Reckoning, then, the 
 average period of service of a piece of scenery at four years, in 
 order to find the annual expense of " making " sufficient to keep 
 the stock up to this level, we divide ;^53io by 4, and arrive in 
 round numbers at the sum of ;i^i328. This figure, then, repre- 
 sents the contract cost of one year's construction of scenery. 
 The painting is, of course, provided for in the scene-room 
 salaries (.2^1050); and these two sums, together with ;i{^ioo for 
 scene-room materials (paint, size, brushes, &c.), represent the 
 whole annual outlay for scenery — namely, jC2^'/S. 
 
 Our estimate for costumes was a somewhat more complex 
 matter. Here we had, in the first place, to distinguish between 
 the costumes for " costume " plays, which would be made in the 
 Theatre, and ladies' dresses for modem plays, which would not. 
 
 Let us take the latter first. After a great deal of discussion
 
 74 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 and consultation of authorities, we determined, in this as in 
 other cases, to adopt an outside estimate. We concluded that 
 the ladies' dresses for the modem new plays of our specimen 
 season might be set down at ;i^iioo, and the ladies' dresses for 
 the modern revivals at ^2000, making ;^3ioo in all. Then 
 came the question how much of this sum would be chargeable 
 to the current expenses of a normal season. In order to answer 
 this question we had to estimate the value of the dresses — not, 
 of course, their selling value, but their value to the Theatre — 
 after a season's use. Here, again, we took an outside estimate, 
 and concluded that they would be depreciated by four-fifths, or, 
 in other words, worth only one-fifth of what they had cost. On 
 these assumptions, then, the amount chargeable to a single 
 season worked out at ;i^248o. 
 
 This figure we put down rather in deference to criticism 
 than as representing our own judgment. We believe that both 
 the total estimate and the estimate for depreciation are too 
 high. For this particular season, indeed, the total estimate may 
 not be excessive ; but, as we have pointed out on p. 42, it must 
 be remembered that in this season the drawing-room play, with 
 its lavish millinery, occupies a much larger space than it pro- 
 bably would in a normal season, after the Theatre had been 
 some years at work. Drawing-room plays, both new and re- 
 vived, would no doubt continue to hold a certain place in the 
 repertory ; but, on the other hand, many modern plays would 
 be produced (and in course of time revived) which not only 
 might, but must, be quite inexpensively dressed. Again, as to 
 depreciation, it is of course true that the remaking and adapting 
 which are possible in the case of historical costumes are prac- 
 tically impossible in the case of modem dresses. But a con- 
 siderable number of dresses could certainly be carried forward.
 
 COSTUMES 75 
 
 unaltered, from one season to the next. In our specimen 
 season, for instance, The Importance of being Earnest is re- 
 vived and acted 5 times. Suppose that the Director put it up 
 again for 5 or 10 performances in the following season — is it 
 to be imagined that he could not do so without re-dressing 
 it? Dowdiness or shabbiness of costume would, of course, be 
 out of the question ; but it would soon come to be understood 
 that, while new productions of the drawing-room order would 
 be " gowned " in the latest mode, modern plays which formed 
 part of the current repertory would not be re-gowned season by 
 season, in exact observance of every fluctuation of fashion. It 
 would be part of the Director's business to decide when the 
 costumes in a modern play had (apart from wear and tear) 
 become so obsolete as to require renewal. 
 
 For these reasons we believe that our total estimate for 
 modem dresses might be considerably reduced for the purposes 
 of a normal season, and that the depreciation might fairly be 
 put down at two-thirds instead of four-fifths. 
 
 As regards historical costumes (to be made in the Theatre) 
 our method was this : we obtained an estimate for the costumes 
 required in all the old plays of our specimen season, supposing 
 them to be made by contract under present conditions, though 
 not, of course, with the profuse employment of costly materials 
 which characterises a long-run spectacular revival. The estimate 
 amounted to /8860. From this we deducted 25 per cent. 
 (^2215), as representing the maker's profit, thus leaving ^6645. 
 From this again we deducted ^2895, being our informant's 
 estimate for the labour employed in making these costumes. 
 There remained, then, a sum of /3750, representing the cost 
 of material. We now assumed that, taking one style with 
 another, there would be, on an average, four years' service in
 
 76 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 the costumes. Accordingly we divided by four the cost of 
 the materials required for our opening season, and arrived 
 at ;^96o as an approximate estimate of the yearly outlay 
 for materials required in costume plays. The expense of 
 making these costumes is of course represented in the salaries 
 of the Wardrobe Staff in our estimate of expenses " Behind 
 the Scenes." 
 
 Our allowance for furniture and properties we arrived at 
 by estimating the total cost of the furniture and properties 
 required for the specimen season (^4704), and assuming eight 
 years to be the average working life of an article of furniture. 
 This we believe to be a low estimate, allowing a large margin 
 for the cost of repairs. One-eighth of ^4704, or ^^588, was 
 therefore the sum chargeable to a normal season ; and to 
 this we added a " property bill " of ^5 a week for sundry 
 materials and consumables, making ;^838 in all.* 
 
 Our estimate for advertising — practically ;i^50 a week — we 
 believe to be ample. As before remarked, such an institution 
 as this ought to be — and must be, if it is to succeed — in great 
 
 ' In a footnote on p. 6, ;^20,ooo is put down as the probable cost of the initial 
 stock which the Donor would have to provide. That sum is arrived at as follows : — 
 
 Scenery. — Our estimate for the "making" of the whole scenery for the opening 
 season is ;^53io. To this we add ^3000 as a probable estimate for the cost of paint- 
 ing, thus finding the whole cost of making and painting the first season's scenery to 
 work out at ;if83io. From this, then, we deduct ;£2478, being our estimate for scene- 
 room salaries and cost of " making" during a normal season, and arrive at jCS^j'^i ^ 
 the cost of the scenery which the Donor would have to supply in order to place the 
 opening season on the financial footing of an ordinary year. 
 
 Costumes. — The ladies' modem dresses for the whole season are estimated to cost 
 ^3100, and four-fifths of that sum is reckoned as chargeable to the current expenses of 
 a normal season. Therefore, one-fifth (^620) has to be .supplied by the Donor. The 
 price of historical costumes for the opening season is estimated at ^8860, from which 
 we deduct ^960, being the cost of materials for a normal season, and ;{^i885, being the 
 wardrobe-department salaries for a normal season, thus arriving at ^6015 as the pro- 
 portion chargeable to the Donor. 
 
 Properties. — The whole estimate for furniture and properties for the opening season
 
 ADVERTISEMENT 77 
 
 measure its own advertisement. It must stand out from its 
 surroundings and attract attention in virtue of its inherent 
 dignity and largeness of design. It would not be one of a 
 crowd of entertainment-houses clamorously over-bidding one 
 another for popular favour. Its aim in advertising should not 
 be to obtrude itself upon the notice of the casual newspaper- 
 reader, but to afford readily accessible information as to its 
 doings for all who choose to look for it. We may also point 
 out that the proposed subscription system (Appendix C), by 
 which notifications of the repertory for two weeks ahead would 
 every week be forwarded to subscribers, would in itself be an 
 eflFective form of advertising. 
 
 came to £,^^o^. From this we deduct one-eighth as the proportion chargeable to a 
 normal season, and find ^41 16 to be provided by the Donor. 
 
 Thus the outlay necessary to place the opening season on the financial footing of a 
 normal season would be : — 
 
 Scenery £'i^^Tfl 
 
 Ladies' modern dresses 620 
 
 Historical costumes 6,015 
 
 Properties, &o. 4)ii6 
 
 Total .... ^£16,583 
 
 There would also be musical instruments to be provided for use on the sfcige (pianos, 
 harmonium, small organ, &c., &c.), and perhaps some specially costly pieces of armour 
 and historical properties. Therefore we think ^20,000 a probable estimate for the 
 cost of the initial stock.
 
 SECTION VIII 
 
 The Auditorium — Seat Capacity and Money Capacity — Prices — 
 Subscription (Abonnement) System. 
 
 The seating capacity of the Theatre, with its correlative 
 money-containing capacity, is a very important matter to be 
 considered. The enterprise might be seriously handicapped, 
 or even ruined, by a too large or too small auditorium. 
 
 In order to afford a basis for comparisons, we here give a 
 tabular statement of the seating [capacity of several well-known 
 London theatres : — 
 
 Drury Lane 
 
 Adelphi (before reconstruction) 
 
 Shaftesbury 
 
 Duke of York's 
 
 New Theatre 
 
 St. James's . 
 
 Prince of Wales's 
 
 Avenue 
 
 Comedy 
 
 Savoy . 
 
 Haymarket . 
 
 Vaudeville . 
 
 3500 
 2300 
 
 1800 
 
 1300 
 
 1264 
 
 1260 
 
 1 200 
 
 1200 
 
 1185 
 
 1150 
 
 1 100 
 
 1000 
 
 It appears, then, that the seating capacity of a medium- 
 sized London theatre of to-day ranges from iioo to 1300. The 
 Shaftesbury, indeed, which is not an extravagantly large house, 
 seats 1 800, and the Adelphi over 2000 ; but each of these 
 theatres contains a large pit and gallery in which the audience 
 
 can be much more tightly packed than it would be in even the 
 
 78
 
 THE AUDITORIUM 79 
 
 cheapest seats of the National Theatre, while many of the seats 
 probably command but an indifferent view of the stage. 
 
 Taking these things into account, we had originally placed 
 the seating capacity of the Theatre here outlined at 1350; but 
 more than one critic of very high authority urged us to recon- 
 sider and increase this estimate. "The Theatre," we were 
 told, " must be in a position to ' make hay while the sun shines,' 
 or, in other words, to take the fullest advantage of the first 
 flush of popularity attending a successful production. When a 
 play hits the popular fancy, it is always found that, during the 
 first few weeks, crowds of people have to be turned away, many 
 of whom do not come back again. In this Theatre, in which 
 the number of performances a play can attain is strictly limited, 
 it is all the more necessary that, in the case of a success, this 
 limited number of performances should be as fruitful as possible. 
 The classical repertory will have to be supported largely upon 
 the profits made by successful modern plays ; therefore the 
 Theatre must be large enough to leave a very wide margin of 
 profit on such productions." 
 
 That the classical repertory must live on the modem plays, 
 we do not admit ; but otherwise we agree with this reasoning. 
 The only question is how far the capacity of the auditorium 
 may be extended without rendering it too large for clear sight, 
 easy hearing, and a sense of intimate relationship between 
 the actor and the audience.* This is an architectural problem, 
 to be solved only by experiment ; but on careful inquiry we 
 
 ' It must be remembered, too, that a house with accommodation for a great many 
 more people than the average audience it can hope to attract, seems emptier than it 
 really is when the audience falls below the average: so that even a fairly remunerative 
 audience may be so sparsely scattered as to look, and feel, like a depressingly "bad 
 house." The system of obviating this inconvenience by " papering " the house would 
 of course be rigorously excluded at the National Theatre.
 
 8o NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 are disposed to accept the view that our original estimate was 
 too low. Everything depends upon the skill of the designer. 
 Some theatres which seem enormous seat comparatively few 
 people ; others, which seat a large number, seem compact and 
 comfortable. One point is certain : namely, that the Theatre 
 must be designed primarily for modern plays. It is possible to 
 fit a Shakespearean production into a house adapted for modern 
 drama ; it is impossible to give modem drama its proper effect 
 in a theatre primarily designed for spectacular productions. 
 
 If we look abroad for guidance the evidence is a little 
 difficult of interpretation. We have not exact information as 
 to the French theatres, but we have reason to believe that 
 neither the Th^atre-Frangais nor the Od^on can seat more 
 than 1 200 spectators. These seem to the eye very large 
 theatres ; their comparatively small capacity is probably due 
 to the fact that their galleries are verj' shallow. A large part 
 of each gallery, in fact, is given up to boxes, in which the 
 spectators cannot sit more than two deep. For the same reason 
 the Burgtheater in Vienna looks large in proportion to its 
 seating capacity, which is 1474. On the other hand, the 
 Deutsches Volkstheater of Vienna, a most commodious theatre 
 where every class of play is performed, accommodates the aston- 
 ishing number of 1873 spectators. We say "accommodates,"' 
 not " seats," for the " Stehparterre " or " standing-pit " is an 
 institution in this, as in many other Austrian theatres, a special 
 price being charged for " standing-room only." But even if we 
 deduct 200 for standing-room (a large conjecture) there remain 
 over 1650 comfortable and roomy seats. Among other Viennese 
 theatres, the Eaimund-Theater accommodates 1607 spectators, 
 and the Kaiserjubilaums - Stadttheater 1885. The Neues 
 Deutsches Theater in Prague, a house of no inordinate dimen-
 
 SEAT-CAPACITY 8i 
 
 sions, contains 1800 places. The National Theatre in Christiania 
 — an admirable house both for modern and historical drama — 
 accommodates 1400 people with the utmost comfort. In most 
 of these theatres — indeed we believe in all — the galleries are of 
 inconsiderable depth, the system of carrying them well forward, 
 so as to bring a large proportion of the audience comparatively 
 close to the stage, being little practised on the Continent. 
 
 We believe then, on reconsideration, that it would be possible 
 to design a house — with deep galleries well brought forward, 
 and with a moderate proscenium opening — which might, without 
 seeming unduly vast or cavernous, accommodate from 1550 to 
 1600 spectators. 
 
 Let us assume that 1550* represents the utmost capa- 
 city of the Theatre. Our next step is to exclude from 
 our calculations the odd 50 places. It is probable that there 
 would be a certain number of boxes which would contain 
 the most expensive seats in the house ; but until the Theatre 
 is actually designed we must leave this feature in doubt 
 Furthermore, there would have to be a certain, though strictly 
 limited, number of free admissions, for students of the Training 
 School, members of the company not employed in the per- 
 formance in progress, &c., &c. On first nights, too, free seats 
 might ^ have to be allotted to the Press. These 50 seats, then, 
 
 • One eminent authority who has examined our scheme is of opinion that the house 
 might, without inconvenience,'be so constructed as to hold, at full prices, £^70 or 
 £2,^0, instead of the ^345 allowed for in this estimate. The addition of icxj six- 
 shilling seats would bring the capacity of the house, at full prices, up to ^375, and at 
 "ordinary" rates (as explained below, p. 86) from /301, 12s. up to ^328, 5s. This 
 would certainly make a great differencejn the yearly balance-sheet, and it is not at 
 all inconceivable that an otherwise] suitable theatre might be designed which should 
 hold an audience of 1650. We do not feel sufficiently confident of this to make it a 
 basis of calculation ; but see footnote, p. 108. 
 
 2 We say "might," for we believe that at this Theatre it might be possible to 
 introduce a more satisfactory system than that of free admissions for the theatrical 
 
 F
 
 82 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 we assume to be partly box seats, partly free seats. In so far 
 as they may be box seats, they leave a margin to the good 
 in our calculations. 
 
 There remain 1500 seats to be disposed of, and for the 
 purposes of this calculation we reckon the " House Full " when 
 these 1500 seats are all sold. A probable apportionment of 
 them might be as follows : — 
 
 Stalls (occupying the whole floor of the house) — 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 seats. 
 
 Back Rows , 
 
 
 
 
 150 
 
 tf 
 
 First Circle — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 Back Rows 
 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 Second Cucle — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 
 
 
 ISC- 
 
 
 Back Rows 
 
 
 
 
 ISO 
 
 
 Third Circle 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 15° 
 
 
 Back Rows (Gallery) 
 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 
 Total . . . 1500 
 
 J) 
 
 critics. Under present conditions 
 
 it is ve 
 
 ry difficult 
 
 for a 
 
 critic, 
 
 be he never so 
 
 willing, to pay for his seat, seeing that first-night places do not come into the market, 
 or can at best be secured with great trouble. Exorbitant prices, too, stand in the 
 way of the admittedly healthier system by which the critic should pay for his seat. 
 Takini; a hint from Vienna, we suggest that at the National Theatre a special seat 
 should be allotted to every paper on the Press list, and that the critic of that paper 
 should always be able to secure its special seat by sending in an application before a 
 certain stated time, accompanied by the subscription price of the place — which, as 
 hereafter explained, would be 63. if it be in the front rows of the stalls, 5s. if it he 
 in the back rows of the stalls or front rows of the first circle. As there would be 
 about twenty-three important first nights in the season, this would mean that a critic's 
 attendance at all of them would cost his paper either £,(>, i8s. or ^5, 15s. It is 
 probable that a few critics would want to follow the performances of the Theatre 
 very closely, as Francisque Sarcey followed those of the Thciatre-Franfais, and would 
 attend not only on first nights but on many others as well. It would of course be 
 competent for the Director, recognising the services such a critic may render the 
 Theatre, to place him on the free list for ordinary nights, as distinct from first nights.
 
 PRICES 83 
 
 It is beyond question that the prices at the National 
 Theatre ought to be considerably lower than those which at 
 present prevail in the West End of London. Experiments in 
 the direction of lower prices have not hitherto succeeded, 
 because they have been made at theatres which had somehow 
 or other fallen into bad odour, and have always been associated 
 with inferior entertainments. They have been a last resource 
 against failure, and an ineflFectual one. So distinctly do 
 theatres lose caste when prices are lowered, that in most 
 leases there is a clause forbidding any such reduction. The 
 half-guinea stall, however, is a product of the long-run 
 system, and can maintain its ground only at long-run theatres. 
 People will face high prices in order to see a play that is in 
 vogue, that is "run upon"; even if they dislike it, they have 
 the satisfaction of being able to say so with authority. But 
 unless they know that all the world is flocking to a play, they 
 will not pay half a guinea (or other sums in proportion) in 
 order to find out for themselves whether it is or is not to their 
 taste. High prices, then, are among the chief reasons why 
 there is seldom any medium, under present conditions, between 
 huge success and total failure. But the experiment has never 
 been tried of starting at moderate prices a new theatre, quite 
 obviously of the first rank. We are not sure that even in 
 the case of a long-run theatre the policy might not prove a 
 sound one. For a repertory theatre, at any rate, it is essential. 
 It must not rely upon "rushes" anymore than it relies upon 
 " runs." To the great body of its public it must be a place 
 of habitual resort, not merely a place to be visited, at cost of 
 much trouble, discomfort, and money, when some particular 
 entertainment happens to be so much in vogue as to supply a 
 motive for disregarding these drawbacks. The present scale
 
 84 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 of prices means large profits in the case of a successful new 
 play, or spectacular revival, while at the height of its vogue ; 
 but in the absence of such special attractions, it undoubtedly 
 tends to keep people out of the theatres. Now, at the National 
 Theatre there would be no spectacular revivals ; and though 
 there would no doubt be new plays which people would be 
 eager to see even at high prices, they would not constitute 
 the bulk of the repertory, nor would it be reasonable to fix 
 the scale of prices with a special view to such pieces as were 
 likely to be in exceptionally keen demand. It has been 
 suggested that two or three rows of stalls should be sold at 
 the current half-guinea rate. But which rows ? Certainly not 
 those nearest the stage, for they are not the most desirable. 
 Nor would it seem feasible to charge half a guinea for a strip of 
 three rows in the middle of the stalls, while the rows in front 
 and behind were sold at 7s. 6d. In short, we are firm in our 
 belief that a general reduction of prices is the true policy for 
 this Theatre. 
 
 The following table shows the prices which we suggest as 
 reasonable, and the receipts which they would produce : — 
 
 Stalls- 
 
 FULL PRICES. 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 Back Rows 
 First Circle — 
 
 
 300 seats at 7s. 
 150 „ 6a. 
 
 6d. 
 
 £ 
 
 112 
 
 45 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 
 200 seats at 6s. 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 
 
 Back Rows 
 Second Circle — 
 
 
 , 200 „ 5s. 
 
 
 
 5° 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 Back Rows 
 Third Circle- 
 
 
 150 seats at 4s. 
 150 „ 2S. 
 
 6d. 
 
 
 30 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 Back Rows (G 
 
 allery) 
 
 150 seats at 2s. 
 
 200 ,, IS. 
 
 Total . 
 
 6d. 
 
 
 18 
 10 
 
 IS 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 u.s 
 

 
 SUBSCRIPTION SYSTEM 85 
 
 Thus the full capacity of the house (boxes apart) at full 
 prices would be ;!^345. But only on comparatively rare occasions 
 would all the seats be sold at full prices. 
 
 , On ordinary nights, according to the system fully set forth 
 in Appendix C, the greater number of places would probably 
 be sold at subscription (abonnement) prices. Under the German 
 abonnement system, the " Abonnent " usually buys a certain 
 seat for a fixed series of evenings — say every Friday throughout 
 the season, or every second Monday, or whatever the arrange- 
 ment may be. We do not believe that this arrangement 
 would be practicable in London, except in special cases. We 
 suggest that there should be, during part of the season at 
 any rate, a series of fashionable Thursday evenings (like the 
 "Mardis" of the Thdatre-Francais), for which people should 
 engage a particular seat or group of seats at full rates,^ knowing 
 that the Theatre would on these evenings be the rendezvous 
 of their " set," and of course expecting a different play to be 
 presented on each evening of the series. But these " special 
 subscription " evenings have nothing to do with the ordinary 
 subscription system which we would propose to introduce. 
 This is founded on the common principle of " a reduction on 
 taking a quantity." Every one buying ten places at a time 
 would save from one-and-sixpence to sixpence on each place. 
 For details of the system we refer the reader to the Appendix 
 (p. 140). In the meantime, we proceed to calculate the capacity 
 of the house on the assumption that one-third of the seats 
 are sold at full rates and two-thirds at subscription rates : — 
 
 ' It might even be found that people were willing to pay advanced rates — say, the 
 current theatrical prices of to-day — for these special subscription seats. It would 
 simply be a question of supply and demand. There would be no objection in 
 principle to advancing the prices for these particular evenings.
 
 86 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 "ORDINARY" PRICES. 
 
 Stalls- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 100 seats at 7s. 
 
 6d. 
 
 £?,! 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 Back Bows 
 
 200 „ 6s. 
 50 „ 6s. 
 
 
 60 
 IS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 First Circle- 
 
 100 „ ss. 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 66 seats at 6s. 
 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 Back Rows 
 
 134 .. SS. 
 66 „ 5s. 
 
 
 33 
 16 
 
 10 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 Second Circle — 
 
 134 .. 48. 
 
 
 26 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 50 seats at 4s. 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 1) )) • • 
 Back Rows 
 
 100 „ 3s. 
 
 50 „ 2S. 
 
 6d. 
 
 15 
 6 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 Third Circle- 
 
 100 „ 2S. 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 Front Rows 
 
 50 seats at 2 s. 
 
 6d. 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 )» »» • • 
 Back Rows (Gallery), n( 
 subscription price' . 
 
 100 „ 2S. 
 200 „ IS. 
 
 Total . 
 
 
 10 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -=£■301 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 This sum — ;^30i, 12s. — may be regarded as the receipt of 
 the normal full house on ordinary occasions. Only on sixty 
 occasions in each season is the Director authorised to " suspend 
 the subscription" and sell all seats at their full price. This 
 number (about one-sixth of the whole number of performances) 
 is calculated so as to allow of full prices being charged, not 
 only on all important first-nights, but for the first few per- 
 formances of certain new plays or revivals, and on special 
 occasions such as royal "command" nights and the like. The 
 wise Director would show his wisdom in a judicious use of this 
 right to " suspend the subscription," so as to reap the full 
 benefit of it without irritating or alienating the regular sub- 
 scribers.
 
 MONEY-CAPACITY 
 
 87 
 
 The assumption that, on ordinary nights, one-third of the 
 seats would be sold at full rates and two-thirds at subscription 
 rates is grounded on a rule to be hereafter stated (Appendix C, 
 Rule 5), but is nevertheless quite hypothetical. It might not 
 infrequently happen that more than two-thirds of the seats were 
 sold at subscription prices. Supposing the whole house to 
 be sold at subscription rates, the receipts would work out as 
 follows : — 
 
 SUBSCRIPTION PRICES ALONE. 
 
 Stalls 
 
 11 ... 
 
 First Circle Seats 
 
 Second Circle Seats 
 
 )> ») • 
 
 Third Circle Seats , 
 Gallery . . . 
 
 Total . . . ;i^277 10 
 
 Again, a certain number of educational and other special 
 performances (we have placed the maximum at fifteen) would 
 be given in each season at largely reduced prices. On these 
 occasions the full receipt would be : — 
 
 300 seats at 6s. 
 
 £90 
 
 
 
 15° . 
 
 , Ss- 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 200 , 
 
 53- 
 
 5° 
 
 
 
 200 , 
 
 4S. 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 150 1 
 
 , 38- 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 150 . 
 
 , 2S. 
 
 IS 
 
 
 
 150 
 
 , 2S. 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 200 , 
 
 , IS. 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 REDUCED PRICES. 
 
 Stalls . 
 
 300 
 
 seats at 
 
 4S. 
 
 £60 
 
 
 
 i) • • • 
 
 150 
 
 
 3S. 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 First Circle Seats . 
 
 200 
 
 
 33- 
 
 3° 
 
 
 
 J) )j 
 
 200 
 
 
 2S. 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 Second Circle Seats 
 
 300 
 
 
 IS. 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 Third Circle Seats . 
 
 150 
 
 
 IS. 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 Gallery . 
 
 200 
 
 
 6d. 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 ;£l60
 
 88 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 These are, of course, maximum calculations, and we are far 
 from assuming that the Theatre could always look for maximum 
 receipts. A discussion of reasonable probabilities under this 
 head will be found in Section XI. 
 
 The lack of a pit in the Theatre here forecast will probably 
 be held a defect. But the pit is really a survival from a bygone 
 order of things, and would enormously complicate the architec- 
 tural problem. The abolition of the pit at the Haymarket Theatre 
 in no way impairs the attractiveness of that very popular house. 
 Our scheme provides 300 seats at the pit price of 2s. 6d., or, 
 according to our subscription system (Appendix C), 2s. to pur- 
 chasers of ten seats at a time. The pit at His Majesty's Theatre 
 seats only 190,
 
 SECTION IX 
 
 Relation of the Theatre to Living Authors — Royalties. 
 
 We have calculated at lo per cent, the royalty to be paid to the 
 authors of new plays, that being also the percentage deducted 
 from the receipts of non-copyright plays, for the benefit of the 
 Pension Fund (see Appendix B). It is not intended to lay down 
 a fixed rule as to the royalties payable to living authors. They 
 would be the subject of special agreement in each individual 
 case. As a matter of fact, a " sliding scale " would probably be 
 adopted in most cases ; but calculations on this basis would be 
 far too complicated for a discussion such as the present. We 
 believe that lo per cent, ought to be, and would be, about 
 the average — a more advantageous rate, we may add, than 
 is commonly commanded, except by authors of the highest 
 standing. 
 
 Let us see, then, what a successful play would be likely to 
 earn in a season. In that which we have outlined, two new 
 plays are notably successful, one being acted thirty-nine times 
 and the other forty-three times. Supposing, as we fairly may, 
 that the first thirty performances of each of these plays (from 
 three to six of which would be given with " subscription sus- 
 pended ") drew an average sum equivalent to full houses at the 
 "ordinary" rates (two-thirds of the house, that is to say, being 
 occupied by subscribers, and one-third by non-subscribers pay- 
 ing the full price for their seats), this would mean lo per 
 
 cent, on ^300 for thirty nights, or ^900. After the thirty 
 
 89
 
 go NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 performances we suppose the receipts to drop oflF — say, to an 
 average of ;^200. In that case the author of the one play 
 would have ;^i8o (nine performances at an average royalty of 
 ;£2o) to add to his total earnings ; while the author of the other 
 play would receive an additional ;^26o (thirteen performances 
 at the same average royalty). Thus one author would receive 
 ;^io8o, and the other ^i i6o, in all. 
 
 Supposing, now, that the latter author, whose play was per- 
 formed forty-three times, had been able to command a percentage 
 higher than the average — say, 1 2^ per cent. — his total receipts 
 for that season would be ^1450.^ 
 
 There would remain to each author, of course, the provincial, 
 American, and foreign rights of his play — to say nothing of the 
 certainty that a play which had proved very successful in one 
 season would be repeated in the following season, and the pro- 
 bability that it might pass into the permanent repertory of the 
 Theatre, and become a " stock piece," seldom absent from the 
 bills for many weeks at a stretch.*^ 
 
 ' It is, of course, not at all improbable that the great success of a season might 
 attain a much larger number of performances — seventy or eighty. In the latter case, 
 on the assumption of seventy performances at an average receipt of ;^30o, and ten at 
 an average receipt of ;£200, the author's whole earnings, on a lo per cent, royalty, 
 would be ;£23oo, while on a I2i per cent, royalty they would be ;£2875. 
 
 It may be well to calculate what the authors of the less successful plays of our 
 specimen season would receive. One play has ten performances. Supposing five of 
 them to produce an average of ^250, and the remainder an average of ^150, the author 
 would receive at 10 per cent, just ;{^20o. Another is performed eight times — four per- 
 formances at ^250 and four at ^150, would put ^160 in the author's pocket. The 
 remaining new play is performed only four times. Let us assume that it is a play by 
 an unknown author, full of promise which deserves encouragement, but obviously un- 
 likely to succeed. The management might produce it, in order to bring the author's 
 name before the public and give him a start, but might allow him no more than 7^^ per 
 cent. Every new play could count on at least one nearly full house at full prices ; so we 
 may reckon the receipts of this play's four nights at ^^340, ^250, ^140, ^70, on which 
 the royaltii-'s would amount to ^60 — no such contemptible remuneration for a beginner 
 
 - The general practice of the Theatre would probably be to stipulate for the 
 exclusive London rights in a play so long as it chose to retain it in ita repertory. It
 
 AUTHORS' FEES 91 
 
 To most men of letters — to most artists or professional men 
 — such remuneration as even the less successful of our two 
 authors would receive for a single play, in a single season, at a 
 single theatre, would seem by no means despicable. But we are 
 far from pretending that even the ^1450 netted by the more 
 successful and more highly remunerated author will bear any 
 comparison with the sum which a dramatist of the first rank 
 expects to clear by a successful play at a long-run theatre. Is 
 there any likelihood, then, that the National Theatre would be 
 able to induce these dramatists to work for it ? 
 
 Yes, there is every likelihood that it would secure their best 
 work. It is becoming more and more evident that, while there 
 is a large public for the strongest and most serious plays of our 
 living dramatists, it is not what may be called a three-hundred 
 night public — nay, it is barely a hundred-night public. Only 
 by some rare chance — such, for example, as the sudden vogue of 
 some brilliant performer — does a play of the highest class ever 
 attain one of those huge successes which entirely throw into the 
 shade the modest figures above stated. As a rule, a dramatist 
 who does the strongest work of which he is capable, risks 
 absolute failure, and has at best to be content with a quite 
 moderate success, which, moreover, exhausts, or nearly exhausts, 
 the money-making capacity of his play. Few plays are revived 
 after their first run, and fewer still prove largely remunerative on 
 revival. In working for the National Theatre, then, a dramatist 
 would have these advantages : — 
 
 would have to keep ita claim upon the play alive, so to speak, by never allowing a 
 stated time to elapse without a stated number of performances. The usual understand- 
 ing might be that if, in any three consecutive seasons, a play had been acted less than 
 fifteen times, it should be held to have dropped out of the repertory, and the entire 
 control of it should revert to the author. The Theatre must on no account speculate in 
 plays — that is to say, acquire any rights in performances of them other than those which 
 it gives itself.
 
 92 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 (i) He would not be forced to suit his work to the require- 
 ments or the prejudices of a particular actor- or actress-manager. 
 He would be enabled, for instance, to produce plays containing 
 several parts of almost equal importance — a liberty denied to 
 him under the star system. Such a play as Le Monde ou Von 
 s'ennuie is for this reason impossible on the English stage. Were 
 The School for Scandal a new play, the practical equality of the 
 four parts — Sir Peter and Lady Teazle, Joseph and Charles 
 Surface — would, under present conditions, almost certainly 
 exclude it from the stage. 
 
 (2) He would minimise the risk of absolute failure. The 
 Theatre, once fairly established, would certainly attach to itself 
 a large body of subscribers and habitual frequenters, taking an 
 interest in its policy and its fortunes, who would seldom leave 
 a new play unvisited. A dramatist of any note, then, might 
 securely reckon on a certain number of good houses, and would 
 not have to face the loss of prestige involved in the premature 
 withdrawal of a play which had been launched for a hundred- 
 night or two-hundred night run. 
 
 (3) Even if a play were only a moderate success at first, 
 its chances of a long life — of maintaining its place on the 
 stage for an indefinite number of years — would be much 
 greater at the National Theatre than at any other. It is a 
 far healthier state of things, and far better for a dramatist's 
 reputation, if not for his pocket, that a play should bring in 
 an average of ;^500 a year for ten years than that it should 
 bring in ;;^5000 in one year, and then be heard of no 
 more. 
 
 Another point is to be noted, which has an important 
 bearing on the author's position. The establishment of a 
 Repertory Theatre of this class in London would almost
 
 PROVINCIAL PROFITS 93 
 
 certainly be followed before long by the establishment of 
 similar theatres — for the most part, no doubt, on a somewhat 
 smaller scale — in all the important cities of the kingdom. A 
 play which had met with any acceptance at the National 
 Theatre would instantly be in demand at a score of Municipal 
 or Subscription Theatres in the provincial centres ; and it 
 might often happen, as it does in Germany at present, that 
 the provinces would redress any injustice that might have 
 been done in the capital. At present a play which has not, 
 at any rate, the appearance of having made a great success 
 in London, is practically worthless in the provinces ; but a 
 number of Repertory Theatres, each with its intelligently- 
 interested public of constant subscribers, would enormously 
 widen the range of appeal open to a dramatic author, to say 
 nothing of enhancing his revenues. The leading dramatists 
 of Germany, writing exclusively for repertory theatres, have 
 certainly no reason, even from a pecuniary point of view, to 
 envy our playwrights or to sigh for the long-run system. 
 
 If it be objected that a playwright, accustomed to modem 
 conditions of mounting and stage-management, will not will- 
 ingly leave his work to the tender mercies of a dozen provincial 
 companies, whose treatment of it he cannot oversee or control, 
 the answer is again a reference to Germany, where playwrights 
 find this system answer exceedingly well. It of course pre- 
 supposes,:^a much larger number of competent actors and able 
 producers than we at present possess in England ; but these 
 the repertory system would necessarily beget, if it ever struck 
 root at all ; and it is the only system by which they can 
 ever be begotten. Nor would the author necessarily abandon 
 all control over the representation of his work when it went 
 forth to the provincial theatres. Prompt copies would be
 
 94 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 sent to the theatres where the play was to be given ; the 
 producers attached to these theatres might assist at the 
 rehearsals conducted by the author in London ; it would not 
 infrequently happen, we believe, that authors would find time 
 personally to supervise some of the rehearsals at the leading 
 provincial theatres, especially if they knew that this part or 
 that had been allotted to an actor or actress of promise. 
 Cases would certainly not be uncommon in which a provincial 
 performer would make a striking success in a part which 
 had perhaps not received full justice in London. It is not 
 pretended that the provincial performances would have the 
 absolute mechanical smoothness attained by a touring com- 
 pany under present conditions — a company which elaborately 
 mimics the London production, and repeats a single play 
 night after night for months. But the loss of this soulless 
 surface polish would assuredly be no loss to art ; and it would 
 be a distinct gain to art that authors should learn to write 
 plays which did not depend for their ejQPect upon a minute 
 personal supervision of the actor's every tone and gesture.^ 
 
 Each addition to the list of Repertory Theatres thi-oughout 
 the country would tend in many ways to facilitate the work- 
 ing of all the rest. But even supposing the National Theatre 
 to stand alone, we do not think, for the reasons stated above, 
 that it would find any difficulty in securing the best work 
 of the best dramatists. On the contrary, we believe that 
 the best dramatists are fully aware that present conditions 
 are hostile to their best work, and would lend ready support 
 
 1 It should be open to the Director, with the sanction of the Trustees, to take the 
 whole companv on tour, on certain rare occasions, — at times, for instance, when the 
 Theatre had to be closed for extensive repairs. Perhaps, too, a system of reciprocity 
 might be established with Repertory Theatres in the leading provincial towns, whereby 
 an exchange of companies for a brief season might now and then be effected.
 
 A NEW OUTLET 95 
 
 to a theatre at which other conditions prevailed. They could 
 not but gain by it, since it would oflFer a new outlet for 
 their work without in any way restricting or inteifering with 
 the outlets at present at their command. When they happened 
 to write a play with a star part, a " strong sentimental 
 interest," or any other attribute that seemed to promise a 
 two-hundred or three-hundred night run, they would natur- 
 ally carry it to a long-run theatre. But such themes are not 
 the only themes — are not even sufficiently common to afford 
 our leading playwrights a continuous series of successes. We 
 find them frequently essaying themes which are on the face 
 of it unlikely to attract the three-hundred night public ; and 
 we may be sure that for one such theme which they actually 
 essay, they consider and reject half-a-dozen, knowing them 
 to be hopeless under actor-manager and long-run conditions. 
 They would welcome a theatre, then, which should enable 
 them to produce with comparative security the best plays 
 that, under existing circumstances, they actually write, and 
 would encourage them to write the still better plays which, 
 under existing circumstances, they leave unwritten.
 
 SECTION X 
 
 The Training School — Principles and Regulations — A possible 
 Dramatic College. 
 
 A Deamatic Training School would be an indispensable adjunct 
 to a National Theatre. In saying this, we do not commit our- 
 selves to the affirmative side in the ancient controversy as to 
 whether acting can be, and ought to be, taught. On the con- 
 trar}% we strongly incline to the negative side. The better part 
 of the art of acting cannot be directly taught ; but certain of its 
 constituent elements can and ought to be. There must be no 
 excuse for the appearance at this Theatre, in however unimpor- 
 tant a position, of any person who is entirely unskilled in the 
 rudimentary mechanism of his calling. Though many teachers 
 of acting, and a few teaching organisations exist, almost the only 
 practical training obtainable under the present system consists 
 in the paternal attentions of a (more or less qualified) producer 
 during several weeks of leisurely rehearsing. Were this method 
 the best in the world, it is clearly impossible in a Repertory 
 Theatre. A high standard of competence must be maintained 
 among even the most subordinate members of a company called 
 upon to do such varied and exacting work as our scheme in- 
 volves. To this end, the most obvious, economical, and efficient 
 means is the establishment of a Dramatic Training School, by 
 which, of course, it would not be the National Theatre alone 
 that would benefit. Such a School, well conducted, would be 
 
 of incalculable advantage to the whole art of English acting. 
 
 96
 
 THE TRAINING SCHOOL 97 
 
 The great majority of our leading authors, managers, and actors 
 are agreed in deploring our present lack of any such insti- 
 tution.^ 
 
 We have not gone into any financial estimate for the Train- 
 ing School, as it could clearly be made self-supporting. There 
 is a great demand for dramatic training, and the advantages of 
 a School afRhated to the National Theatue would certainly attract 
 large numbers of paying pupils. At the same time there would 
 be ample room for endowment, to be directed to three ends : — 
 
 1. The establishment of Scholarships for students of notable 
 
 promise and of limited means. 
 
 2. The enlargement of the teaching staff, so as to enable the 
 
 School (in a manner to be hereafter indicated) to fulfil 
 all the functions of a Dramatic College. 
 
 3. The provision of a specially suitable building, fitted with 
 
 all desirable appliances, in a specially convenient 
 locality. 
 
 The School should be artistically and financially under the 
 control of the Director and Business Manager of the Theatre. 
 The Director would have to delegate to a specially-selected 
 lieutenant the immediate and daily supervision of its working ; 
 but he himself would remain its responsible head. 
 
 In the conduct of the School, two main principles should be 
 observed : — 
 
 (i) Each pupil should be bound to apprentice himself, as it 
 were, to a certain minimum course of study, for which he should 
 pay in advance a large proportion, at any rate, of the fees, to be 
 forfeited in the event of his not completing the course. Some 
 
 ' Written before the establishment of Mr. Beerbohm Tree's School of Acting. 
 
 G
 
 98 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 such precaution would be necessary to insure that the advan- 
 tages of the School should not be abused by the mere trifler and 
 dilettante, who thinks it would be pleasant to dabble in a calling 
 which he imagines to be an easy and idle one. 
 
 (2) The second principle follows from what we have said 
 above as to the limits within which the teaching of acting is 
 desirable. It is that training should, as far as possible, be 
 analytic rather than synthetic — that the constituent parts of act- 
 ing, rather than acting itself, should be the subjects of instruc- 
 tion. The teaching of acting, either in a studio or at rehearsal, 
 is too apt to mean simply the coaching of a young actor by an 
 old actor in antiquated methods. With a little experience, an 
 actor will learn to pick and choose among the virtues and vices 
 of an over-developed style. But a tyro is apt to absorb only the 
 vices, since they are so easy to imitate. What should first of all 
 be taught in the School are the several accomplishments which, 
 mastered perfectly and used instinctively, go to make an actor 
 complete in the technique of his art — voice-production, elocu- 
 tion, the speaking of verse, gesture, dancing, and fencing. The 
 rehearsing of parts should be confined to the second half of the 
 training. Individual coaching should be entirely excluded. 
 
 As to the division of subjects and organisation of the profes- 
 sorial staff, hints may be gathered from several existing institu- 
 tions, such as the Eoyal College of Music, the Guildhall School 
 of Music, and Mr. Franklin Sargent's American Academy of 
 Dramatic Arts. The School should certainly share with the 
 Theatre the services of — say — three of its actors and two of its 
 actresses, who, with but a portion of their time employed at the 
 Theatre, should divide the work of rehearsing advanced pupils 
 in various plays. It would be well, indeed, to obtain the partial 
 services of an even larger number of actors and actresses from
 
 THE TRAINING SCHOOL 99 
 
 the Theatre ; for pupils should be placed under as many varie- 
 ties of stage management as possible, as a further safeguard 
 against the perils of imitation.^ 
 
 It will be noticed that we suggest the employment of actresses 
 as well as actors in the quality of School stage-managers. 'I'here 
 is no reason, save lack of opportunity, why an experienced actress 
 should not be an excellent stage-manager ; and in any case, in 
 school work, there are many things which women must be taught 
 by women. 
 
 Pupils should enter the School for not less than one and not 
 more than three years. An entrance examination would be 
 advisable, but it should be imposed merely with the object of 
 eliminating the quite obviously unfit. Few things are more 
 difficult or more dangerous than to say with certainty that a 
 young person " will never act." 
 
 The first year's course should consist solely of the contribu- 
 tory accomplishments before-mentioned. During the second 
 year the study and rehearsing of parts should be added. Second 
 year pupils would be used to " walk on " in the Theatre. 
 
 In their third year, pupils would be given more important 
 parts to study and rehearse. The Director of the Theatre would 
 attend complete rehearsals and (very occasional) pupil - per- 
 formances. It would be competent for him to cast any third- 
 year pupils for small parts in the Theatre repertory, and to 
 appoint them as understudies. For this they would be 
 paid. 
 
 Pupils on leaving — or, as the Americans say, graduating 
 from — the School, would have no absolute claim to engagements 
 
 ' The partial employment of actors and actresses in the Training School would mean 
 either a slight reduction of the salary-list of the Theatre, or a certain enlargement of 
 the company without increase of expenditure.
 
 lOO NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 at the Theatre.^ The Director would, doubtless, be glad to 
 recruit his company from among them, knowing the soundness 
 of their training. But it would of course be impossible to keep 
 on increasing the staff of the Theatre year by year ; and more- 
 over it would generally be advisable for trained pupils to seek 
 elsewhere for more immediate practice in important parts than 
 they could possibly hope to obtain at the Central Theatre. 
 As we have elsewhere pointed out, the successful establishment 
 of a National Theatre would almost certainly be followed by the 
 establishment of Municipal or Subscription Theatres in the 
 great provincial centres, and the directors of these theatres 
 would be sure to keep a watchful eye upon the pupils of the 
 National Theatre Training School. 
 
 It would be the business of the School — and this should 
 be clearly understood and borne in mind — to minister to the 
 requirements of the theatre in general, no less than to those of 
 the National Theatre in particular. While the National Theatre 
 kept — as it should always try to keep — in the forefront of 
 theatrical progress, its pupils would be welcomed everywhere. 
 But to have graduated in an old-fashioned school is almost worse 
 than to have graduated in no school at all. The danger common 
 to all securely established bodies is that of falling behind the 
 times. The School should be so ordered as to help the Theatre 
 to avoid this danger, by providing for it recruits strong in the 
 vital principles of their art, instead of assisting it mechanically 
 to hand on an academic tradition (however worthy) from one 
 artistic generation to another. 
 
 ' But the Theatre would have a first claim on the services of pupils who had taken 
 scholarships. That is to say, it would be at the option of the Director to engage them 
 for a period equivalent to the period of their scholarship, and if offered such an engage- 
 ment they would be bound to accept it on terms to be stated in the Scholarsliip 
 Regulations.
 
 THE TRAINING SCHOOL loi 
 
 As the School would not be run with a view to profit, the 
 fees woxild be regulated so as simply to cover the necessary 
 expenses, apart from such luxuries, so to speak, as might be 
 provided by endowment. At the same time it is clear that, 
 however low the fees, a three-years' course of training, involving 
 daily attendance in the centre of London, is a means of entering 
 the theatrical profession costly in comparison with those now 
 usually adopted. But this is not to be regretted. The fact that 
 acting is a trade for which there is no recognised preparation, 
 encourages many men, and still more women, with no special 
 aptitude, to " go on the stage " for a year or two, and then to 
 drop it as soon as the novelty of the experience has worn oflF. 
 Thus a " casual labour" class is created, the existence of which 
 is most prejudicial to the interests of the lower ranks of profes- 
 sional actors, whose sole chance of a decent livelihood lies in 
 continuity of employment. The establishment of a recognised 
 Training School will not, of course, keep this " casual labour " 
 altogether out of the field, but it will create a clear distinction 
 between the actor and the amateur, so that in time a certain 
 stigma will attach to the employment of wholly unqualified 
 people. 
 
 Pupils of the Training School would be admitted to some 
 rehearsals at the Theatre (especially to those of classical plays), 
 and, under certain restrictions, to performances as well. 
 
 Though technical training would be the primary business of 
 the School, it ought (as above foreshadowed) to develop in 
 process of time into a Dramatic College, capable of giving 
 instruction in all subjects, literary or artistic, that have any 
 direct bearing upon the actor's art. To this end lectureships in 
 Dramatic Literature, History, Archaeology, &c., would have to be 
 endowed, and prizes ofi'ered for proficiency in such subjects. But
 
 I02 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 attendance at these lectures (as distinct from the courses of 
 technical training) should be optional and free. 
 
 It may be objected that the School would thus trench upon 
 the province of existing educational institutions — the colleges 
 of the University of London, &c., &c. — where a wider course 
 of literary instruction can be obtained than the School could 
 possibly oflFer. The answer is twofold. In the first place, it 
 would be impracticable to insist that pupils should have gone 
 through a complete course of literary instruction hefore entering 
 the Training School, and equally impracticable to expect them 
 to attend lectures or classes in other parts of London while they 
 are going through their course of technical training. Any 
 literary instruction of which they can reasonably be expected to 
 avail themselves must be supplied in, or quite close to, the 
 building in which their technical training is carried on. In the 
 second place, though the actor's literary culture should no doubt 
 be as wide as possible, yet human life is short, and the literary 
 coiurses in our higher colleges include much matter that does 
 not bear directly upon his art, and omit much matter that does. 
 It is visionarj' to expect that every actor should qualify for a 
 B.A. degree ; but it is neither superfluous nor impracticable to 
 offer him, along with his technical training, courses of literary 
 and historical instruction specially adapted to his requirements 
 — courses which should awaken in him an intelligent interest 
 in his art, and deepen his comprehension of its principles and 
 problems. 
 
 The County Council might be expected, in pursuance of 
 its recent policy, to allow a "grant in aid" to the Training 
 School.
 
 SECTION XI 
 
 General Summary of Expenses — Receipts required to Meet Expenses- 
 Possibilities and Probabilities — Order of Procedure. 
 
 Summary of Expenses for One Season. 
 
 Salaries : 
 
 General Staff. , . . 
 
 Performers 
 
 Employees in front of the house 
 
 Musical Staff .... 
 
 Employees behind the scenes . 
 General expenses .... 
 
 Total 
 
 ;^4,6oo o 
 
 28,777 10 
 
 3>377 10 
 
 3,900 o 
 
 10,277 10 
 
 14,050 o 
 
 ^£■64,982 10 
 
 It will be seen that our estimate of expenses, exclusive of 
 authors' fees and the percentage on the receipts of non- 
 copyright PLAYS WHICH IS TO SUPPORT THE PENSION FUND, 
 amounts to ;;^64,982, los. From this we deduct ;^iooo, the 
 estimated profit on the sale of refreshments (see p. 62), and 
 arrive at ;^63,982, los., or in round numbers, ;^64,ooo, as the 
 nett yearly outlay. This means that, reckoning the number of 
 performances at 363, an average receipt per performance of ^177, 
 p?MS the authors' percentages, would be needed in order to cover 
 expenses. Eeckoning the royalties, whether on copyright or 
 non-copyright plays, at an average of 10 per cent., we conclude 
 that an average receipt of about £196, 13s. would be required 
 to relieve the Theatre from the need of a yearly subvention. 
 What likelihood is there of that average being reached? 
 
 »03
 
 I04 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 For an ordinary London theatre, it would be a high 
 average ; but the criterion is not a just one. When the 
 initial expenses of mounting a play have been paid oflF by a 
 month or so of nearly full houses, a manager can aflford to 
 go on running it so long as the receipts keep a few pounds 
 above the sum which it costs him to " take his curtain up " ; 
 so that he may very likely play it for months to audiences 
 far below the full capacity of his theatre. If his nightly 
 expenses, including rent, taxes, and interest on borrowed 
 money, are ^loo, and his nightly receipts ;^iio, he is 
 making (with matinees) the handsome income of ;^8o a week, 
 and will be in no hurry to change his bill. Thus the" average 
 receipt on (say) a six-months' run may be no more than 
 ;^iio or ;^ii5 a performance. But a repertory theatre, per- 
 petually renewing its attractions, recruiting a , solid stand-by 
 of constant supporters, and offering the public more com- 
 fortable accommodation at lower prices than the long-run 
 theatres can afford, would have every chance of securing 
 more constantly well-filled houses than most of the long-run 
 theatres are in the habit of attracting. We speak of theatres 
 devoted to comedy or drama. The successful extravaganza- 
 theatres probably attract a very high average of receipts ; but 
 it is by dint of very lavish expenditm^e. 
 
 The total receipts of the Th^atre-Frangais in the year 1895 
 were ;^85,052 (2,126,275 francs). The prices were at this time 
 pretty nearly equivalent to those suggested in Section VIII. 
 They ranged from 10 francs (8s. 4d.) to i franc (lod.) ; but the 
 majority of the best places in the house (stalls and first circle) 
 were sold at 8 francs and 7 francs (6s. 8d. and 5s. lod.). We 
 believe that in a normal season at the Frangais the number of 
 performances is about 430 ; so that the average receipt of this
 
 FORECAST OF RECEIPTS 105 
 
 season would be ;^i98, or /^^ more than the average receipt 
 required to cover expenses at the Theatre here outlined. Since 
 1895 the prices at the Francais have risen. They are now nearly 
 as high as those which obtain at our own West End theatres. 
 In the year 1902, at these higher prices, the total receipts were 
 ;^ioi,6o4 (2,540,103 francs), or an average of over .;^230 a 
 performance. The Com^die Francaise, no doubt, enjoys a 
 prestige which cannot possibly attach to any new institution. 
 On the other hand, something must be allowed for the charm 
 of novelty. By the time that has worn oflf, one may fairly 
 hope that a certain amount of prestige will have accrued to 
 the Theatre. 
 
 The Th^atre-Fran^ais, as a rule, is open all the year 
 round, gives afternoon as well as evening performances on 
 Sundays, and not infrequently afternoon performances on 
 Thursdays as well. It is impossible for an English theatre 
 to give so many performances in the year ; but by suppress- 
 ing, in whole or in part, the six weeks' vacation we have 
 reckoned for — and this could be done with veiy little extra 
 expense — we could considerably diminish the average re- 
 ceipt required in order to cover the annual outlay. Vie 
 are inclined to believe that it would be good policy to close 
 the Theatre for a fortnight only, reopening about the middle 
 of August instead of the middle of September; by which 
 means the average receipt required (royalties included) could 
 be reduced to about ;^I78. But as this short vacation would 
 be more or less experimental, we thought it wiser not to base 
 our calculations upon it. 
 
 An analysis of the individual receipts required to make 
 up the necessary average will show, we trust, that our expecta- 
 
 tions are not extravagant.
 
 io6 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 We estimate, as before explained (p. 8i), for a theatre 
 seating 1550 people, but we strike off fifty seats for free 
 admissions. There would be three scales of prices : 
 
 At full prices (on nights for which subscription tickets 
 are not available) the house would hold ^345. 
 
 At "ordinary" prices (on nights when subscription tickets 
 are available, but one row in every three is supposed to be 
 occupied by non-subscribers paying full rates) the house would 
 
 hold ;^30I, I2S. 
 
 At reduced prices, for educational and other special per- 
 formances, the house would hold ^160. 
 
 The Director has the right to suspend the subscription 
 and charge full prices throughout the house on a maximum 
 of 60 performances in the season. Supposing him to exercise 
 this right on only 50 nights, and supposing the average receipt 
 of these nights to be ;^340, we find that they would bring 
 £1^,000 into the treasury. 
 
 Again, during the greater part of the season there would 
 be a full-dress and full-price subscription night once a week, 
 like the fashionable Mardis of the Theatre-Francais. Suppos- 
 ing that there were 30 such nights, at a receipt of ;^320, 
 this would give a total of ;!^96oo. 
 
 Again, in the season we have outlined, we reckon on two 
 new plays and one Shakespearean revival making a marked 
 success. In such cases we might reasonably expect to fill 
 the house at " ordinary " prices for a fairly long series of nights. 
 Suppose, then, that each of these three productions draws ;^300 
 for 25 nights — this gives us a total of ;^22,500. 
 
 We may fairly reckon, too, on reaching the maximum at 
 " ordinary " prices on, say, ten other nights, bringing in a 
 total of ^3000.
 
 FORECAST OF RECEIPTS 107 
 
 Thus we have 165 performances bringing ;^52,ioo into 
 the treasury. 
 
 Now a royalty of 10 per cent, on ;^52,ioo comes to /'5210. 
 This, then, we must add to our total expenses of ;i^63,982, 
 making ^69,192 in all. 
 
 The Director reserves (as against the Subscribers) the right 
 to give a maximum of fifteen performances in the season at 
 reduced prices. We suppose him to exercise this right on ten 
 occasions, bringing in £1600. On this sum no royalties would 
 have to be paid. The plays given would be Shakespearean and 
 other classical pieces, " for the use of schools," and of students 
 preparing for examinations. 
 
 We now add the ^1600 resulting from these ten perform- 
 ances to our former total of receipts, and find that 175 perform- 
 ances have brought in jC53>7oo. This we deduct from our last 
 total of expenses, and find that ;^i 5,491 {2)lus royalties) have 
 still to be accounted for in 188 (that is, 363 minus 175) per- 
 formances. Dividing 188 into ;^ 15,491, we get as nearly as 
 possible ^82. This, then, plus the percentage — say, £g a 
 night— would have to be the average receipt of ordinary per- 
 formances. Now ^82 j3?MS jC9 makes ^91 ; and that is 
 considerably less than one-third of the money capacity of the 
 Theatre at " ordinary " rates ; indeed, just about one-third of its 
 capacity at subscription rates alone. 
 
 Let us look at the matter in another light. Taking the total 
 annual outlay, exclusive of royalties, at ;^63,982, and adding 
 one-ninth of this sum to cover the royalties, we find ;^7 1,091 
 to be the whole annual expense. Suppose, now, that the 
 Theatre were a great success, and that the average of its 
 receipts was equivalent to the full house at subscription rates 
 alone, we find that the season's receipts would be j^ 100
 
 io8 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 and that the profit on the season's working would be 
 ^29,641, los., minus the additional royalties arising from the 
 surplus receipts. We do not, of course, calculate on such 
 success as this, though it is far from impossible ; but we state 
 the figures in order to show that there is a large margin be- 
 tween great success and failure to make both ends meet. 
 
 We may here present a summary of the various " margins " 
 allowed in the course of our calculations — points at which it 
 is highly probable that receipts may be increased or expenses 
 diminished, (i) It is quite possible (as pointed out in the foot- 
 note to p. 81) that the Theatre might seat 1650 instead of 1550 
 people, so that the full house at full prices would bring in ;C375 
 instead of ;^345.^ (2) In all our calculations we have left 50 
 seats out of account as being partly box-seats and partly free 
 seats ; but there would be many occasions on which all, or almost 
 all, these seats would be occupied by paying spectators. (3) As 
 we have just seen (p. 105), it would be possible, at very little 
 extra expense, to add at least thirty-two performances to thei:363 
 we have estimated for, thus considerably reducing the nightly 
 average of receipts required to balance expenses. (4) It may 
 quite possibly appear that the 10 per cent, on the receipts 
 of non-copyright plays which we allot to the Pension Fund 
 is more than is required to establish the Fund on a solid 
 basis ; in which case the percentage would naturally be reduced. 
 
 ' Since the above was written, Mr. John Hare has informed us that at the Hollis 
 Street Theatre, Boston, Mass., he has acted A Pair of Spectacles (a play demanding the 
 minutest and most delicate effect*) without feeling any inconvenience from the size o£ 
 the house, which nevertheless contained ^400 at prices ranging from two dollars 
 downwards — very little higher than the prices we suggest. This confirms our impres- 
 sion that a theatre might be designed, equally adapted to Shakespeare and to modern 
 comedy, which should hold at least ^375. In that case, the calculations on pp. 106, 
 107 would give something like ^77 (instead of ;^9i) as the average receipt required 
 for ordinary performances.
 
 ORDER OF PROCEDURE T09 
 
 (5) The partial employment of members of the company as 
 teachers in the Training School might lead to a certain lighten- 
 ing of the salary-list. If our hope of larger incomings or smaller 
 outgoings should be justified in even one or two of these cases, 
 the effect on the yearly balance-sheet would be considerable. 
 
 If it be asked what we conceive to be the natural order of 
 procedure in calling such a Theatre into being, we would fore- 
 cast it as follows : 1 The starting-point would unquestionably 
 be the conditional promise of the building. That secured, the 
 next step would be to obtain the equally conditional promise of 
 a site. In other words, Donor A. would say to Donors B., C, D. 
 (individuals or a Corporation), " If you will grant a site on such- 
 and-such terms, I will erect a theatre on it which shall ulti- 
 mately, on such-and-such conditions, become the property of the 
 Nation ; " whereupon Donors B., C, D. would reply, " If you 
 can satisfy us that there is a reasonable chance of this Theatre 
 successfully fulfilling its purposes, we are willing to grant the 
 site." Then Donor A. and Donors B., C, D. would consult 
 together (under expert advice) on the terms of a provisional 
 constitution. Chief among the advising experts would in all 
 probability be the man provisionally designated to fill the post of 
 Director. Before matters went much further, the various public 
 Bodies above enumerated (p. 10) ought to be invited to nomi- 
 nate Trustees, and to undertake this duty in permanency, as 
 occasion should arise. But as the majority of the Board would, 
 in the first instance, be nominated by the Donors of the building 
 and site, this would practically mean that the Donors reserved 
 
 ' Assuming, for the moment, the co-operation of several Donors, though we believe 
 it equally probable, and at least equally desirable, that the whole institution should be 
 created by one man.
 
 no NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 to themselves the right to appoint the first Director. It would 
 not be advisable to leave this appointment entirely in the hands 
 of the newly constituted and untried Board of Trustees. The 
 Trustees being provisionally appointed, the next step would be 
 for the Donors to discuss with them, and obtain their definite 
 assent to, the Statutes by which their functions were to be re- 
 gulated. Not until the Statutes were finally and unanimously 
 ratified would the Trustees be considered as definitely holding 
 office. This point being reached, they would so far enter on 
 their functions as to set about the raising of the Guarantee 
 Fund. Their proposals would set forth that the constitution of 
 the Theatre had now been settled in such-and-such terms, and 
 the site and the building promised, provided that a body of 
 Guarantors would undertake, on their part, to be responsible 
 for such-and-such a sum, to be paid to the credit of the Theatre 
 six months before the date of its opening (to be subsequently 
 fixed). At a somewhat earlier stage, the Donor of the building 
 would probably have invited architects to send in competitive 
 designs for a theatre to occupy the proposed site. With the 
 criticism and selection of the design the Trustees should, 
 officially at all events, have nothing to do. This task the 
 Donor should reserve to himself, in concert with the Director 
 and the Donors of the site, who would probably appoint a small 
 commission of experts to represent them. Sketches and plans 
 of the selected design should, if possible, accompany the pro- 
 posals for the formation of the Guarantee Fund. As soon as it 
 was evident that no hitch in the arrangements was to be feared, 
 the building might be proceeded with ; and in due time the 
 General Staff" would be appointed, and the Director would set 
 about organising his company and arranging his repertory for 
 the first season. At what time the salaries of the Director and
 
 ORDER OF PROCEDURE iii 
 
 other employees should begin to accrue would, of course, be a 
 matter of private arrangement ; but all salaries paid or payable 
 before the opening of the Theatre should be reckoned as part of 
 the building donation, along with the initial stock of scenery 
 and costumes. On the day fixed for the opening performance, 
 Donor A. and Donors B., C, D. should definitely make over 
 the building and site to the Trustees, who should from that 
 moment enter upon their full functions ; while the Donors and 
 Guarantors should thenceforth have no more control over the 
 enterprise than any other members of the general public. 
 
 It is needless to add that many of the negotiations which 
 we have here represented as successive might, and probably 
 would, be undertaken simultaneously. We have merely tried to 
 sketch their logical order, supposing "one thing at a time" to 
 be the motto of the promoters of the enterprise. Nor need we 
 say that if the whole Institution — Site, Building, and Guarantee 
 Fund — were to be provided by one Donor, the method of pro- 
 cedure would be immensely simplified.
 
 SECTION XII 
 
 The Guarantee Fund — The Amount Required — Provisions for its Administra- 
 tion — How to Wind up in Case of Failure — How to Apply the Surplus in 
 Case of Success — The Sinking Fund. 
 
 We have now outlined, in as much detail as seemed desirable at 
 the present stage, the scheme of a National Theatre which we 
 believe to be attainable without any extravagant demand upon 
 the public spirit of a great and wealthy community. As above 
 stated, the financial pre-suppositions of the scheme are two: (i) 
 that the Theatre Building should be provided, free of rent, 
 taxes, insurance premium, and cost of upkeep ; (2) that a 
 Guarantee Fund should be raised to assure, for a certain period 
 at any rate, the solvency of the institution. 
 
 It has now to be pointed out that a good theatre, in a good 
 position, has always a high commercial value, and that in the 
 event of the failure of the National enterprise, property in the 
 building and site should revert to the Donor or Donors, together 
 with the Guarantors, who would thus not have wasted their 
 substance to no end, but would recover a considerable part of 
 it. The condition of aflfairs which is to be taken as implying 
 failure and involving the winding up of the enterprise, must be 
 clearly determined beforehand ; and to this end we proceed to 
 make some suggestions. The Statutes governing this side of 
 the enterprise must, of course, be drawn up in consultation 
 with skilled financiers. All we attempt for the present is to 
 afford some rough indication of what their provisions might be.
 
 GUARANTEE FUND 113 
 
 To give the enterprise at the outset a fair chance of success, 
 it is clear that the Guarantee Fund must be liberal and must be 
 known to be liberal. As the salaries allotted to actors and to 
 many other employees are regulated on the assumption of ex- 
 ceptional stability, the whole calculation would evidently be 
 upset if, in the eyes of the persons to be so remunerated, the 
 enterprise seemed, not stable, but precarious. The Guarantee 
 Fund must be guaranteed sufficient to ensure the existence of 
 the enterprise, even in the face of the largest yearly deficits that 
 can reasonably be anticipated, for a certain term of years ; and 
 the point at which failure is to be considered definite and 
 irretrievable must be so fixed that the remaining portion of 
 the Guarantee Fund shall be sufficient to indemnify, on a certain 
 fixed scale, those with whom the Theatre has been forced to 
 break any expressed or implied contract 
 
 Let us roughly calculate what losses might conceivably have 
 to be met. Absolute accuracy is almost impossible in these 
 calculations, for every diminution in the receipts involves a 
 corresponding diminution in the expenses, seeing that the sums 
 paid in royalties, to authors and to the Pension Fund, would be 
 smaller. We can but roughly work out these complex calcula- 
 tions ; but in all cases we may be taken as stating outside 
 figures. 
 
 We assume, then, that the total expenses of the season of 
 363 performances (royalties included) amount to ;^7 1,091. We 
 have seen that the full capacity of the house at " ordinary" rates 
 (one-third at full prices and two-thirds at subscription prices) 
 would be in round numbers ;^300. Supposing, now, that the 
 average receipt were only one-half of that sum, ^T 150, the total 
 receipt for the season would be j^ 54,450, leaving a deficit of 
 £16,641, or, roughly allowing for the diminished royalties, say 
 
 H
 
 114 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 ;^ 1 5,000. If the average receipt were only ;^ioo, the deficit 
 would be about ^^ 30,000 ; if the average receipt were ;^ 175, the 
 deficit would be about ^7000. 
 
 In view of these figures, we suggest that the Guarantee Fund 
 should be ;£ 150,000. On this supposition, let us forecast various 
 eventualities.^ 
 
 Take the worst event that is reasonably conceivable. Suppose 
 that the average receipt was only £^0, and that the season's 
 deficit was ^^42,000. This would mean, of course, that the 
 Theatre had wholly failed to answer its purpose and to supply 
 any want. But the fault might lie in the management. The 
 Trustees at the end of the season might dismiss the Director 
 (paying any indemnity that might have been stipulated for in 
 such an event), and might transfer the control of the enterprise 
 to a new Director. 
 
 Suppose that the new Director produced a slightly better 
 result, the deficit on the second season being ;^2 7,000, and on the 
 third season ;£20,ooo. Thus, at the end of the third season, the 
 whole Guarantee Fund would have been reduced by three-fifths 
 — ;£90,ooo having been spent, and ;£6o,ooo remaining to draw 
 upon. The course now to be taken by the Trustees would depend 
 on many circumstances, (a) It might be quite clear that, in 
 
 ' The term Guarantee Fund, as noted on p. 7, is used for convenience, but is 
 scarcely accurate. The money would have to be, not merely promised, but paid in full 
 to the account of the Theatre. The interest on it would go to paying the rates and 
 taxes on the Theatre, the insurance premium, and the cost of repairs. How the 
 Theatre might be rated it is impossible to foresee at all definitely. It may be hoped 
 that the Commissioners would not be too exacting. The insurance premium would 
 probably not be much less than ^1000 a year. The repairs to the building ought not 
 for some years to form a considerable item. So long as the Guarantee Fund remained 
 intact, tlie income arising from it ought to be ample for all thes>- purposes. But should 
 it be trenched upon to any large exteut, the income might become inadequate ; and in 
 that case any deficit would have to be charged to the yearly expenses of the Theatre. 
 See Statute 19, p. 130.
 
 GUARANTEE FUND 115 
 
 spite of the large deficits, the Theatre was taking root, acquiring 
 prestige, giving a valuable stimulus to theatrical life in general. 
 In that case the Trustees would doubtless continue the Director 
 in ofRce, and ask him to go on as he had begun. It might be 
 that he would gradually reduce the deficit to ;£50oo, ^^3000, 
 ^2000, ;^500 ; so that at the end of the seventh season the 
 actual loss would have been ;^ 100, 500. The eighth season might 
 show a clean balance-sheet, and from the ninth onward profits 
 might begin to be made — a possibility to be discussed further on. 
 For the moment, let us return to the point at which, after 
 three seasons, _;^90,ooo had been lost, and consider another set 
 of possible circumstances. (b) The position of the Theatre 
 might be entirely dubious, and the possibility of a further 
 reduction in the yearly deficit problematical. The Statutes 
 would probably permit the Trustees, in the event of absolute 
 disaster, to wind up the enterprise after three seasons ; and a 
 party of the Trustees might wish to regard the existing state of 
 affairs as absolutely disastrous, and to throw up the sponge. 
 Let us suppose this party in a minority, however, and suppose 
 that the Theatre were carried on for three more seasons 
 at an annual loss of ^10,000. The total loss would then 
 have been ;^ 120,000, or four- fifths of the Guarantee Fund. 
 Now we suggest that at this point — as soon, that is to say, 
 as the Guarantee Fund is reduced to ;^30,ooo — the Statutes 
 should make it obligatory on the Trustees either to raise a 
 further Guarantee Fund of at least ;if 30,000, or to wind up the 
 enterprise. This provision would be all the more desirable as 
 the success or failure of the Trustees in the attempt to raise the 
 further Guarantee Fund would afi"ord a pretty conclusive answer 
 to the question whether the Theatre was or was not justifying its 
 existence, and fulfilling an important social and artistic function.
 
 ii6 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 If it was felt to be so valuable that it should at least have 
 another chance of establishing itself in financial security, the 
 ;^30,ooo necessary for its continuance would very soon be 
 forthcoming. If, on the other hand, it was felt to be hopelessly 
 struggling along and cumbering the ground, no one would come 
 to its rescue, and the Trustees would have no option but to wind 
 it up. For this purpose the ^30,000 in hand would be far more 
 than was needed. We fix this very wide margin in order that 
 every employee of the Theatre, from the Director to the Call-boy, 
 might feel absolutely certain that, if the worst came to the 
 worst, all contracts would be fulfilled. For the indemnification 
 of actors and others who had accepted comparatively small 
 salaries in consideration of the permanence of the institution 
 and the expectancy of a pension, the accumulations of the 
 Pension Fund would be available, though they might have to be 
 supplemented from the Guarantee Fund. 
 
 The huge initial deficits we have hitherto assumed — ^43,000, 
 ;^2 7,000, and ^20,000 — are in fact extremely improbable. Such 
 eventualities have to be faced and provided for in theory ; but 
 in practice we believe that something like this would be much 
 more apt to happen : The first season, while the institution had 
 the attraction of novelty, might show a deficit of ;i^5000, which 
 might rise in the following five seasons to an average deficit 
 of (say) ;^8ooo, so that at the end of the sixth season the 
 Guarantee Fund might have been reduced by ;!^45,ooo. The 
 question would now be whether the deficit tended, season by 
 season, to rise or to fall. In the latter case, all would be plain 
 sailing : the Theatre would evidently be gradually recruiting and 
 educating its public, and might confidently be expected, after a 
 few more seasons, to show a balance to the good. In the former 
 case — if the deficit tended rather upwards than downwards — the
 
 GUARANTEE FUND 117 
 
 Trustees would have to call the Director and the General Staff 
 into very serious consultation. On the one hand, measures of 
 economy would have to be discussed ; on the other hand, schemes 
 for enhancing the attractions of the Theatre. It would, of 
 course, be open to the Trustees to call in expert advice from 
 without. A system of reforms might perhaps be suggested by 
 an outside critic which might commend itself to the Trustees 
 and not to the Director. If he was disinclined even to attempt 
 its execution, his only course would be to resign, under whatever 
 conditions his contract prescribed. The author of the approved 
 scheme might then be appointed Director, or some one else who 
 was in sympathy with it. The new Director might turn the 
 tide, and after the ninth or tenth season, the yearly accounts 
 might begin to show a surplus in place of a deficit. Or it is 
 conceivable that all refoiTas might be in vain, and that the 
 Guarantee Fund might keep on dwindling by small sums — 
 jC 1000 this year, ^500 next year, ;,^300 the year after — both 
 ends never quite meeting. In such a case, twenty, thirty, or 
 forty years might pass before the total loss of ^120,000 was 
 reached, after which the Trustees were bound by the Statutes 
 either to raise a further Guarantee Fund or to wind up the 
 enterprise. That limit being reached, their duty would be the 
 same whether after six seasons or after sixty. But we suggest 
 that the Statutes might contain a special provision to meet the 
 case of a constant series of small deficits. If the experience of 
 (say) twenty seasons proved that the Theatre could not be run 
 so as to fulfil its purposes except at an annual loss of (say) 
 ^5000, but that, with that deficit, it did amply fulfil its purposes, 
 the Trustees might be permitted, in concert with the Guarantors, 
 to convert the Guarantee Fund into a fixed endowment capital, 
 bringing in a yearly income sufficient for the needs of the
 
 ii8 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 institution.^ We would add, however, that in no event ought 
 this course to be made obligatory on the Trustees, and that the 
 effort to make the Theatre self-supporting should not be aban- 
 doned until its impossibility had been clearly demonstrated. 
 
 But here a caveat is perhaps desirable. It ought to be under- 
 stood from the outset that while the Director must always 
 exercise every reasonable economy, he must not adopt a cheese- 
 paring, and still less a " sweating," policy in order to make both 
 ends meet. The first Director in particular might be tempted 
 to pursue penny-wise and pound-foolish tactics in the hope of 
 astonishing the Trustees by a seemingly brilliant balance-sheet. 
 This he might do in three ways : by starving the scenery and 
 costume departments, by over-working the company and " sweat- 
 ing " the subordinate members, or by prevailing on the Eeading 
 Committee to admit unworthy plays into the repertory, and 
 exploiting them to the extreme limit permitted by the Regula- 
 tions. In the last case, the Trustees would have a more or 
 less effective check upon his proceedings. In their comment 
 upon his quarterly or half-yearly report, they might censure the 
 prominence given to an objectionable play or class of play, 
 and he would be bound, at his peril, to give heed to their 
 censure. But it would be very difficult for the Trustees to take 
 cognisance of a series of individually minute economies in 
 salaries and other outgoings, whose cumulative effect might none 
 the less be disastrous. It would be a wise measure, then, for the 
 Trustees to give the Director to understand at the outset that 
 during the first two or three seasons a moderate deficit would 
 not be reckoned to his discredit. The object of these seasons 
 
 ' It may be jwinted out, however, that this would clearly be a fitting opportunity 
 for the Government to step in, make some equitable arrangement with the Guarantors, 
 and allot the Theatre the yearly subvention which experience had shown to be 
 nece-ssary.
 
 LIQUIDATION 119 
 
 should not be to produce a surplus, or even, at all costs, to make 
 ends meet, but to establish the Theatre in the favour and respect 
 of the public, to set on foot a worthy artistic tradition, and to 
 beget in artists and employees a sense of comfort, security, and 
 loyalty to the institution. 
 
 We have now to consider the method of winding up the 
 enterprise in the event of conclusive failure. Our suggestion is 
 that the Trustees should be empowered to sell the Theatre 
 Building and site (supposing the site to be freehold), and 
 apply the proceeds to reimbursing, in the proportion of their 
 contributions to the enterprise, the Donor or Donors of the 
 building and site and the contributors to the Guarantee Fund. 
 Let us suppose that the site was given by one Donor and cost 
 ;^75,ooo; that the Building was provided and equipped by 
 another Donor at the cost of ;^ 100,000 ; and that the Guarantee 
 Fund was provided by a hundred contributors of ^1500 each. 
 After ten seasons (let us say) the Guarantee Fund has been 
 reduced by ^120,000, leaving ^^30,000 in hand; and the 
 Trustees have failed to raise a further Guarantee Fund. They 
 must then proceed to the liquidation of the enterprise. Its 
 liabilities absorb (over and above the Pension Fund accumula- 
 tions), say ;^i 5,000, leaving ^15,000 of the original Guarantee 
 Fund still in hand. They then proceed to sell the Theatre and 
 site. These might quite possibly fetch more than they cost ; but 
 let us take the opposite view and assume that, having cost 
 ;^i75,ooo, they sell for only ;^i 50,000. Thus the Trustees 
 would have ;!f 165,000 to divide between one Donor of ^'75,000, 
 one Donor of ;i{^ 100,000, and a hundred Guarantors of ^1500. 
 The result would be (if our arithmetic is correct) that the Donor 
 of the site would receive a little more than ;^3 7,500, the Donor 
 of the building a little less than ;i^52,500, and each of the
 
 I20 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Guarantors a little more than ^^750. In other words, the 
 Donors and the Guarantors would, in the event of the failure of 
 the enterprise, all stand to lose a little less than half of their 
 respective contributions. 
 
 Taking a more cheerful and at least equally probable view, 
 let us now sketch the course that seems advisable in the event 
 of the Theatre not only making both ends meet, but showing a 
 considerable balance to the good. The danger to be guarded 
 against in this case is that of reckoning too soon upon the con- 
 tinuance of a prosperity which must always be liable to serious 
 fluctuations. The great point is that the Theatre should always 
 have sufficient resources behind it to give its employees a sense of 
 security, and to place it above the necessity or temptation to go 
 a-profit-hunting at the expense of its artistic principles. We 
 suggest, then, that however prosperous the enterprise may be, 
 no attempt should be made to repay the Guarantors until the 
 Theatre has accumulated in clear profit a capital sum equal 
 to the original Guarantee Fund. When there is a surplus on 
 the workings of any season, that surplus shall go to a Sinking 
 Fund, to be kept wholly distinct from the Guarantee Fund, 
 and left to accumulate at compound interest with a view to 
 ultimately replacing the Guarantee Fund in the economy of the 
 institution. While it is in process of accumulating, deficits 
 shall not be met out of the Sinking Fund, but out of the 
 Guarantee Fund alone. By this means it might not impro- 
 bably happen that the Guarantee Fund would gradually 
 dwindle while the Sinking Fund went on increasing. In the 
 event of the Guarantee Fund having shrunk to ^30,000 before 
 the Sinking Fund had attained to £ 1 50,000, the Trustees should 
 be empowered to draw on the Sinking Fund for the further 
 Guarantee of ;^30,ooo which they are bound to raise if the
 
 SINKING FUND 121 
 
 enterprise is to be continued. If the Sinking Fund at that 
 time amounted to more than ;^30,ooo, there would, of course, 
 be no necessity for the Trustees to make any appeal for outside 
 aid. If, on the other hand, it amounted to less than ^30,000 — 
 say to ;;/"io,ooo or ;^i 5,000 — the Trustees would have to raise 
 the balance of the requisite ^^30,000, or else wind up the 
 enterprise, in which case the Sinking Fund would rank simply 
 as part of its general assets. But except in the event of the 
 Guarantee Fund dwindling to ;^30,ooo, the Sinking Fund must 
 be left untouched until it amounts to ;i^ 150,000. When that 
 point is reached, all further surpluses shaU go to the reimburse- 
 ment of the Guarantors, and (if necessary) of the Donor or 
 Donors of the site/ on whatever system the Guarantee Contract 
 shall determine. From this time forwaid, all further deficits 
 shall be met by drafts on the Sinking Fund, the interest on 
 which shall now go to form part of the annual income of the 
 Theatre. If the Sinking Fund in its turn should be reduced 
 to ;^30,ooo before the Guarantee Fund is fully paid off, the 
 Trustees would have to proceed as in the case of the Guarantee 
 Fund — that is to say, they must raise a further ;^30,ooo or wind 
 up the enterprise. After the Guarantee Fund had been fully 
 paid oflF, the constitution of the Theatre, as appears in the next 
 paragraph, would have to be in some measure remodelled, and 
 the Sinking Fund would be administered according to rules to 
 be then determined, which need not now be forecast. The 
 relations between the Sinking Fund and the Guarantee Fund 
 
 • The probability is that the site, like the Theatre-Building, would be granted 
 (whether by a public body or by a private Donor or Donors) on the understanding 
 that, in the event of success, it should be a free gift to the Nation, and that only in the 
 event of failure and liquidation should the Donor or Donors rank among the creditors 
 of the enterprise. But this arrangement, though desirable, would not be essential. 
 We have admitted (p. 7) that the gift of the building and the gift of the site do not 
 stand on precisely the same plane.
 
 122 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 might conceivably, under the arrangement here suggested, be- 
 come very complex, and we repeat that the Statutes governing 
 them would have to be carefully drawn up by skilled financiers. 
 Our suggestions are merely designed to illustrate the principle 
 that the Theatre must not cut itself adrift from its sheet-anchor, 
 the Guarantee Fund, until it has secured another and equally 
 strong anchor to take its place. 
 
 As soon as the Guarantors and (if necessaiy) the Donors 
 of the site have been paid oflF, the Theatre should become, 
 no longer conditionally, but absolutely, the property of the 
 Nation, represented by Parliament. In that event Parliament 
 would of course have the right either to confirm such of the 
 Statutes as applied to the new condition of afi"airs, and con- 
 tinue the Trustees in office, or to remodel the constitution 
 and method of government of the Theatre. By that time the 
 Theatre would itself have provided an object-lesson in the 
 aims and methods of theatrical endowment, and Parliament 
 would have been, as it were, educated up to responsibilities 
 which, at present, it would probably be chary of undertaking. 
 
 It is, of course, conceivable that the Theatre should, as 
 it were, buy its own building, repaying to the Donor, his 
 heirs or assigns, the sums expended upon it. But our sug- 
 gestion is that he should from the first renounce all claim 
 upon the enterprise in the event of success. In making such 
 a splendid gift to the Nation, he would secure himself a last- 
 ing monument ; whereas if he merely advanced the money, in 
 the hope of ultimate repayment, his name could not be, in 
 the same abiding sense, associated with the benefaction. Only 
 in the event of failure and liquidation ought he to rank, 
 along with the Donor or Donors of the site and the Guaran- 
 tors, among the creditors of the enterprise.
 
 GUARANTEE FUND 123 
 
 On the other hand, we suggest that if the whole institu- 
 tion were to be called into being by one man, he ought not 
 to make a free gift of the Guarantee Fund, but ought to 
 charge the Theatre with the duty of repaying it, just as if it 
 were provided by a numerous body of Guarantors. Whether 
 the cost of the site also should be repayable would be for 
 him to determine. Apart from this question of the site, the 
 constitution of the enterprise, and the methods of dealing 
 with success or failure, ought to be practically the same, 
 whether it were set on foot by one man or by many. 
 
 Finally, returning to the supposition that the Guarantee 
 Fund is provided by a considerable number of Guarantors, 
 we may be asked what inducement our proposal holds out 
 to them. If they are to sacrifice the interest on their money 
 for an indefinite number of years, and to run the risk of 
 losing about half of it, what privilege or advantage are they 
 to enjoy in return? We answer frankly — none whatever. 
 Their names may be engraved, with those of other benefactors 
 of the institution, on the walls of the vestibule ; but beyond 
 this they will " get nothing for their money " save the satis- 
 faction of having done, or tried to do, a splendid service to 
 the English drama and stage, and having helped to amend a 
 condition of afi'airs which is not only artistically deplorable, 
 but tends to be socially demoralising. It is quite impossible 
 for the Theatre to offer them any privilege which shall not 
 be ludicrously disproportionate to the magnitude of their 
 benefaction. Of course if the whole Guarantee Fund were 
 provided by (say) three contributors of ;^50,ooo each, it would 
 be possible to give each of them a box, to remain his property 
 until his ^50,000 were repaid, or the enterprise was wound 
 up. But it does not seem probable that the Fund should
 
 124 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 be raised in this fashion ; and if the contributors were more 
 than three, four, or at the outside six, it would be impossible 
 for the Theatre to give them each a box. A very simple 
 computation will show that the sum might be provided by 
 loo contributors of ;^i5oo each, 3CX) contributors of ;^500 
 each, 600 contributors of ;^2 50 each, or 1000 contributors of 
 ;^i50 each. It is needless to speculate which of these 
 possibilities is the most probable ; for whether the contributors 
 be 100 or icxx», we do not consider it possible for the Theatre 
 to offer them any privilege which should not enormously 
 embarrass its workings, while remaining a pitiably meagre 
 requital of their generosity. Such attempts at recompense as 
 we have from time to time thought of suggesting would 
 detract from the disinterestedness of their public spirit, 
 without affording them any substantial or really desirable 
 advantage. Nor do we believe that the lack of material 
 "inducement" would be any real obstacle to the raising of 
 the Guarantee Fund. When once the other factors in the 
 enterprise are assured, on such a liberal scale as to stir the 
 imagination of the community and afford a fair presumption 
 of success, there is little fear of the scheme falling to the 
 ground for lack of Guarantors.
 
 APPENDICES
 
 APPENDIX A 
 
 DRAFT OF STATUTES AND REGULATIONS 
 
 [By " Statutes " we mean the fundamental Constitution of the Theatre, which, 
 once accepted by the Trustees, can be altered only by Act of Parliament. 
 By " Regulations " we mean the bye-laws laid down by the Trustees, which 
 they, and they only, may revise from time to time, as expediency suggests. 
 
 The following Statutes and Regulations do not profess to be exhaustive. 
 They merely indicate the form which such a Code might take, and define 
 and supplement suggestions already offered in the foregoing chapters.] 
 
 STATUTES 
 
 The site for this Theatre is granted by and 
 
 the Theatre is erected and equipped by , on the 
 
 following conditions: — 
 
 (i) Unless and until the contingencies occur which are provided 
 
 for in Paragraphs 21 and 22, it shall be known as the 
 
 Theatre. 
 
 (2) Unless and until the contingencies occur which are provided 
 for in Paragraphs 21 and 22, or those provided for in Paragraph 28, 
 the ownership of the Theatre shall be vested in a Board of Trustees, 
 fifteen in number, to be constituted as follows : — One to be noruinated 
 by the University of Oxford ; one to be nominated by the University 
 of Cambridge ; one to be nominated by the University of London ; 
 one to be nominated by the President and Council of the Royal 
 Academy ; two to he nominated by the London County Council ; the 
 remaining nine to be nominated in the first instance by the Donors 
 of the site and of the Theatre.' Each Trustee shall hold office until 
 death or voluntary resignation, except as provided in Paragraph 4. 
 On the death or resignation of a nominee of one of the abovc- 
 
 1 The method of nomination would of course be a matter for arrangement between 
 the parties concerned. 
 
 137
 
 128 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 mentioned Public Bodies, that Body shall nominate his successor. 
 On the death or resignation of one of the Donors' nominees, the 
 vacancy shall be filled alternately by nomination of H.M. Government 
 for the time being, and by co-optation, all members of the Board 
 having power to vote in the latter event, and the casting vote, in case 
 of a tie, being given by the Government. 
 
 (3) The services of the Trustees shall be unremunerated. 
 
 (4) The Trustees may, by a vote of twelve of their number, 
 enforce the resignation of a member of the Board, who cannot in 
 that case be re-nominated or re-elected. 
 
 (5) Should any of the Public Bodies above mentioned resign their 
 right of nomination, the Trustees shall transfer it to another Public 
 Body, selected by vote. In case of difference of opinion as to the 
 Body to be chosen, a bare majority shall decide. 
 
 (6) The Trustees shall appoint, from outside their own number, a 
 Director and General Staff for the Theatre. The distribution of the 
 functions of the General Staff the Trustees may from time to time 
 modify by Regulation, as expediency shall direct; but in no event 
 shall the General Staff (exclusive of the Director) exceed six in 
 number. 
 
 (7) All actors, actresses, and other employees of the Theatre, 
 except the General Staff, shall be engaged by the Director. 
 
 (8) The Trustees shall have no share in the management of the 
 Theatre except through the Director, who is their sole and responsible 
 Executive Officer. Should he fail to carry on the Theatre to their 
 satisfaction, they have no power to override his arrangements, but 
 must call upon him to resign, on whatever terms his contract shall 
 prescribe. 
 
 (9) The Director shall present to the Trustees, at such intervals as 
 they shall from time to time appoint, a Report of the workings of the 
 Theatre, artistic and financial. This Report they shall endorse with 
 whatever remarks or censures they think desirable, and it shall be the 
 Director's duty to give effect to the views thus expressed or implied. 
 
 (10) The Theatre shall not be managed with a view to commercial 
 gain ; that is to say, no person or persons, save the Trustees, shall have 
 any interest in, or claim or charge upon, its profits ; but any surplus 
 of receipts over expenditure shall be vested in the Trustees, to be 
 applied by them to the purposes set forth in Paragraphs 25 and 26.
 
 STATUTES 129 
 
 (11) All employees of the Theatre shall be remunerated by fixed 
 salaries, or definite payments for definite services — in no case by 
 contingent percentages. Dramatic authors, however, may be re- 
 munerated by percentages upon the gross receipts produced by their 
 plays. 
 
 (12) The Director shall in no case be an actor, practising his art 
 for fee or reward. Should he be a retired actor, the Trustees shall 
 decide, by fixed regulation or otherwise, on what exceptional occasions 
 (and in no case for personal profit) he shall be allowed to reappear at 
 other theatres. He shall in no event play any part on the stage of 
 the Theatre. 
 
 (13) The Theatre shall be conducted as a Repertory Theatre — 
 that is to say, a number of plays shall always be ready for perform- 
 ance, and shall be performed, in alternation, and no play shall be acted 
 more than two or three times in unbroken succession. 
 
 ( 1 4) The repertory shall consist of what are known as " dramatic 
 pieces," in contradistinction to musical pieces — that is to say, though 
 songs naturally incidental to a dramatic story may be sung, no essen- 
 tial part of the action of a play may be carried on in music.^ 
 
 (15) Not less than one-fourth of the performances of each season 
 shall be devoted to the English Classical Drama. The Trustees may 
 by special Regulation raise this minimum, but they must not lower it. 
 
 (16) The Trustees shall issue Regulations stating what plays are 
 to be regarded as belonging to the English Classical Drama ; the 
 minimum number of performances of such plays to be given in a 
 season, or month, or week ; the maximum number of consecutive 
 performances that may be given of any one play ; and otherwise pre- 
 scribing in its essential outlines the conduct of the Theatre. Such 
 Regulations they may alter from time to time as expediency suggests, 
 provided always that the Regulations keep within the letter and the 
 spirit of these Statutes. 
 
 (17) There shall be a Pension Fund attached to the Theatre, to 
 be raised and administered as the Trustees shall determine. 
 
 (18) Before the Theatre shall be opened, the Trustees shall raise 
 a Capital Sum of not less than ^^ 150,000, in contributions of not less 
 
 ' It seemed necessary to attempt some definition of a " dramatic piece." Certain 
 passages in Elizabethan plays and masques might be found to conflict with the above 
 definition ; but otherwise we believe it may serve its purpose. 
 
 I
 
 I30 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 than ;^I50 each. These sums shall be repayable to the Contributors, 
 in whole or in part, as provided in Paragraph 25, but the Contributors 
 shall receive no interest upon them. This sum of ;^ 150,000 is here- 
 inafter called the Guarantee Fund. 
 
 (19) The Trustees shall invest the Guarantee Fund, and the 
 interest accruing on it shall be applied to pajring the Rates and Taxes 
 and Insurance Premium on the Theatre, and to meeting the expense 
 of repairs to the building, machinery, fixtures, and furnishings, as 
 distinct from stage scenery, properties, and accessories. Any surplus 
 interest on the Guarantee Fund, left over after meeting all such 
 charges for a given season, shall be placed to a special fund entitled 
 the " Rates, Insurance, and Repairs Fund." If in any season the 
 Rates, Taxes, Insurance Premium, &c., should absorb more than the 
 interest on the Guarantee Fund and whatever may be standing to the 
 credit of the " Rates, Insurance, and Repairs Fund," such deficit shall 
 be charged to the general expenses of the Theatre. 
 
 (20) If the general expenses of any season shall exceed its receipts, 
 the deficit shall be met by the Trustees out of the Guarantee Fund. 
 
 (21) Should the calls on the Guarantee Fund at any time reduce 
 it to one-fifth of its original amoimt (that is to say, to ;^30,ooo), it 
 shall be the duty of the Trustees either to raise a further Guarantee 
 Fund of ;^30,ooo, or, failing in that, to liquidate and wind up the 
 enterprise by the method set forth in the next Paragraph. 
 
 (22) Should liquidation become necessary, the Trustees shall, with- 
 out more delay than may be reasonably advisable, sell the Theatre, 
 site, and all accessories and appurtenances — in short, all the property 
 vested in them — and after satisfying all legal and equitable claims 
 upon the institution on the part of its employees, &c., shall divide the 
 balance left in hand among the Donors of the site and building and 
 the Contributors to the Guarantee Fimd, in proportions to be definitely 
 predetermined at the time of the raismg of the Guarantee Fund, 
 and to form part of the contract under which the Guarantee Fund 
 is provided. 
 
 (23) In the event of liquidation, the accumulations of the Pension 
 F'und shall be primarily applicable to compensating employees of the 
 Theatre for the failure of their expectancy of a pension ; but should 
 they prove inadequate to this purpose, the accumulations shall be 
 supplemented from the general assets of the institution.
 
 STATUTES 131 
 
 (24) On selling the Theatre, in the event of Uquidation, the 
 Trustees shall insert in the conditions of sale a clause debarring the 
 
 purchaser from continuing to apply to it the name of the 
 
 Theatre. 
 
 (25) When at the close of any season the balance-sheet shall 
 show a clear surplus of receipts over expenditure, such sm-plus shall 
 be placed to a Sinking Fund, to be kept wholly apart from the 
 Guarantee Fund. This Sinking Fund shall not be drawn upon to 
 meet deficits unless and until the Guarantee Fund shall have been 
 reduced to one-fifth of its original amount. In that case the whole of 
 it, or, if it exceed the stated sum, the necessary part of it, shall be 
 applied by the Trustees to the provision of the further Guarantee Fund 
 required in terms of Paragraph 2 i . Unless and until the Sinking 
 Fund has to be drawn upon for this purpose, it shall be suffered to 
 accumulate at compound interest (each further surplus being added 
 to it in turn) until it shall have reached a sum equivalent to the 
 amount of the original Guarantee Fund. From this time forward, all 
 further surpluses shall be applied to repaying the contributors to the 
 Guarantee Fund [and the Donors of the site] ^ in such proportions, and 
 at such intervals, as the Guarantee Contract shall determine, until the 
 whole of the Guarantee Fund [and the value of the site] shall have 
 been paid off. 
 
 (26) When the Sinking Fund shall have reached a sum equivalent 
 to the amount of the original Guarantee Fund, it shall take the place 
 of that Fund, the interest upon it shall be applied, as was the interest 
 on the Guarantee Fund, to the covering of rates, insurance, and 
 repau-s, and it shall be administered in all respects in the same way as 
 the Guarantee Fund. 
 
 (27) The Donor of the Theatre-Building, though ranking as one 
 of the creditors of the enterprise in the event of liquidation, shall have 
 no claim to repayment out of the Sinking Fund. 
 
 (28) When the Guarantee Fund and the value of the site shall 
 have been completely repaid, as provided in Paragraph 25, the 
 building, site, endowment-capital — in other words, the whole institu- 
 tion — shall ipso facto become the absolute property ot the British 
 Nation, represented by the Imperial ParUament. The Trustees will 
 
 ' See footnote, p. 121.
 
 132 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 in that event formally lay down their office, and it will be for Parlia- 
 ment either to reappoint them, and confirm such of these Statutes as 
 shall be applicable to the then existing state of things, or to reorganise 
 the institution under a fresh set of Statutes. 
 
 (29) Such of these Statutes as do not imply a definite contract 
 between parties may at any time — even before the Theatre has 
 become the absolute property of the Nation — be altered by Act of 
 Parliament ; but no Statute, having once come in force, can be 
 altered except by Act of Parliament. Statutes which imply a definite 
 contract between parties may be altered by Act of Parliament with 
 the consent of all parties. 
 
 EEGULATIONS 
 
 TO BE OBSERVED IN THE CONDUCT OF THE THEATRE. 
 
 By Order of the Trustees. 
 
 (i) The General Staff shall consist of the Director and four other 
 members, namely : i. The Literary Manager ; ii. The Business Manager ; 
 iii. The Reading-Committee Man ; iv. The Solicitor. 
 
 (2) The complete control of every department of the Theatre shall 
 be in the hands of the Director, except only the choice of plays. 
 
 (3) Plays shall be selected for production or revival by a committee 
 of three, consisting of the Director, the Literary Manager, and the 
 Reading-Committee Man. When a play has been so selected, it shall 
 be the duty of the Director to produce it within a reasonable time. 
 
 (4) The Reading-Committee Man shall have no other duty in con- 
 nection with the Theatre than that of assisting in the selection of 
 plays. He shall be a paid official, but shall not be expected to give 
 his whole time to the service of the Theatre. 
 
 (5) The Literary Manager shall, in the first instance, examine all 
 plays sent in to the Theatre, and shall indicate to the Reading Com- 
 mittee those which seem to him manifestly impossible. The other 
 members of the Committee may or may not insist on reading such 
 plays for themselves. It shall further be the duty of the Literary 
 Manager to conduct special negotiations with authors ; to suggest and
 
 REGULATIONS 133 
 
 arrange old plays for revival ; to suggest foreign plays suitable for pro- 
 duction ; to supervise the translation of such plays ; and to consult 
 with and advise scene-painters, costumiers, and producers on questions 
 of archaeology and local colour. 
 
 (6) The Business Manager shall, subject to the Director, control 
 all the incomings and outgoings of the Theatre, and shall draw up 
 a half-yearly balance-sheet to be presented to the Trustees, for the 
 correctness of which he shall be personally responsible. 
 
 (7) It shall be the duty of the Solicitor to advise the Trustees as 
 to the investment and management of the Guarantee Fund, Sinking 
 Fund, &c., and as to contracts with the Director and General Staff; 
 also to advise the Director as to contracts with employees, authors, 
 &c., and as to other legal questions arising out of the conduct of the 
 Theatre. He shall also act as Secretary to the Board of Trustees. 
 He shall be a paid official, but shall not be expected to give his whole 
 time to the service of the Theatre. 
 
 (8) The Theatre being a Repertory Theatre, not less than thirty 
 plays of full length shall be acted in any twelve months, and not less 
 than three different plays of full length shall be acted in any one 
 week. A play of full length means a play occupying at least two- 
 thirds of the whole time of any given performance. But two two-act 
 plays, or three one-act plays, composing a single programme, shall, 
 for the purposes of this regulation, be reckoned as equivalent to a 
 play of full length. 
 
 (9) No play shall be repeated on more than two consecutive even- 
 ings. A third consecutive performance may, however, be given on an 
 afternoon. That is to say, a play acted on Monday and Tuesday even- 
 ings may be repeated on Wednesday afternoon, but another play must 
 be given on Wednesday evening ; and so on. 
 
 (10) Not less than one-fourth of the performances of any given 
 season shall be devoted to the English Classical Drama, and not less 
 than one-third to the English and foreign Classical Drama taken to- 
 gether. Plays, whether English or foreign, over one hundred years 
 old shall be reckoned as belongino; to the Classical Drama. 
 
 (11) Not more than one-fifth of the performances of any season 
 shall be devoted to foreign plays, whether classical or modern. 
 
 (12) Plays by American authors shall rank as EngUsh, not as 
 foreign, plays.
 
 134 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 (13) No play, old or new, shall be performed more than one 
 hundred times in a single season. 
 
 (14) At least one performance of an English classical play shall 
 be given in every week. 
 
 (15) When a non-copyright play shall have been revived, the 
 Director may order its repetition at any time during the season then 
 current and the two following seasons ; but after that it must be re- 
 considered and re-sanctioned by the Reading Committee for another 
 term of three seasons before it can again be performed. 
 
 (16) The actors and actresses of the company shall be engaged 
 by the Director with regard to their general competence, and not to 
 their particular fitness for any one part. No part, or line of parts, 
 shall be guaranteed by contract to any individual artist. 
 
 (17) No part shall be cast outside the regular company;^ but 
 the Director may pay a celebrated actor or actress (not belonging to 
 the company) the compliment of inviting him or her to appear at the 
 Theatre for occasional performances, supported by members of the 
 regular company, provided, however, that the total number of such 
 complimentary performances in a single season shall not exceed ten. 
 
 (18) At least six out of the thirty-seven plays commonly recog- 
 nised as Shakespeare's shall be acted in every season, and at least sixty 
 performances of Shakespearean plays shall be given. 
 
 (19) No performer (except supernumeraries paid by the perfor- 
 mance) shall be engaged for less than one year or for more than three 
 years. 
 
 (20) No performer shall have the right to refuse any part allotted 
 to him by the Director. 
 
 1 It might sometimes be necessary to make an exception to this rule in the case of 
 a " singing part."
 
 APPENDIX B 
 
 PENSION FUND SUGGESTIONS 
 
 In almost all foreign theatres where a Pension Fund exists, it is 
 supported by actual deductions from the salaries of the actors. This 
 system seems to us undesirable ; though where an actor accepts a 
 lower salary than he would otherwise demand, in consideration of 
 becoming entitled to the privileges of the Pension Fund, his claim 
 upon it is doubtless of the same nature as though he contributed to 
 it in the way of " deferred pay." 
 
 Our proposal is to establish and support the Pension Fund by 
 assigning to it a percentage on the receipts of non-copyright plays, 
 equivalent to the royalty paid to the authors of copyright plays. 
 This method will have the advantage of placing living writers and 
 classics on equal terms. As the Theatre will not directly profit by 
 the fact that a play is non-copyright, the management will be the less 
 tempted, as the phrase goes, to make " Shakespeare a blackleg " — to 
 let the classics, by reason of their greater cheapness, crowd living 
 dramatists oft' the stage. 
 
 Assuming that non-copyright plays would, on the whole, draw less 
 money than copyright plays, wo have estimated the average receipt 
 per performance at ;^i8o. The number of such performances in the 
 season we have outlined is 164; but ten of these would be educational 
 performances at reduced prices on which no royalty would be payable. 
 Thus the number of performances on which the royalty would be pay- 
 able would be 154, giving a total receipt of £2J,'J20. Ten per cent, 
 of this sum would give the Pension Fund an annual income of £2y'j2. 
 
 It is naturally impossible to forecast exactly the claims upon such 
 a fund. The limited number of the persons who benefit by it upsets 
 the averages on which actuarial calculations are based. At the same 
 time, we are assured by the two actuaries who have been good enough 
 to advise us, that, assuming our data to be correct, the sums we pro-
 
 136 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 pose to allot to the Pension Fund ought to be amply sufficient to meet 
 all claims upon it. It will be observed that, under the rules to be 
 hereafter stated, no claim can arise until ten years after the open- 
 ing of the Theatre, during which time the fund will have been 
 accumulating. 
 
 We had originally included a somewhat detailed scheme for pro- 
 viding for the widows and orphans of members of the Theatre. We 
 are advised, however, firstly, that such provision is very unusual in 
 pension schemes ; secondly, that it would be rash to pledge the Theatre 
 to any fixed scale of payments in such cases, so impossible is it to fore- 
 see the claims that might arise. We have therefore thought it best 
 to leave it to the Pension Board (hereafter provided for) to consider 
 such cases on their individual merits, and, where there is evidence of 
 real distress, to make such provision as seems reasonable, and as the 
 circumstances of the Pension Fund permit. It might be advisable to 
 make a rule that every married man, on becoming " pensionable," must 
 insure his life. 
 
 It is further suggested that the Pension Board should be free 
 to exercise a wide discretion in relaxing any rule which, as applied 
 to any individual case, seems to conflict with justice or expediency. 
 For example, the rule which fixes fifty-five and sixty as the ages at 
 which an actress and an actor respectively may retire on a pension, 
 might in certain cases be waived so as to allow an artist, even tliough 
 not positively disabled, to retire at an earlier age. 
 
 The provision for " furloughs " ( Rules 4 and 6) is prompted by 
 the belief that it might often be desirable to allow an actor to 
 accept an engagement for a definite period at another theatre, with- 
 out severing his connection with the National Theatre, or forfeiting 
 any advantages accruing to him from continuity of service. On the 
 other hand, the " bonus-percentages," provided for in Rule 5 , are 
 designed to make a permanent connection with the Theatre more 
 advantageous than intermittent engagements. 
 
 The general rule for Civil Service pensions is that for each year 
 of service an official is entitled to ^^th of the salary he is earning at 
 his retirement. It will be seen that even the lower rate of per- 
 centage laid down in Rule 5 is, on the whole, and apart from bonus- 
 percentages, slightly more advantageous than the Civil Service rate. 
 
 Many details might have to be regulated into which, at the
 
 PENSION FUND 137 
 
 present stage, we have not thought it worth while to enter. We 
 trust, however, that the following set of rules will be found to repre- 
 sent in outline a practicable pension scheme. 
 
 RULES 
 
 I. A member of the Theatre who, under the rules to be herein- 
 after stated, shall have become entitled, on disablement or superannua- 
 tion, to enjoy the benefits of the Pension Fund, is hereinafter called 
 a " pensionable " member. 
 
 II. The Pension Fund shall be administered, and all disputes, 
 &c., settled, by a Board consisting of: — The Director of the Theatre 
 {ex officio Chairman) ; the Business Manager {ex officio Treasurer) ; 
 the Solicitor ; and two Actors, whom the pensionable members of the 
 Theatre shall elect by ballot from among their own number for a 
 term of two years. One will retire each year, but will be indefinitely 
 re-eligible. 
 
 III. A member of the Theatre shall become pensionable when 
 (and not until) he or she shall have been regularly engaged in the 
 service of the Theatre for ten consecutive years. No engagement 
 for a shorter term than three years shall count as a " regular 
 engagement " for the purposes of this paragraph. The term " member 
 of the Theatre " is to be taken as covering, not only actors and 
 actresses, but certain officials of the Theatre,^ whose period of qualifi- 
 cation shall be the same as that required of actors and actresses. 
 
 IV. A furlough granted by the Director to a member of the 
 Theatre, who remains under engagement to resume service at the 
 Theatre at a definite date, shall not be held to break the continuity of 
 service required to render that member pensionable. But the period 
 of his furlough shall not be reckoned as part of the necessary ten 
 
 1 The Director. Two Scenic Artists. 
 
 Tlie Literary Manager. The Chief of the Wardrobe. 
 
 The Business Manager. The First Wardrobe Assistant. 
 
 The Acting Manager. The Wardrobe Mistress. 
 
 Two Box-Office Clerks. The Master Carpenter. 
 
 The Conductor of the Orchestra. The Property Master. 
 
 The Stage Manager. The Chief Electrician. 
 
 The Head Prompter. The Stage-Doorkeeper.
 
 138 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 years. In other words, at the end of ten years from the date of 
 his first three years' engagement, he will have to serve a further 
 period equivalent to the length of his furlough before he becomes 
 pensionable. 
 
 V. When a member of the Theatre has become pensionable (as 
 provided in Rule III.) he shall be entitled, on permanent disablement 
 from further service, to a pension consisting of a percentage of the 
 salary he is then earning, such percentage to be calculated upon the 
 following basis : — 20 per cent, in consideration of the qualifying term 
 of ten years, and an additional i| per cent, for each further year of 
 service at any salary under ;!^6oo, and 2 per cent, for each further 
 year of service at a salary of ^600, presumed (for the purposes of the 
 Pension Fund) to be the highest salary paid in the Theatre. More- 
 over, a bonus-percentage shall be added for every fifth year of con- 
 tinuous service (after the qualifying ten years) on the following scale : 
 For the fifth year an additional i per cent. ; for the tenth year an 
 additional 2 per cent. ; for the fifteenth year an additional 3 per cent. ; 
 for the twentieth year an additional 4 per cent. ; and so on. But in 
 no case shall the sum total exceed two-thirds of the salary on which 
 it is calculated. 
 
 VI. A furlough (as in Rule IV.) is not held to break continuity of 
 service, but the period of the furlough does not count in the reckoning 
 either of ordinary percentages or of bonus-percentages. 
 
 VII. Pensions are to be calculated on fixed salaries alone, not on 
 total incomes — i.e., salaries plus acting-fees. 
 
 VIII. When a male member of the Theatre ^ shall have reached 
 the age of sixty, or a female member the age of fifty-five, it shall be 
 at his or her option to retire, or at the option of the Director to retire 
 him or her, on the pension then accruing to him or her under Rule V. 
 Should the Director think it advisable to retain the services of a 
 member beyond the ages stated, his or her pension shall continue to 
 increase, as above provided, with every further year of service. 
 
 IX. Should a pensionable member of the Theatre leave its service 
 voluntarily before attaining the age of sixty, he remains entitled at 
 
 ' It would be at the discretion of the Trustees to relax this rule in the case of 
 members of the General Staff; while the Director might relax it in the case not only 
 of actors and actresses, but of other employees. But in no case could either the Trus- 
 tees or the Director overrule an employee's wish to retire at the superannuation age.
 
 PENSION FUND 139 
 
 sixty or disablement to whatever pension he may have earned at the 
 date of his leaving, minus all bonus-percentages to which, by his 
 voluntarily leaving the Theatre, he forfeits all claim. Should he 
 return to the service of the Theatre, the ordinary percentage due to 
 him shall increase year by year from the date of his return on the 
 scale provided in Rule V., and he shall be entitled to a bonus- 
 percentage for every fifth year of continuous service, reckoning from 
 the date of his return. 
 
 X. Should the services of a pensionable member of the Theatre be 
 dispensed with by the management before he attains the age of sixty, 
 he shall be entitled on reaching that age (or on disablement) to the 
 pension which he had earned at the date of his leaving the Theatre, 
 without any additional percentage for subsequent years, but with 
 whatever bonus-percentages he may have become entitled to during 
 his period of service. 
 
 XL An actor or actress who has left the Theatre shall not be 
 entitled to claim a pension at the age of sixty or fifty-five, unless he 
 or she shall then have retired from the stage — i.e., shall have ceased 
 to appear for money.^ 
 
 XII. The Pension Board shall decide all questions as to whether 
 a member of the Theatre is or is not disabled from further service. 
 Should a dispute arise, the member in question may claim to be 
 examined (at his own expense) by three doctors, one appointed by 
 himself, one by the Director, and one by the actors' representatives on 
 the Board. The Board is not bound to act upon the report of the 
 doctors or of a majority of them ; but should they decline to do so, 
 the member may then (but not till then) appeal to the Trustees. 
 
 XIII. On pain of forfeiture, no pension or allowance shall, under 
 any circumstances, be mortgaged or assigned. 
 
 XIV. All expenses of administration of the Pension Fund shall be 
 borne by the fund itself. 
 
 • It may be thought that a pension once earned is earned, and ought to be paid 
 whether the artist is or is not still in active employment. But one main purpose of 
 the Pension Fund is to prevent an actor or actress from lingering too long on the stage ; 
 and to suppress Rule XI. would be to defeat that purpose.
 
 APPENDIX C 
 
 SUBSCRIPTION AND BOOKING SYSTEM 
 
 It is felt that the German Abonnement system, whereby the " Abon- 
 nent " secures a special seat or group of seats for a definite series of 
 performances — one or more night in each week or fortnight, or what- 
 ever the arrangement may be — though probably practicable in the 
 Municipal Theatres of provincial towns, could scarcely be introduced 
 in a National or Central Theatre. The vast size of London, and the 
 multipUcity of a Londoner's engagements, would render it inappUcable. 
 It would be desirable to have one Special Subscription evening in the 
 week, like the " Mardis " of the Theatre-Franc^ais, for which seats or 
 groups of seats should be rented for the whole season or half the season 
 — at any rate for a definite series of performances. The subscribers to 
 this special series would thus make of the Theatre, on the evening set 
 apart for it, a social rendezvous where they would be sure of meeting 
 once a week the members of their " set." Ultimately, perhaps, two 
 evenings a week, or one evening and one afternoon, might be devoted 
 to such subscription series ; but at first it would be sufficient to try 
 the experiment of one evening a week. As a rule, of course, a different 
 play would have to be presented on each evening of the series. 
 
 Apart from this Special Subscription, an ordinary subscription 
 system should be introduced, having for its basis the common principle 
 of " a reduction on taking a quantity." Every one buying ten places 
 at a time should save from is. 6d. to 6d. on each place. What he 
 would actually buy in the first instance would be a block of ten 
 coupons, which he could afterwards exchange for numbered seats, one 
 two, three, or more at a time, on whatever dates he pleased — provided 
 of course that there were seats disengaged to meet his application. 
 These blocks of coupons should be purchasable at the Theatre itself 
 and from certain accredited agents. 
 
 We beUeve it would be convenient for all parties that the exchange
 
 SUBSCRIPTION 
 
 141 
 
 of coupons for numbered seats should, for the most part, be conducted 
 by post, and have fi-amed the following set of rules on that assumption. 
 In order that the system may work successfully, it is necessary that 
 all the seats in any given part of the house should be (as nearly as 
 possible) equally advantageous, so that subscribers may be willing to 
 leave the booking-clerks to allot them whatever seats may be available, 
 confident that in no case will they have to put up with an imperfect 
 view of the stage or an otherwise undesirable position. 
 
 RULES FOR SUBSCRIPTION 
 
 (Abonnement) 
 
 (i) Subscription seats are purchasable in blocks of ten coupons 
 at the following rates : — 
 
 
 Ordinary Price 
 
 Subscription 
 
 Block of Ten 
 
 
 per Seat. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Coupons. 
 
 Stalls, Section A (Pront Rows) . . 
 
 7s. 6d. 
 
 6s. 
 
 £z 
 
 „ „ B (Back Rows) . . 
 
 6s. 
 
 5s. 
 
 2 10 
 
 Circle, Section C (Front Rows) . . 
 
 63. 
 
 53. 
 
 2 lO 
 
 „ „ D (Back Rows) . . 
 
 5s. 
 
 43. 
 
 2 
 
 Second Circle, Section E (Reserved) 
 
 43. 
 
 3s- 
 
 I 10 
 
 Second Circle, Section F (Unre- 
 
 
 
 
 served) 
 
 23. 6d. 
 
 2S. 
 
 I 
 
 Third Circle, Section F (Unre- 
 
 
 
 
 served) 
 
 2s.6d. 
 
 28. 
 
 I 
 
 Holders of Series F coupons are admitted on presenting them, 
 like money, at the pay-box. All other coupons must be exchanged 
 for numbered seats before they become available. There is also a 
 shilling gallery for which no subscription coupons are issued.^ 
 
 (2) The Director reserves the right to declare the subscription 
 suspended on a maximum of 60 performances in each season. For 
 these performances coupons will be available only if accompanied 
 by a supplement bringing their price up to the full price of the 
 
 ' For the sake of the Special Subscription evenings (see Rule 4), if for no other 
 reason, the Theatre ought, if possible, to have a certain number of well-placed private 
 boxes ; but until the design is prepared, it is of little use to discuss their prices or the 
 conditions under which they would be let.
 
 142 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 seats, i.e., on each coupon of Section A, a supplement of is. 6d. ; on 
 each coupon of Sections B, C, D, and E, a supplement of is.; on 
 each coupon of Section F, a supplement of 6d. On the back of 
 each coupon is printed the amount of the supplement necessary to 
 render it available for these performances. 
 
 (3) The Director further reserves the right to give a maximum 
 of fifteen performances in each season at reduced prices (Stalls — 
 Section A, 4s. ; Section B, 3s. First Circle — Section C, 3s. ; Section 
 D, 2s. Second and Third Circles — Sections E and F, is. Gallery, 
 6d.). For these performances coupons of Sections A to E inclusive 
 shall not be available at all. Coupons of Series F shall be available 
 without supplement for the back rows of the First Circle (Section D 
 seats on ordinary occasions). 
 
 (4) Thursday evening in each week is or may be set apart as a 
 Special Subscription evening, devoted, that is to say, to subscribers 
 who rent (at full prices, with no reduction for quantity) one par- 
 ticular seat or set of seats for every Thursday evening throughout 
 a definite series of not less than ten weeks. On these evenings only 
 the seats not secured by Special Subscribers will be available for 
 ordinary subscribers. 
 
 (5) In all the reserved parts of the house one row of seats in 
 every three is devoted to purchasers at ordinary rates ; but seats not 
 secured by purchasers at ordinary rates before midday on the day 
 before a given performance may be allotted to subscribers ; and con- 
 versely, seats not secured by subscribers before midday on the day 
 before a given performance, may be allotted to purchasers at ordinary 
 rates. 
 
 (6) Every subscriber on first purchasing coupons shall place his 
 or her name and address on a register to be kept at the Theatre. 
 To this address all communications (except as provided in Rule 10) 
 shall be directed ; and the Theatre will not be responsible for any 
 delay or inconvenience arising from the subscriber's failure to give 
 notice of a change of address. 
 
 (7) Every Wednesday evening a notification of the repertory to 
 be presented during the week beginning ten days later will be posted 
 to the registered address of subscribers (except to holders of Section 
 F coupons), accompanied by a form of application for seats, and an 
 (unstamped) envelope bearing the printed address of the Theatre.
 
 SUBSCRIPTION ■ 143 
 
 Subscribers desiring seats will then fill in the appUcation-form and 
 return it, with the requisite coupons, to the booking-office before the 
 following Monday at midday. Until that day and hour no applica- 
 tion-form will be examined, nor can any personal application by 
 subscribers for seats during the week in question be entertained. At 
 midday on the Monday all application-forms will be opened, not in 
 the order in which they reach the Theatre, but at random, the 
 principle being that up to that hour no subscriber shall have priority 
 over another. This principle, however, is subject to the exception set 
 forth in the following rule. 
 
 (8) Any subscriber who by sending in a previous application-form 
 along with his current form shows that he has already applied unsuc- 
 cessfully for seats for a particular play, shall have priority over those 
 making then first application for seats for that play. Two unsuccess- 
 ful application-forms give priority over one only, and so forth. 
 
 (9) Seats allotted to subscribers, or the notification that they 
 cannot be allotted, will be posted so as to reach subscribers (in 
 London) by the first post on the Tuesday morning. 
 
 (10) Subscribers who have not made application for seats in the 
 way and at the time indicated in Eule 7, may apply for seats per- 
 sonally or by letter any time after the booking-office opens (for 
 ordinary as well as subscription booldng) on Tuesday morning ; but 
 their chance of finding seats available is obviously less than if they 
 apply as above prescribed. 
 
 (11) Subscribers may at any time secure any ordinary-price seats 
 not already disposed of by paying in coupons along with the supple- 
 ment necessary to bring their price up to the ordinary price of the seats. 
 
 (12) The notification of the week's repertory will be sent only to 
 the registered address of the subscriber. Tickets, &c., will be sent to 
 Avhatever address is given on the application-form. The Theatre will 
 not be responsible for any delay occurring in the post, or through the 
 chance misdirection of any letter sent to an address other than the 
 registered address of the subscriber. 
 
 (13) Subscribers who claim priority as provided in Kule 8 should 
 write in the upper left-hand corner of the envelope enclosing their 
 application-forms the word " Priority." The Theatre does not under- 
 take to rectify any failure to grant priority arising through neglect of 
 this rule.
 
 144 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 (14) Subscribers may apply for seats by ordinary letter, and not 
 on the forms provided by the Theatre ; but such applications, as 
 entailing additional w-ork to the staff, will be postponed to those 
 made in the prescribed form, and are therefore the more likely to be 
 unsuccessful. 
 
 (15) Subscription-coupons are transferable in so far that they, or 
 the tickets issued in exchange for them, may be presented, or even 
 sold, privately and as between acquaintances. But every subscriber, 
 on first placing his name on the register, will be required to sign an 
 undertaking not to traffic publicly in them, to expose them for sale 
 in any shop, bar, restaurant, or public place, or to hawk them, or 
 transfer them to any one who shall hawk them, on the street, in the 
 environs of the Theatre, or elsewhere. All coupons held by any one 
 who shall infringe this undertaking shall thereby become null and 
 void, and the Theatre may strike his name oflf the register and decline 
 to sell him any further coupons. 
 
 (16) When dates for the performances of a particular play can be 
 fixed for more than a fortnight ahead (for instance, when it is found 
 possible to determine that such-and-such a play shall be given, say, 
 every Tuesday and Friday evening for the next six weeks), this will 
 be announced in the notification of the repertory, and seats for these 
 performances may be applied for on the application-form accompanying 
 the announcement, or on any subsequent application-form. 
 
 (17) Coupons of all Sections from A to E inclusive are issued for 
 one season alone ; but unused coupons may be exchanged for coupons 
 of the following season on payment of a fee of 2d. per coupon, or 
 will be bought back by the Theatre at a discount of 25 per cent, on 
 the price paid for them. Coupons of Series F are not restricted to 
 one season and cannot be bought back. 
 
 (18) The Management in no case guarantees the appearance of 
 any individual artist, though his or her name may have been included 
 in the official announcements ; nor does the unavoidable substitution 
 of one front-piece or after-piece for another imply the cancelling of 
 seats allotted for that performance. But when the principal play 
 of the evening (or afternoon) has to be altered, seats will be trans- 
 ferred, or money returned, at the choice of the holder, and every 
 effort will be made, by early and prominent notification of the change, 
 to obviate inconvenience and disappointment.
 
 [Specimen NOTIFICATION OF REPERTORY to be Posted to 
 
 SUBSCEIBERS EACH WEDNESDAY EVENING, ALONG WITH BlAXK 
 
 FoBii OF Application for Seats.] 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Wednesday, February i8, 19 — 
 The Repertory for the week March 2 to March 7 will be as follows : — 
 
 Monday, March 2. — The Critic, by R. B. Sheridan. (Messrs. Tower Hill, 
 
 Cornhill, Finsbury, Gracechurch, Clement Dane, Bethnal Green ; 
 
 Mesdames Dalmeny, Mentmore, Alnwick.) And Sweethearts, by 
 
 W. S. Gilbert. (Mr. Savile Rowe, Miss Chatsworth.) 
 Tuesday, March 3. — Hamlet, by WillLam Shakespeare. (Messrs. Kingsway, 
 
 Wimpole, Holborn, Knightsbridge, Smithfield, PaU-MaU ; Mesdames 
 
 Hatfield, Blenheim.) 
 Wednesday, March 4 (afternoon). — The Liars, by Henry Arthur Jones. 
 
 (Messrs. Bryanston, Smithfield, Lothbury, Ludgate, Clement Dane ; 
 
 Mesdames Wahner, Alnwick, Chatsworth, Arundel.) 
 
 (Evening) The CounteSS Cathleen, by W. B. Yeats. (Messrs. 
 
 Wimpole, Finsbury, CornhUl, Fenchurch, Lothbury ; Mesdames Tin- 
 
 tagel, Pevensey, Knole.) 
 Thursday,^ March 5. — Special Subscription Evening — Hamlet. (Cast as 
 
 above.) 
 /Wday, 1/arcA 6.— First Production of The Chiltem Hundreds,^ by . . . . 
 
 (Messrs. Aldwych, Langham, Mark Lane, Savile Rowe, 
 
 Gracechurch, Finsbury, Tower Hill ; Mesdames Elcho, Mentmore, 
 
 Tintagel, Knole.) 
 Saturday, March 7 (afternoon). — Hamlet. (Cast as above.) 
 
 (Evening) The Chiltem Hundreds.^ (Cast as above.) 
 
 N.B. — The Chiltem Hundreds- will be repeated on the afternoon of 
 Wednesday, March 11, and the evening of Thursday, March 12, for which 
 dates seats may be secured. 
 
 The Casts above stated are subject to alteration. 
 
 1 For the Special Subscription (Thursday) Evenings of the present season, no Series A 
 seats are available for ordinary subscribers, andionly a few Series B, 0, and D seats. 
 
 ^ For all these performances of The Chiltem Hundreds the subscription is suspended. 
 Coupons are available only if accompanied by a supplement bringing their price up to the 
 ordinary price of the seats (see back of each coupon). Supplementary payments up to 
 Three Shillings, but not above that sum, accepted in postage stamps. 
 
 145 K
 
 EXTRACT FROM SUBSCRIPTION RULES 
 
 The Director reserves the right to declare 
 the subscription suspended on a maximum 
 of 60 performances in each season. For 
 these performances coupons will be avail- 
 able only if accompanied by a supplement 
 bringing their price up to the ordinary price 
 of the seats. On the back of each coupon 
 is printed the amount of the supplement 
 necessaiy to render it available for these 
 performances. 
 
 The Director further reserves the right 
 to give a maximum of 15 performances in 
 each season at reduced prices. For these 
 performances coupons of Sections A to E 
 inclusive shall not be available at all. Cou- 
 pons o£ Series F shall be available without 
 supplement for the back rows of the First 
 Circle (Section D seats on ordinary occa- 
 sions). 
 
 Thursday evening in each week is or may 
 be set apart as a Special Subscription even- 
 ing. On these evenings only the seats not 
 secured by Special Subscribers wUl be avail- 
 able for ordinary subscribers. 
 
 In alljthe reserved parts of the house one 
 row of seats in every three is devoted to 
 purchasers at orilinary rates ; but seats not 
 secured by purchasers at ordinary rates be- 
 fore midday on the day before a given per- 
 formance may be allotted to subscribers ; 
 and conversely, seats not secured by sub- 
 scribers before midday on the day before 
 a given performance, may be allotted to pur- 
 chasers at ordinary rates. 
 
 Every Wednesday evening a notification 
 of the repertory to be presented during the 
 week beginning ten days later will he posted 
 to the registered address of subscribers (ex- 
 cept to holders of Section F coupons) accom- 
 panied by a form of application for aeats, 
 and an (unstamped) envelope bearing the 
 printed address of the Theatre. Subscribers 
 desiring seats will then fill in the applica- 
 tion-form and return it, with the requisite 
 coupons, to the booking-office before the 
 foUovring Monday at midday. Until that 
 day and hour no application - form will be 
 examined, nor can any personal application 
 by subscribers for seats during the week in 
 question be entertained. At midday on the 
 Monday all application-forms will be opened, 
 not in the order in which they reach the 
 Theatre, but at random, the principle being 
 that up to that hour no subscriber shall 
 have priority over another. This principle, 
 however, is subject to the exception set 
 forth in the following rule. 
 
 146 
 
 Any subscriber who by sending in a pre- 
 vious application-form along with his cur- 
 rent form shows that he has already applied 
 unsrmcssfuUij for seats for a particular play, 
 shall have priority over those making their 
 first application for seats for that play. 
 Two nnsuocessful application - forms give 
 priority over one only, and bo forth. 
 
 Subscribers who claim priority shonid 
 write in the upper left-hand comer of the 
 envelope enclosing their application-forms 
 the word "Priority." The Theatre does 
 not undertake to rectify any failure to 
 grant priority arising through neglect of 
 this rule. 
 
 Seats allotted to subscribers, or the notifi- 
 cation that they cannot be allotted, wiU be 
 posted so as to reach subscribers (in London) 
 by the first post on the Tuesday morning. 
 
 Subscribers who have not made applica- 
 tion for seats in the way and at the time 
 above indicated, may apply for seats person- 
 ally or by letter at any time after the book- 
 ing-office opens (for ordinary as well as 
 subscription booking) on Tuesday morning. 
 
 Subscribers may at any time secure any 
 ordinary-price seats not already disposed of 
 by paying in coupons along with the sup- 
 plement necessary to bring their price up to 
 the ordinary price of the seats. 
 
 Every subscriber on first purchasing cou- 
 pons shall place his or her name and address 
 on a register to be kept at the Theatre. The 
 notification of the week's repertory will be 
 sent only to the registered address of the 
 subscriber. Tickets, &c., will be sent to 
 whatever address is given on the applica- 
 tion-form. The Theatre will not be respon- 
 sible for any delay occurring in the post, 
 or through the chance misdirection of any 
 letter sent to an address other than the 
 registered address of the subscriber. 
 
 Subscribers may apply for seats by ordi- 
 nary letter, and not on the forms provided 
 by the Theatre ; but such applications, as 
 entaUing additional work to the staff, will 
 be postponed to those made in the prescribed 
 form, and are therefore the more likely to 
 be unsuccessful. 
 
 Subscription-coupons are transferable in 
 so far that they, or the tickets issued in 
 exchange for them, may be presented, or 
 even sold, privately, and as between ac- 
 quaintances. But they must not be pub- 
 licly or systematically trafficked in. 
 
 [Por fu/rihcr d-ctails see fvU copy of RvUi 
 iisued to every Subaoriber.^
 
 
 S 
 
 
 -x 
 
 
 H 
 
 w 
 
 CO 
 
 Pi 
 
 c 
 
 Eh 
 
 H 
 
 <! 
 
 
 W 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 
 14 
 
 H 
 
 CO 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 <i 
 
 ?! 
 
 iz; 
 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 HH 
 
 is 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 
 <i 
 
 H 
 
 iz; 
 
 O 
 
 c> 
 
 
 &5 
 
 ■a 
 
 ° "I 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 5! 3 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 09 
 
 
 
 
 
 € 
 
 1 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 5 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ** 
 
 
 § 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 
 &p 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 o 
 e 
 >> 
 
 
 "i 
 
 -2 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 1 
 
 03 
 
 d 
 
 a,' 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 p^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 <« 
 
 ^ 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 {^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *i 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 §* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ej 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 S 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 1 
 
 ■8 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 « 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ». 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ■8 
 1 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .— Cfl 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 C fc. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ;^0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 !; 
 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 ^ 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ae to 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 = O^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 S*' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 2 
 
 m 
 
 f*) 
 
 M 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 :s 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 ^ 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Iri 
 
 Z3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 a 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 M 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 «3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,-^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 . 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 il 
 
 
 .« 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Cs, 
 
 
 
 
 
 .c c 
 
 
 i 
 r 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 ^ 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 1 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 si 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 t 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 s ^ 
 
 
 
 •3 a 
 
 OB'S _-- 
 
 ' O K °0 
 
 sis « 
 
 147
 
 [Remarks on the Specimen Notification of Repertory 
 AND Specimen Application-Form for Seats. 
 
 Both the Notification Leaflets and the Apphcation Forms would 
 be larger than they are here shown — the Application Form three or 
 four times the size. 
 
 It would probably be advisable to indicate by the use of a special 
 type the plays which are given with the subscription suspended. 
 
 The Application-Form may at first glance seem complex and 
 difficult to understand; but after using it two or three times sub- 
 scribers would find it quite simple, and would be able to fill it in 
 rapidly and with ease.] 
 
 148
 
 APPENDIX D 
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 SHAKESPEARE: "KING RICHARD II." 
 
 Richard II. . 
 
 
 . Mr 
 
 Kingsway 
 
 Abbot of WestH (_ ivr^ -r 
 
 Buke of York . 
 
 JJ 
 
 Throgmorton 
 
 minster . 
 
 i 
 
 Duke of Lancaster 
 
 n 
 
 Ludgate 
 
 Lord Marshal . 
 
 . „ F. 
 
 Bolingbroke 
 
 )) 
 
 Wimpole 
 
 Exton . . . 
 
 „ Tower Hill 
 
 Aumerle . . . 
 
 Ji 
 
 Hyde Park 
 
 Scroop . . . 
 
 „ G. 
 
 Duke of Norfolk 
 
 ti 
 
 Fenchurch 
 
 Welsh Captain 
 
 („ Temple 
 1 Barre 
 
 Duke of Surrey 
 
 ») 
 
 Euston 
 
 
 Salisbury 
 
 a 
 
 Longacre 
 
 ist Gardener . 
 
 „ Pall MaU 
 
 Lord Berkeley . 
 
 >J 
 
 A. 
 
 2nd Grardener . 
 
 . „ H. 
 
 Henry Percy 
 
 
 J» 
 
 L. 
 
 A Groom . . 
 
 „ I. 
 
 Ross . . . 
 
 
 n 
 
 Paternoster 
 
 A Servant . . 
 
 „ J. 
 
 Willoughby . 
 
 
 )> 
 
 D. 
 
 A Keeper . . 
 
 „ K. 
 
 Bushey . . 
 
 
 »» 
 
 Finsbury 
 
 
 
 Bagot . . . 
 
 
 »» 
 
 B. 
 
 Queen . . . 
 
 Miss Elcho 
 
 Green . . 
 
 
 jj 
 
 C. 
 
 Duchess of Gloster ,, Hatfield 
 
 Fitzwater 
 
 
 J) 
 
 Knights- 
 
 Duchess of York 
 
 Mrs. Pevensey 
 
 
 bridge 
 
 A Lady to the 
 
 Miss M. 
 
 Bishop of Carlisle 
 
 )) 
 
 Farringdon 
 
 Queen . . . 
 
 
 
 Twelve per 
 
 'ormances. 
 
 
 SHAK 
 
 .ESPEARE: "KIN 
 
 G HENRY IV.," 
 
 Part I. 
 
 Henry IV. . . 
 
 Mr 
 
 Wimpole 
 
 Earl of Worcester Mr. Euston 
 
 Henry, Prince o 
 Wales . . . 
 
 ■)•■ 
 
 Aldwych 
 
 Earl of Northum 
 berland . . 
 
 > ,, Lothbury 
 
 Prince John 
 
 n 
 
 F. 
 
 Hotspur . . . 
 
 „ Kingsway 
 
 Earl of Westmore 
 
 jj 
 
 Smithfield 
 
 Earl of March . 
 
 „ Hyde Park 
 
 land 
 
 
 Archbishop ol 
 
 },, A. 
 
 Sir Walter Blui 
 
 at 
 
 )) 
 
 Paternoster 
 
 York . . . 
 
 '49
 
 ISO NATIONAL 
 
 THEATRE 
 
 
 Earl of Douglas . Mr. Knightsbridge 
 
 Owen Glendower ./" Somerset 
 1 House 
 
 Peto 
 
 Bardolpb . . 
 Francis .... 
 
 Mr. E. 
 „ Pallmall 
 ,, G. 
 
 Sir Richard Ij^^g 
 Vernon ■ . J 
 
 ist Carrier . . . 
 2nd Carrier . . . 
 
 „ H. 
 
 FalstafF . . . . „ Barbican 
 Sir Michael . . . „ C. 
 
 Chamberlain . . 
 
 „ J. 
 
 Poins Finsbury 
 
 Gadshill . . . . i " I^ethnal 
 I Green 
 
 Lady Percy . 
 Lady Mortimer 
 Mrs. Quickly . . 
 
 Miss Walmer 
 „ Blenheim 
 ;, Knole 
 
 Twelve performances. 
 
 SHAKESPEARE : " KING HENRY IV.," Fakt IL 
 
 Henry IV. . . . Mr 
 
 . Wimpole 
 
 Bardolph . . . 
 
 . Mr 
 
 Pallmall 
 
 Henry, Prince of 1 
 
 Wales . . . . / " 
 
 Aldwych 
 
 Pistol .... 
 
 l» 
 
 Fenchurch 
 
 Poins .... 
 
 H 
 
 Finsbury 
 
 Duke of Clarence . ,, 
 
 B. 
 
 Peto .... 
 
 • )* 
 
 E. 
 
 Duke of Lancaster ,, 
 
 Paternoster 
 
 Shallow . . . 
 
 >) 
 
 Throgmorton 
 
 Humphrey of Glou-) 
 cester . . . .) " 
 
 C. 
 
 Silence . . . 
 
 »» 
 
 Cornhill 
 
 
 Davy .... 
 
 ») 
 
 Longacre 
 
 Earl of Warwick . ,, 
 
 Knightsbridge 
 
 Fang .... 
 
 ») 
 
 J. 
 
 Earl of Weetmore- ) 
 land . . . . f " 
 
 Smithfield 
 
 Snare .... 
 
 >J 
 
 K. 
 
 Mouldy . . . 
 
 »» 
 
 Tower Hill 
 
 Gower , 
 
 F. 
 
 Shadow . . . 
 
 * ») 
 
 D. 
 
 Lord Chief -Justice „ 
 
 Euston 
 
 Wart .... 
 
 ») 
 
 F. 
 
 Ear! of Northum- ) 
 berland . . / " 
 
 Loth bury 
 
 Feeble . . . 
 
 •{■• 
 
 Bethnal 
 Green 
 
 Scroop, Archbishop ( 
 of York . . . j " 
 
 A. 
 
 Bullcalf . . . 
 
 . » 
 
 Temple 
 
 
 
 Baixe 
 
 Lord Mowbray . . „ 
 
 G. 
 
 First Drawer . 
 
 »» 
 
 L. 
 
 Lord Hastings . . „ 
 
 H. 
 
 
 
 
 Lord Bardolpb . . ,, 
 
 White Hall 
 
 Lady Northumber 
 
 ■|m 
 
 iss Hatfield 
 
 Sir John Colville . „ 
 
 E. 
 
 land . . 
 
 
 Travers , 
 
 I. 
 
 Lady Percy . . 
 
 
 , Walmer 
 
 Morton . . . . „ 
 
 Farringdon 
 
 Mrs. Quickly . 
 
 ■ 
 
 , Knole 
 
 Sir John Falstaff . „ 
 
 Barbican 
 
 Doll Tearsheet . 
 
 
 , Alnwick 
 
 His Page . . . Master X. 
 
 
 
 
 Five performances.
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 151 
 
 "SHAKESPEARE: "KING HENRY V." 
 
 Henry V. . . 
 Duke of Bedford 
 Duke of Gloucester 
 Duke of Exeter 
 Earl of Salisbury 
 Earl of Westmore 
 
 land 
 Archbishop of Can 
 
 terbury 
 Bishop of Ely 
 Earl of Cambridge 
 Lord Scroop 
 Sir Thomas Grey 
 Sir Thomas Erping 
 
 ham ... 
 Gower 
 Fluellen . 
 Macmorria 
 Jamy . 
 Bates 
 Williams . 
 Pistol . . 
 
 Mr. 
 
 I- 
 
 [.. 
 
 Aldwych 
 
 I. 
 
 D. 
 
 Lothbury 
 
 0. 
 
 Smithfield 
 
 Somerset 
 
 House 
 A. 
 E. 
 B. 
 0. 
 
 E. 
 
 Farringdon 
 
 Mark Lane 
 
 Tower Hill 
 
 F. 
 
 G. 
 
 Ludgate 
 
 Fenchurch 
 
 Chorus 
 
 Nym 
 
 Bardolph .... 
 
 Boy 
 
 Charles VI. . . . 
 Lewis the Dauphin 
 Duke of Burgundy 
 Duke of Orleans . 
 Duke of Bourbon . 
 Constable of France 
 Rambures . . 
 Grandpr6 
 
 Mont joy .... 
 
 Governor of Har- 
 
 fleur . . . . 
 
 French Soldier . . 
 
 Mr. Longacre 
 
 „ Pallmall 
 Master X. 
 Mr. Finsbury 
 
 ,, Hyde Park 
 
 „ Euston 
 
 ,, H. 
 
 „ A. 
 
 „ Knightsbridge 
 
 „ L. 
 
 „ K. 
 
 „ White Hall 
 
 }n J- 
 ., B. 
 
 Isabel, Queen of 
 
 France 
 Katharine . 
 Alice . . . 
 Mrs. Quickly 
 
 I Mi.ss Inveraray 
 . . „ Blenheim 
 
 Longleat 
 Knole 
 
 Miss Haddon Hall 
 
 Ten performances. 
 
 A. W. PINERO : " THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT." 
 
 Claude Emptage . 
 Sir Fletcher Port 
 
 wood . . . . 
 The Bishop of St. 
 
 Olpherta . 
 Eraser of Locheen 
 John AUingham . 
 Denzil Shafto . . 
 Peter Elphick . . 
 
 Mr. Clement Dane Horton .... Mr. B. 
 
 Cornhill 
 
 Farringdon 
 
 White Hall 
 Langham 
 Paternoster 
 A. 
 
 Quaife . . 
 
 Mrs. Emptage . 
 Justina Emptage 
 Theophila Eraser 
 Mrs. Cloys 
 Olive AUingham 
 
 „ C. 
 
 . Mrs. Dalmeny 
 „ Chatsworth 
 „ Mentmore 
 . ,, Carnarvon 
 . „ Tintagel 
 
 Twelve performances.
 
 152 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 HENLEY AND STEVENSON: "BEAU AUSTIN." 
 
 Beau Austin . . Mr. Kingsway 
 John Fenwick . . „ Knightsbridge 
 Anthony Musgrave „ Savile Rowe 
 Menteith . . . ,, Throgmorton 
 A Royal Duke . . „ A. 
 
 Seven performances. 
 
 Dorothy Musgrave Miss Elcho 
 
 Miss Evelina ) Mrs. Pevensey 
 Foster .... J ^ 
 
 Barbara Ridley . Miss Alnwick 
 
 SAINT CECILIA. 
 
 Mr. Bryanston 
 Mark Lane 
 Somerset House 
 Tower Hill 
 Fenchurch 
 Ludgate 
 Farringdon 
 Bethnal Green. 
 Longacre 
 
 Mr. Temple Barre 
 
 Miss Belvoir 
 
 ,, Arundel 
 
 „ Longleat 
 
 Mrs. Penshurst 
 
 Miss Haddon Hall 
 
 ,, Wahner 
 
 Forty-one performances. 
 
 W. S. GILBERT: "TOM COBB." 
 
 Colonel O'Fipp . . 
 Tom Cobb . . . 
 Whipple . . . . 
 Mr. Effingham . . 
 Bulstrode Effing- 
 ham . . . . 
 
 Sir Sampson 
 
 gend 
 Valentine 
 Scandal . 
 Tattle . . 
 Ben . . 
 Foresight 
 Jeremy 
 Trapland . 
 
 Le- 
 
 Mr. Holborn 
 „ Gracechurch 
 „ White Hall 
 Throgmorton 
 Clement 
 Dane. 
 
 }" 
 
 Footman 
 
 Mr. A. 
 
 Matilda O'Fipp . Miss Inveraray 
 Mrs. Effingham . Mr.s. Penvensey 
 Caroline Effingham Miss Walmer 
 Biddy „ M. 
 
 Six performances 
 
 OONGREVE: "LOVE FOR LOVE." 
 Buckram . . . . 
 
 ■ Mr. Fenchurch 
 
 ,, Langham 
 
 „ White Hall 
 
 „ Mark Lane 
 
 „ Savile Rowe 
 
 „ Throgmorton 
 
 „ Farringdon 
 
 Snap 
 
 Mr. A. 
 „ B. 
 
 Miss Belvoir 
 „ Knole 
 „ Inveraray 
 ,, Alnwick 
 Nurse Mrs. Penshurst 
 
 Angelica . . . 
 Mrs. Foresight . 
 Mrs. Frail . . 
 Miss Prue . . 
 
 Temple Barre Jenny Miss M. 
 
 Nine performances.
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 153 
 
 HADDON CHAMBERS: 
 
 Mr. Parbury . . Mr. Aldwych 
 Mr. George Gun- ) _ Q^^^y,^^], 
 
 ning .... J 
 Colonel Armitage . „ Ludgate 
 
 'TYRANNY OF TEARS." 
 Mr. A. 
 
 Miss Arundel 
 „ Walmer 
 
 Evans . 
 Hyacinth 
 ward . 
 Mrs. Parbury 
 
 Wood- 
 
 Four performancea 
 MOLlfiRE: "DON JUAN." 
 
 Don Juan . . 
 
 Mr 
 
 Langham 
 
 Sganarelle . . 
 
 )j 
 
 Mark Lane 
 
 Gusnian . . 
 
 ») 
 
 A. 
 
 Don Carlos . . 
 
 jj 
 
 Euston 
 
 Don Alonso . . 
 
 I) 
 
 Lothbury 
 
 Don Louis . . 
 
 >» 
 
 Wimpole 
 
 Francisque . . 
 
 ,, 
 
 B. 
 
 Pierrot . . 
 
 )) 
 
 Pallmall 
 
 The Statue . . . 
 
 )} 
 
 Fenchurch 
 
 La Violette . . . Mr. C. 
 Ragotin . . . . „ D. 
 Monsieur Dimanche „ Cornhill 
 La Ram^e . . . ,, E. 
 
 Elvire Miss Tintagel 
 
 Charlotte Longleat 
 
 Mathurine • . . „ Alnwick 
 
 Seven performances. 
 
 "THE FLIGHT OF THE DUCHESS." 
 
 Miss Elcho 
 
 Mentmore 
 
 Chatsworth 
 
 Hatfield 
 
 Carnarvon 
 
 Inveraray 
 
 Ten performancea 
 OSCAR WILDE: "THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST." 
 
 Mr 
 
 Kingsway 
 
 
 Hyde Park 
 
 
 Savilc Rowe 
 
 
 Clement Dane 
 
 
 White Hall 
 
 
 Holborn 
 
 
 Paternoster 
 
 
 Tower Hill 
 
 Worthing, I j^^g^j^j^g^j^ 
 
 John 
 J.P 
 
 Algernon MoncriefF 
 Rev. Canon Chas- 
 uble, D.D. . . 
 Merriman . . . 
 Lane 
 
 Gracechurch 
 Throijmorton 
 
 A. 
 B. 
 
 Lady Bracknell . Mrs. Dalmeny 
 
 The Hon. Gwendo- \ -Kr- -r, ■, ■ 
 „ . . > Miss Belvoir 
 
 len iairrax . . J 
 
 Cecily Cardew . . „ Alnwick 
 
 Miss Prism ... „ Hatfield 
 
 Five performances.
 
 154 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 SHAKESPEARE: "THE TEMPEST.' 
 
 Alonso . . . 
 Sebastian . . 
 Prospero . . . 
 Antonio . . 
 
 , Mr. Lothbury 
 „ Wimpole 
 „ Kingsway 
 
 ,, Euston 
 
 Trinculo . . . 
 Stephano 
 Master of Ship 
 Boatswain . . 
 
 . Mr. Throgmorton 
 . „ Barbican 
 . „ Longacre 
 . „ Pallmall 
 
 Ferdinand . . 
 
 „ Hydo Park 
 
 Ariel .... 
 
 ■ „ X. 
 
 Gonzalo . . . 
 Adrian . . . 
 
 ,, Ludgate 
 „ Finsbury 
 
 Miranda . . . 
 
 . Miss Bleinheim 
 
 Francesco . . . 
 Caliban . , . 
 
 „ Knightsbridge 
 J „ Somerset 
 1 House 
 
 Iris 
 
 Ceres .... 
 Juno .... 
 
 • „ M. 
 . ., N. 
 . « 0. 
 
 Thirty-one performances. 
 
 LABIOHE AND GRUNDY : 
 
 Gold- 
 
 A PAIR OF SPECTACLES." 
 
 Benjamin 
 finch . 
 Uncle Gregory 
 Percy . . 
 Dick . . . 
 Mr. Lorimer 
 Joyce . . . 
 
 ':} 
 
 Mr. Tower Hill. 
 
 „ Farringdon. 
 
 „ A. 
 
 „ Savile Rowe. 
 
 „ B. 
 
 „ C. 
 
 Bartliolomew, a 
 Shoemaker 
 
 Another Shoe- 
 
 maker .... 
 
 i Mr. D. 
 
 I Mrs. Goldfinch 
 I Lucy Lorimer 
 
 Three performances. 
 
 Miss Arundel. 
 „ M. 
 
 SHAKESPEARE: "THE TAMING OF THE SHREW." 
 
 A Lord . 
 
 
 . Mr. Lothbury. 
 
 Tranio 
 
 f Mr. Bethnal 
 ■ \ Green. 
 
 Christopher 
 
 Sly 
 
 . „ Pallmall. 
 
 
 Hostess . 
 
 • • 
 
 . Miss M. 
 
 Biondello 
 Grumio 
 
 . . „ B. 
 
 . . „ Mark Lane 
 
 Baptista . 
 
 , , 
 
 . Mr. Ludgate. 
 
 Curtis 
 
 . . „ c. 
 
 Vincentio 
 
 . . 
 
 . ,, A. 
 
 Pedant . . 
 
 . . „ D. 
 
 Lucentio . 
 
 . 
 
 . „ Finsbury. 
 
 Tailor . . . 
 
 . . ,. E. 
 
 Petruchio 
 
 . 
 
 . ,, Fenchurch. 
 
 
 
 Gremio . 
 
 . 
 
 „ Cornhill. 
 
 Katharine . 
 
 . . Miss Tintagel. 
 
 Hortensio 
 
 • • 
 
 . „ Paternoster. 
 
 Bianca . . 
 Widow . . 
 
 . . ,, Longleat. 
 . . ,, N. 
 
 Thirteen performances.
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 155 
 
 Vogelreuter . . 
 George von Hart 
 
 wig. . . . 
 Pastor HafFke . 
 Plotz .... 
 
 SUDERMANN : '• JOHANNISFEUER. 
 . Mr. Holborn. 
 
 }■ 
 
 Smithfield. 
 
 Throgmorton. 
 CornhUl. 
 
 Frau Vogelreuter . Mrs. Pevensey. 
 
 }•■ 
 
 Elcho. 
 
 TruJe Miss Blenheim. 
 
 Marikke (Heim- 
 
 chen) . 
 
 The Gip.sy . Mrs. Penshurst. 
 
 Housekeeper . Miss M, 
 
 Maidservant . . „ N. 
 
 Four performances. 
 
 "THE BACKWATER." 
 
 Mr. Langham. 
 „ Bryanston. 
 „ White Hall. 
 ,, Clement Dane. 
 
 Miss Walmer. 
 „ Arundel. 
 „ Inveraray. 
 ,, Carnarvon. 
 
 Four performances. 
 
 SHERIDAN : " THE CRITIC 
 
 Sir Fretful Plagi- 
 ary .... 
 
 Puff .... 
 
 Dangle 
 
 eer .... 
 
 Under-Prompter 
 
 Mr. Hopkins 
 
 Mrs. Dangle 
 
 Lord Burleigh . 
 
 Governor of Til- 
 bury .... 
 Earl of Leicester . „ A. 
 Sir Walter Raleigh „ B. 
 
 Mr. Tower Hill. 
 
 „ Cornhill. 
 „ Finsbury. 
 „ Gracechurch. 
 
 „ J. 
 
 By the Prompter. 
 
 Mrs. Dalmeny. 
 
 j Mr. Clement 
 I Dane. 
 
 Wimpole. 
 
 Christopher ) j^^ ^ 
 atton . . . i 
 
 } 
 
 Sir 
 
 Hatton 
 Master of tht 
 
 Horse ... 
 Don Ferolo Whisk 
 
 erandos 
 Beefeator 
 Justice 
 
 Son ... . 
 Constable . . 
 Thames . . . 
 
 Tilburina . . 
 ConfiJaut 
 Justice's Lady . 
 ist and 2nd Niece 
 
 \ 
 
 D. 
 
 Bethnal 
 Green. 
 „ E. 
 „ F. 
 „ G. 
 „ H. 
 „ I- 
 
 Miss Mentmore. 
 
 ,, Alnwick. 
 
 „ M. 
 Misses N. and O 
 
 Nine performances.
 
 156 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 W. B. YEATS: "THE COUNTESS OATHLEEN." 
 
 Shemus Rua 
 Teig, his son 
 Aleel . . . 
 Maurteen, a 
 
 dener 
 1st Demon . 
 2nd Demon . 
 Herdsman . 
 1st Peasant . 
 2nd Peasant 
 Sheogue . 
 A Steward . 
 3rd Peasant 
 
 gar 
 
 Mr. 
 
 Wimpole 
 
 A. 
 
 Finsbui-y 
 
 Cornhill 
 
 Fenchurch 
 
 Lothbury 
 
 B. 
 
 0. 
 
 D. 
 
 E. 
 
 H. 
 
 1. 
 
 4th Peasant . . . Mr. J. 
 
 Tho-Countees Oath- 
 leen ... 
 
 Oona, her foster- 
 mother 
 
 Maire, wife 
 Shemus 
 
 I st Peasant Woman „ M. 
 
 2nd Peasant Woman „ N. 
 
 A Sowlth .... „ O. 
 
 A Thivish P. 
 
 I Miss Tintagel 
 
 ) 
 
 > Mrs. Pevensey 
 
 ° i Miss Knole 
 
 Six performances. 
 
 HENRY ARTHUR JONES: "THE LIARS. 
 
 Colonel Sir Chris- 
 topher Dering . 
 Edward Falkner . 
 Gilbert Nepean 
 George Nepean 
 Freddy Tatton . . 
 Archibald Coke 
 Waiter .... 
 Gadsby .... 
 Taplin .... 
 
 > Mr. Bryanston 
 
 Mr. Smithfield 
 
 „ Lothbury 
 
 „ White HaU 
 
 „ ClementDane 
 
 „ Ludgate 
 
 „ A. 
 
 „ B. 
 
 „ C. 
 
 Footman . 
 
 Mr. D. 
 
 Alnwick 
 
 Lady Jessica N^ I Miss Walmer 
 
 pean .... J 
 Lady Rosamond ) 
 
 Tatton . . . . i 
 Dolly Coke ... ,, Chatsworth 
 Beatrice Ebernoe . „ Arundel 
 BIrs. Crespin . . „ M. 
 Ferris N. 
 
 Nine performances. 
 
 SHAKESPEARE: "HAMLET." 
 
 Claudius . 
 Hamlet . 
 Fortinbras 
 Horatio . 
 Polonius . 
 Laertes . 
 
 Mr. Wimpole 
 „ Kingsway 
 „ Hyde Park 
 „ Knightsbridge 
 „ Holborn 
 „ Smithfield 
 
 Rosencrantz . 
 
 Guildensteru 
 
 Osric . 
 
 A Priest . . 
 
 Marcellus 
 
 Bernardo . 
 
 Mr. A. 
 „ B. 
 
 ,, Savile Rowe 
 „ 0. 
 
 ,, Euston 
 „ D.
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 Francisco. . . 
 
 Reynaldo . 
 
 ist Player . . 
 
 2nd Player . . 
 
 ist Gravedigger 
 
 2nd Gravedigger . „ H. 
 
 Mr. E. 
 „ F. 
 
 „ Thrc^morbon 
 
 „ G. 
 
 „ Pallmall 
 
 Ghost . . 
 
 Queen 
 Ophelia . 
 3rd Player 
 
 Mr. Bryanston 
 
 Miss Hatfield 
 „ Blenheim 
 „ M. 
 
 Nineteen ^ performances. 
 
 Mr. Aldwych 
 ,, Langham 
 „ Maik Lane 
 „ Savile Rowe 
 ,, Gracechurch 
 ,, Finsbury 
 
 "THE CHILTERN HUNDREDS." 
 
 Mr. Tower Hill 
 
 Miss Elcho 
 ,, Mentmore 
 „ Tintagel 
 ,, Knole 
 Forty-three performances. 
 
 Gracechurch 
 
 Marquis de River- ) ^^ ^^ 
 
 olles . . . . j 
 Lucien de River- 1 
 
 olles . . . . / " 
 
 Stanislas de Gran- I , , , , 
 
 \ „ Aldwych 
 dredou . . . . ) 
 
 Hemi de Simeux . „ Finsbury 
 
 DUMAS FILS: " FRANCILLON." 
 
 Celestin . . . 
 
 Jean de Carillac ,, 
 
 Pinguet . . . . I " 
 
 Tower Hill 
 Bethnal 
 Green 
 
 Francine de River 
 olles ... 
 
 Th^rese Smith . , 
 
 Annette de River- 
 olles 
 
 Elisa . . 
 
 Mr. A. 
 
 > Miss Belvoir 
 ,, Inveraray 
 ' > ,, Chatsworth 
 . . „ M. 
 
 Ten performances. 
 
 T. W. ROBERTSON: "CASTE." 
 
 George D'Alroy 
 Captain Hawtree 
 Eccles . . . 
 Sam Gerridge . 
 Dixon .... 
 
 Mr. Smithfield 
 „ Bryanston 
 ,, Mark Lane 
 „ Tower Hill 
 .. A. 
 
 Marquise de 
 Maur . . 
 Esther Eccles 
 Polly Ecclea 
 
 St. ) 
 
 Mrs. Dalmeny 
 
 Miss Arundel 
 „ Mentmore 
 
 Seven performances.
 
 158 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 SHAKESPEARE: "ROMEO AND JULIET." 
 
 Escalus . . . 
 
 . Mr. Euston 
 
 Balthasar . . 
 
 Mr. 0. 
 
 Paris .... 
 
 . „ Knightsbridge 
 
 Sampson . 
 
 „ D. 
 
 Montague . . 
 
 . „ A. 
 
 Gregory . 
 
 . „ E. 
 
 Capulet . . . 
 
 ( ,, Somerset 
 ' 1 House 
 
 Peter .... 
 Abraham . . 
 
 „ Pallmall 
 
 Romeo . . . 
 
 . ,, Hyde Park 
 
 An Apothecary 
 
 „ Longacre 
 
 Mercutio . . 
 
 . ,, Throgmorton 
 
 
 
 Benvolio 
 
 „ White Hall 
 
 Lady Montague 
 
 Miss M. 
 
 Tybalt . . . 
 
 . „ Smithfield 
 
 Lady Capulet . 
 
 „ Knole 
 
 Friar Laurence 
 
 „ Ludgate 
 
 Juliet. . . . 
 
 „ Tintagel 
 
 Friar John . . 
 
 „ B. 
 
 Nurse .... 
 
 Mrs. Penshurst 
 
 
 Thirteen performances. 
 
 
 
 BRIEUX: "LA 
 
 ROBE ROUGE." 
 
 
 Mouzon . . . 
 
 . Mr. Fenchurch 
 
 Yanetta . . . 
 
 . Miss Elcho 
 
 Etchepar . . . 
 
 . „ Throgmorton 
 
 The Mother . . 
 
 . Mrs. Pevensey 
 
 Vagret . . . 
 
 „ Finsbury 
 
 Madame Vagret 
 
 . Miss Carnarvon, 
 
 The Procureur . 
 
 . „ A. 
 
 Madame Buzerat 
 
 . ., M. 
 
 The President . 
 
 . „ Longacre 
 
 Bertha . . . 
 
 . „ N. 
 
 Mondoubleau . 
 
 . „ CornhiU 
 
 Oatialena . . 
 
 . „ Chatsworth 
 
 Ardeuil . . . 
 
 . „ White Hall 
 
 
 
 Seven performances. 
 
 BEN JONSON : " EVERY MAN IN HIS HUMOUR." 
 
 Knowell . . • 
 
 Mr 
 
 Tower Hill 
 
 Justice Clement 
 
 . Mr. Barbican 
 
 Edward Knowell 
 
 >> 
 
 Smithfield 
 
 Roger Formal . 
 
 . „ B. 
 
 Brainworm . 
 
 11 
 
 Temple Barre 
 
 Servant . 
 
 • ,, c. 
 
 Master Stephen 
 
 )> 
 
 Savile Rowe 
 
 
 
 George Downright 
 
 JJ 
 
 Euston 
 
 Dame Kitely 
 
 . Miss Walmer 
 
 Kitely . . . 
 
 ti 
 
 Lothbury 
 
 Mistress Bridget 
 
 . „ M. 
 
 Thomas Cash . 
 
 )) 
 
 A. 
 
 Tib .... 
 
 . Mrs. Penshurst 
 
 Captain Bobadill 
 
 >1 
 
 Wimpole 
 
 
 
 Master Matthew 
 
 {■■ 
 
 Bethnal 
 Green 
 
 Prologue . . . 
 
 . Mr. D. 
 
 Oliver Cobb . . 
 
 {■■ 
 
 Somerset 
 House 
 
 
 
 Seven performances.
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 159 
 
 "HODGE AND THE VICAR." 
 
 Mr. Mark Lane 
 Pall Mall 
 Barbican 
 Holborn 
 Gracechurch 
 Cornhill 
 Clement Dane 
 Lothbury 
 
 Mr. Farringdon 
 
 Miss Mentmore 
 „ Knole 
 „ Haddon Hall 
 „ Arundel 
 ,, Alnwick 
 
 Eight performances. 
 
 R. 0. CARTON: "LADY HUNTWORTH'S EXPERIMENT." 
 
 }•■ 
 
 Captain Dorvaston Mr. Bryanston 
 Rev. Audley Pil- ) ,, Bethnal 
 
 lenger . 
 Rev. H. Thoresby 
 Mr. Crayll . 
 Gandy . . . 
 Newspaper Boy 
 
 Green 
 „ A. 
 
 ,, Tower Hill 
 „ B. 
 
 Master X. 
 
 Miss Hannah Pil- 
 lenger . . . . 
 
 Lucy 
 
 Keziah . . . . 
 Caroline Rayward 
 
 Miss Hatfield 
 
 ,, Alnwick 
 
 „ M. 
 
 ,, Belvoir 
 
 Seven performances. 
 
 SHAKESPEARE: "AS YOU LIKE IT." 
 
 Banished Duke 
 Duke Frederick 
 Amiens . . . 
 Jaques . . . 
 
 Le Beau . . . 
 
 Charles . . . 
 Oliver. . . . 
 Jaques de Bois . 
 Orlando . 
 
 , Mr 
 
 »> 
 »j 
 »> 
 
 ») 
 
 n 
 
 Finsbury 
 Lothbury 
 X. 
 
 Kingsway 
 Bethnal 
 Green 
 Paternoster 
 Euston 
 A. 
 
 Aldwych 
 Wimpole 
 B. 
 
 Touchstone . . 
 ist Lord . . . . 
 Sir Oliver Martext 
 
 Corin 
 
 Silvins 
 
 William . , . . 
 
 Rosalind . . . . 
 Celia 
 
 Mr. Barbican 
 „ Knightsbridge 
 „ C. 
 
 „ Farringdon 
 „ Hyde Park 
 „ Pallmall 
 
 Miss Haddon HaU 
 Loneleat 
 
 Phebe 
 
 ., Walmer 
 
 Adam .... 
 Dennis . . . 
 
 Audrey . . . . 
 Hymen . . . . 
 
 ,, Alnwick 
 
 Nine performances.
 
 i6o 
 
 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 A. W. PINERO: "TRELAWNY OF THE WELLS." 
 Theatrical Folk. 
 
 James Telfer 
 Augustus Colpoys 
 Ferdinand Gadd 
 Tom Wrench . 
 O'Dwyer . . . . 
 
 Mr. Wimpole 
 ,, Longacre 
 „ White Hall 
 „ Savile Rowe 
 „ Tower Hill 
 
 Mrs. Telfer . . 
 Avonia Bunn 
 Rose Trelawny . 
 Imogen Parrott 
 
 Miss Knole 
 „ Ohatsworth 
 „ Blenheim 
 ,, Mentmore 
 
 Non-Theatrical Folk. 
 
 Vice-Chancellor Sir 
 
 W. Gower 
 Arthur Gower 
 
 Smithfield 
 Bethual 
 
 !• Mr. Ludgate 
 
 „ Smithfi( 
 ( ,, Bethua] 
 Captain De Foenix J. Green 
 
 J) 
 
 Mr. Ablett 
 Chai'lea . 
 
 Pallmall 
 
 Clement 
 
 Dane 
 
 Trafalgar ) ,, _ 
 
 > Mrs. Pevensey 
 
 Miss 
 
 Gower 
 
 Clara De FoenLx . Miss Alnvick 
 Mrs. Mossop . . Mrs. Penshurat 
 Sarah Miss M. 
 
 SLx performances. 
 
 MAETERLINCK : " PELLEAS AND MELISANDE." 
 
 ist Servant 
 
 {•• 
 
 Yniold 
 
 Pelleas .... Mr. Hyde Park 
 Golaud ....,, Knightsbridge 
 
 Arkel „ Farringdon 
 
 Temple 
 Barre 
 
 Doctor , A. 
 
 Six performances. 
 
 Queen Genevieve 
 Melisande . . 
 
 Servants . . 
 
 Mr. X. 
 
 Miss Hatfield 
 
 ,, Longleat 
 f Misses M., N., 
 ) 0., P., Q. 
 
 BULWER LYTTON : " MONEY." 
 
 Lord Glossmore 
 Sir John Vesey 
 
 Sir Frederick 
 
 Blount 
 Stout . . . 
 
 . Mr. Lothbury 
 I „ Somerset 
 ( House 
 
 Graves 
 
 > „ Finsbury 
 
 Barbican 
 Bethnal 
 Green 
 
 Evelyn . . . . 
 Captain Dudley 
 
 Smooth . . . 
 Sharpe .... 
 
 Toke 
 
 Franz, a taUor . 
 Tabouret, an up 
 
 holsterer . 
 
 Mr. Aldwych 
 > ,, Bryanston 
 
 „ Longacre 
 „ A. 
 ,. B. 
 
 :}•• 
 
 c.
 
 CASTS OF PLAYS 
 
 i6i 
 
 MacFinch, a jewel- (. -sr . -p) 
 ler ) 
 
 MacStucco, an ) 
 architect . . . i " 
 
 Kite, a horse- 
 dealer . 
 
 ':}» 
 
 Crimson, a por- ) 
 
 trait-painter . . f " 
 Grab, a publisher . „ 
 
 E. 
 
 F. 
 
 G. 
 H. 
 
 Patent, a coach- ) , , _ 
 
 builder 
 An Old Member 
 
 Lady Franklin . 
 Georgina Vesey 
 Clara Douglas 
 
 Two performances. 
 
 /■ 
 
 ■{ 
 
 „ Temple 
 Barre 
 
 , Miss Knole 
 „ Walmer 
 ,, Arundel 
 
 W. S. GILBERT: "SWEETHEARTS." 
 
 Mr. Spreadbrow . Mr. Savile Rowe 
 f „ Temple 
 ' ( Barre 
 
 Wilcox 
 
 Miss Northcott 
 Ruth . . . . 
 
 Miss Chats- 
 worth 
 „ M. 
 
 Maurteen Bruin 
 
 Shawn Bruin 
 Father Hart 
 
 W. B. YEATS: "THE LAND OF HEART'S DESIRE." 
 
 Bridget Bruin . , Miss Hatfield 
 Maire Bruin . . ,, Longleat 
 Fairy Child ... „ X. 
 
 ..{ 
 
 Mr. Temple 
 Barre 
 ,, Knightsbridge 
 „ Holborn 
 
 Count Federigo 
 Filippo . . . .| " 
 
 TENNYSON : " THE FALCON." 
 
 Monna Giovanna . Miss Elcho 
 Elisabetta . . . Mrs. Pevensey 
 
 Mr. Aldwych 
 Temple 
 Barre 
 
 King Rene . 
 Count Tristan 
 Sir GeoflFrey 
 Sir Almeric . 
 Ebn Jahia . 
 
 HERZ AND WILLS : " lOLANTHE." 
 
 Mr. Holborn Bertrand . . . Mr. C. 
 
 Aldwych 
 
 Martha .... Miss M. 
 
 Haddon 
 HaU 
 
 B. 
 
 Cornhill 
 
 lolanthe 
 
 { " 
 
 FREDERICK FENN : " JUDGED BY APPEARANCES." 
 
 Arthur Denison 
 A Burglar . . 
 
 Mr. Grace- 
 church 
 ,, Euston 
 
 A Constable 
 Helen Denison 
 
 Mr. A. 
 
 Miss Arundel 
 L
 
 i62 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 
 "THE 
 
 SPARTAN." 
 
 Mr 
 
 Langham 
 
 
 Mrs. Dalmeny 
 
 )) 
 
 Clement Dane 
 
 
 Miss Inveraray 
 
 n 
 
 Gracechurch 
 
 
 „ Carnarvon 
 
 )) 
 
 Paternoster 
 
 
 
 
 "AT THE 
 
 DOCK GATES." 
 
 Mr 
 
 Holborn 
 
 
 Miss Mentmore 
 
 >» 
 
 Bryanston 
 
 
 „ Haddon HaU 
 
 1) 
 
 Pallmall 
 
 
 Mrs. Penshurst 
 
 11 
 
 Cornhill 
 
 
 Miss Carnarvon 
 
 PARTS PLAYED BY PRINCIPAL MEMBERS OF THE 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 Mr. KixGswAY. Richard II., Hotspur, Beau Austin, Prospero, Hamlet, 
 Jaques. Part in one New Play. (loo performances.) 
 
 Mr. Aldwych. Prince of Wales (Henry IV., Parts i and 2), Henry 
 v., Mr. Parbury (Tyi-anny of Tears), Orlando, Alfred Evelyn, 
 Count Federigo (The Falcon), Tristan (lolanthe). Part in one 
 New Play. (75 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Langham. John Allingham (The Benefit of the Doubt), Valen- 
 tine (Love for Love), Don Juan. Parts in three New Plays. 
 (83 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Mark Lane. Fluellen, Tattle (Love for Love), Sganarelle (Don 
 Juan), Grumio, Eccles (Caste). Parts in three New Plays. 
 (138 performances.) 
 
 Mr. LuDGATE. John of Gaunt, Williams (Henry V.), Colonel Armi- 
 tage (Tyranny of Tears), Gonzalo (Tempest), Baptista (Taming of 
 the Shrew), Archibald Coke (The Liars), Marquis de Riverolles 
 (Francillon), Friar Laurence, Sir William Gower (Trelawny). 
 Part in one New Play. (149 performances.) 
 
 Mr. WiMPOLE. Bolingbroke, Hemy IV., Don Louis (Don Juan), 
 Sebastian (The Tempest), Governor of Tilbury (The Critic), 
 Shemus Rua (Countess Cathleen), Claudius (Hamlet), Bobadil 
 (Every Man in his Humour), Adam (As You Like It). (123 
 performances.)
 
 CHARACTER LISTS 163 
 
 Mr. Fenchurch. Duke of Norfolk (Richard II.), Pistol (Henry IV., 
 Part 2, and Henry V.), Sir Sampson Legend (Love for Love), 
 Statue (Don Juan), Petruchio, ist Demon (Countess Cathleen), 
 Mouzon (La Robe Rouge). Part in one New Play. ( 1 1 o 
 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Barbican. FalstafF, Stephano (The Tempest), Justice Clement 
 (Every Man in his Humour), Touchstone, Stout (Money). Part 
 in one New Play. (74 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Bryansto.v. Sir Christopher Dering (The Liars), Ghost (Hamlet), 
 Captain Hawtree (Caste), Captain Dorvaston (Lady Huntworth's 
 Experiment), Dudley Smooth (Money). Parts in three New 
 Plays. (100 performances.) 
 
 Mr. HoLBORN. Colonel OTipp (Tom Cobb), Vogelreuter (Johannis- 
 feuer), Polonius, Father Hart (Land of Heart's Desire), King 
 Ren^ (lolanthe;. Parts in three New Plays. (74 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Somerset House. Owen Glendower, Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury (Henry V.), Caliban, Capulet, Oliver Cobb (Every Man in 
 his Humour), Sir John Vesey (Money). Part in one New Play. 
 (116 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Pallmall. 1st Gardener (Richard II.), Bardolph (Henry IV., 
 Part I , Part 2 ; Henry V.), Pierrot (Don Juan), Boatswain 
 (Tempest), Sly (Taming of the Shrew), ist Gravedigger, Peter 
 (Romeo and Juliet), Mr. Ablett (Trelawny). Parts in two New 
 Plays. (156 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Tower Hill. Exton (Richard II.), Mouldy (Henry IV., Part 2), 
 Macmorris (Henry V.), Benjamin Goldfinch (A Pair of Spec- 
 tacles), Sir Fretful Plagiary (The Critic), Jean de CarUlac 
 (Francillon), Sam Gerridge (Caste), Knowell (Every Man in his 
 Humour), Mr. Crayll (Lady Huntworth's Experiment), O'Dwyer 
 (Trelawny). Parts in three New Plays. (170 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Savile Rowe. Anthony Musgrave (Beau Austin), Ben (Love 
 for Love), Dick (A Pair of Spectacles), Osric, Stephen (Every 
 Man in his Humour), Tom Wrench (Trelawny), Mr. Spreadbrow 
 (Sweethearts). Parts in two New Plays. (112 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Gracechurch. Tom Cobb, George Gunning (Tyranny of Tears), 
 Algernon Moncrieff (Importance of being Earnest), Sneer (The 
 Critic), Lucien (Francillon), Denison (Judged by Appearances). 
 Parts in three New Plays. (loi performances.)
 
 i64 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Mr. Clement Daxe. Claude Emptage (The Benefit of the Doubt), 
 Bulstrode Effingham (Tom Cobb), Burleigh (The Critic), Freddy 
 Tatton (The Liars), Charles (Trelawny of the Wells). Parts in 
 four New Plays. (72 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Throgmorton. Duke of York (Richard II.), Shallow, Menteith 
 (Beau Austin), Mr. Effingham (Tom Cobb), Foresight (Love for 
 Love), Chasuble (Importance of being Earnest), Trinculo, Pastor 
 Haftke (Johannisfeuer), ist Player (Hamlet), Mercutio, Etche- 
 par (La Robe Rouge). (118 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Hyde Park. Aumerle, Earl of March (Henry IV., Part i), 
 Dauphin (Henry V.), Ferdinand (The Tempest), Fortinbras, 
 Romeo, Silvius (As You Like It), Pelleas (Pelleas and Melis- 
 sande). Part in one New Play. (130 performances,) 
 
 Mr. CoRNHiLL. Silence, Sir Fletcher Portwood (The Benefit of the 
 Doubt), M. Dimanche (Don Juan), Gremio (The Taming of the 
 Shrew), Plotz (Johannisfeuer), Puff (The Critic), Mondoubleau 
 (La Robe Rouge), Ebn Jahia (lolanthe). Parts in two New 
 Plays. (82 performances.) 
 
 Mr. White Hall. Lord Bardolph (Hem-y IV., Part 2), Montjoy 
 (Henry V.), Eraser of Locheen (The Benefit of the Doubt), 
 Whipple (Tom Cobb), Scandal (Love for Love), George Nepean 
 (The Liars), Benvolio, Ardeuil (La Robe Rouge), Gadd (Tre- 
 lawny). Parts in two New Plays. (9 1 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Bethnal Green. Gadshill (Henry IV., Part i). Feeble (Henry 
 IV., Part 2), Tranio, Don Ferolo Whiskerandos (The Critic), Pin- 
 guet (Francillon), Matthew (Every Man in his Humour), Rev. 
 Audrey Pillenger (Lady Huntworth's Experiment), Le Beau (As 
 You Like It), Graves (Money). Part in one New Play. (131 
 performances.) 
 
 Mr. Smithfield. Westmoreland (Henry IV., Part i , Part 2 ; Henry 
 v.), Worthing (The Importance of being Earnest), Hartwig 
 (Johannisfeuer), Edward Falkner (The Liars), George D'Alroy 
 (Caste), Tybalt, Edward KnoweU (Every Man in his Humour), 
 Arthur Gower (Trelawny). (97 performances.) 
 
 Miss Elcho. Queen (Richard II.), Dorothy Musgrave (Beau Austin), 
 Marikke (Johannisfeuer), Yanetta (La Robe Rouge), Monna 
 Giovanna (The Falcon). Parts in two New Plays. (9 1 perform- 
 ances.)
 
 CHARACTER LISTS 165 
 
 Miss Belvoib. Angelica (Love for Love), Gwendolen Fairfax (Impor- 
 tance of being Earnest), Francine de RiveroUes (Francillon), 
 Caroline Rayward (Lady Huntworth's Experiment). Part in 
 one New Play. (72 performances.) 
 
 Miss Mentmore. Theophila Eraser (The Benefit of the Doubt), Til- 
 burina (The Critic), Polly Eccles (Caste), Imogen Parrott (Tre- 
 lawny). Parts in four New Plays, (i 06 performances.) 
 
 Mrs. Penshurst. Nurse (Love for Love), The Gipsy (Johannisfeuer), 
 Nurse (Romeo and Juliet), Tib (Every Man in his Humour), Mrs. 
 Mossop (Trelawny). Parts in two New Plays. (89 perform- 
 ances.) 
 
 Miss KxoLE Mrs. Quickly, Mrs. Foresight (Love for Love), Maire 
 (Countess Cathleen), Lady Capulet, Mrs. Telfer (Trelawny), Lady 
 Franklin (Money). Parts in two New Plays. (78 perform- 
 ances.) 
 
 Mrs. Dalmexy. Mrs. Emptage (The Benefit of the Doubt), Lady 
 Bracknell (Importance of being Earnest), Marquise (Caste), Mrs. 
 Dangle (Critic). Part in one New Play. (41 performances.) 
 
 Miss Inveraray. Isabel (Henry V.), Matilda (Tom Cobb), Mrs. Trail 
 (Love for Love), Therese Smith (Francillon). Parts in three 
 New Plays. (57 performances.) 
 
 Miss TiNTAGEL. Olive (The Benefit of the Doubt), Elvira (Don Juan), 
 Katharine (Taming of the Shrew), Countess Cathleen, Juliet. 
 Part in one New Play. (94 performances.) 
 
 Miss Walmer. Lady Percy, Caroline (Tom Cobb), Mrs. Parbury 
 (Tyranny of Tears), Lady Jessica (The Liars), Dame Kately (Every 
 Man in his Humour), Phebe (As You Like It), Georgina (Money). 
 Parts in two New Plays. (99 performances.) 
 
 Miss Blenheim. Lady Mortimer, Katherine (Henry V.), Miranda, 
 Trude (Johannisfeuer), Ophelia, Rose Trelawny. (82 perform- 
 ances.) 
 
 Miss Longleat. Alice (Henry V.), Charlotte (Don Juan), Bianca 
 (Taming of the Shrew), Celia, Melisande, Maire Bruin (The Land 
 of Heart's Desire). Part in one New Play. (94 performances.) 
 
 Miss Haddon Hall. Chorus (Henry V.), Rosalind, lolanthe. Parts 
 in three New Plays. (87 performances.) 
 
 Miss Arundel. Hyacinth (Tyranny of Tears), Mrs. Goldfinch (Pair 
 of Spectacles), Beatrice Ebernoe (The Liars), Esther Eccles, Clara
 
 i66 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 Douglas (Money), Helen (Judged by Appearances). Parts in 
 three New Plays. (86 performances.) 
 
 Miss Carnarvon. Mrs. Cloys (The Benefit of the Doubt), Madame 
 Vagret (La Robe Rouge). Parts in four New Plays. (52 per- 
 formances.) 
 
 Mrs. Pevensey. Duchess of York (Richard II.), Miss Foster (Beau 
 Austin), Mrs. Effingham (Tom Cobb), Frau Vogelreuter (Johan- 
 nisfeuer), Oona (Countess Cathleen), The Mother (La Robe 
 Rouge), Miss Gower (Trelawny), Elisabetta (The Falcon). (64 
 performances.) 
 
 Miss Alnwick. Doll Tearsheet, Barbara Ridley (Beau Austin), Miss 
 Prue (Love for Love), Mathurine (Don Juan), Cecily Cardew 
 (Importance of being Earnest), Confidant (Critic), Lady Rosamond 
 (The Liars), Lucy (Lady Huntworth's Experiment), Audrey, Clara 
 (Trelawny). Part in one New Play. (81 performances.) 
 
 Miss Chatsworth. Justina (The Benefit of the Doubt), Dolly Coke 
 (The Liars), Annette (Francillon), Catialena (La Robe Rouge), 
 Avonia Bunn (Trelawny), Miss Northcott (Sweethearts). Part 
 in one New Play. (70 performances.) 
 
 Miss Hatfield. Duchess of Gloster (Richard II.), Lady Northumber- 
 land, Miss Prism (Importance of being Earnest), Queen (Hamlet), 
 Miss Pillenger (Lady Huntworth's Experiment), Queen (Pelleas 
 and Melisande), Bridget (The Land of Heart's Desire). Part in 
 one New Play. (72 performances.)
 
 APPENDIX E 
 
 THE THEORY OF THEATRICAL ENDOWMENT: 
 EXTRACTS FROM SPEECHES AND ARTICLES. 
 
 John Hare : Speech at the Royal Academy Banquet, 
 April 30, 1904. 
 
 And now, Mr. President, may I be forgiven if I take this oppor- 
 tunity to make one little plea on behalf of the Cinderella of the Arts — 
 the Drama. True, her sisters have not been either haughty or unkind, 
 but she still awaits her fairy prince to take her by the hand, to raise 
 her from the basement, and give her the privileges enjoyed by those 
 more favoured. In the presence of so many distinguished members 
 of the Legislature I would venture to express a hope that on some fair 
 spring afternoon when, free from the graver cares of State, their minds 
 may lightly turn to thoughts of love — to love of the arts (cheers) — 
 they may help us to the fulfilment of our legitimate aspirations, the 
 endowment of a National Theatre — a theatre which should uphold 
 the noblest traditions of the British stage, where the best and worthiest 
 dramas of British authors should be performed, and to which a sound 
 school of gratuitous dramatic teaching should be attached. (Cheers.) 
 Such an institution would at once raise the dignity of the drama to 
 the level it occupies in other great nations of the world, and would 
 help to check those malignant growths which are poisoning and 
 undermining our very existence, and making our stage a byword and 
 reproach. (Cheers.) 
 
 A. W. PiNERO : Speech to the Pen and Pencil Club, Edinburgh, 
 February 25, 1903. 
 
 Of course it is the case that every theatrical season does not pro- 
 duce a masterpiece ; well, this country is not alone in that respect. A 
 
 fine play is the rarest product of any country. But where other coun- 
 
 167
 
 i68 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 tries are ahead of us — at least, I hold so — is that when a fine play is 
 produced they do something for it. They preserve it ; they take a 
 reasonable amount of pride in it ; they do not allow it, when it has 
 once been seen and admired, to lie neglected, forgotten ; they take 
 good care that, from time to time, it shall be displayed as evidence of 
 what they can do in that particular department of art and literature. 
 And there you have, in a nutshell, one of the great uses — I do not by 
 any means say the only use — of a theatre which, whether established 
 by the State, or by a municipal corporation, or by private munificence, 
 shall be independent of the purely commercial conditions which too 
 frequently govern the drama in Great Britain. Yes, but you will ask 
 — Have we existing in Great Britain sufficient material to stock such 
 a shop ? I think we have. I think you would find that, given the 
 shop — given a National or Repertory Theatre — you could make, even 
 at the start, a highly respectable show. In short, I believe firmly that, 
 under the more favourable conditions I have indicated, it would be 
 discovered that the maligned British drama is a thing not to be so very 
 much ashamed of after all. 
 
 Henry Arthur Jones. " The Recognition of the Drama by the 
 State." Nineteenth Century, March 1904. 
 
 And now at last we have come to the moment when it is plain 
 to everybody that the system is not working, and cannot be got to 
 work ; and that if the EngUsh drama and the English stage are to be 
 kept alive in our midst, if all the golden leisure and evening hours of 
 the English people are not to be wasted in the emptiest, tawdriest 
 tomfoolery, if this is to be avoided, " something must be done ! " 
 But what? . . . 
 
 We have made great progress towards a National Theatre during 
 the last few years, or at least we have made very great progress 
 towards the necessity for a National Theatre. We have made such 
 progress that we seem to be irresistibly and instinctively moving 
 towards it, drawn by hands that we cannot see, and called by 
 whisperings from a future not very far away. I am sure that the 
 establishment of a National Theatre should be the fervent hope, the 
 object of every actor's, and every dramatist's, ambition. And if we 
 can once get our root idea to catch fire and blaze, a National Theatre
 
 THEORY OF ENDOWMENT 169 
 
 must follow as the night the day. I believe it is coming. Our great 
 care must be to see that no abortive or premature attempt is made 
 to start it on wrong lines, or under wrong management, or without 
 sufficient security. A false step made at this moment, an unworkable 
 scheme started in a crude way, blundering along for a few months or 
 years to certain disaster, would be the greatest misfortune that could 
 just now befall the English drama. 
 
 Sydney Lee : " Shakespeare and the Modern Stage." 
 Nitieteenth Century, January 1900. 
 
 It is a tradition of the modern stage that every revival of a 
 Shakespearean play at a leading theatre must exceed in magnificence 
 all that went before. , . . The natural result is that Shakespearean 
 revivals in London are comparatively rare; they take place at un- 
 certain intervals, and only those plays are viewed with favour by the 
 managers which lend themselves in their opinion to ostentatious 
 spectacle. . . . Until Shakespeare is represented constantly and in his 
 variety, the spiritual and intellectual enlightenment that his achieve- 
 ment offers to Englishmen wiU remain wholly inaccessible to the 
 majority who do not read him, and wiU be only in part at the com- 
 mand of the few who do. Nay more : until Shakespeare is repre- 
 sented on the stage constantly and in his variety, EngHshmen are 
 liable to the imputation not merely of failing in the homage due to 
 the greatest of their countrymen, but of falling short of their neigh- 
 bours in Germany and Austria in the capacity of appreciating 
 supremely great imaginative literature. 
 
 H. Hamilton Fyfe : " A Permanent Shakespearean Theatre." 
 Fortnightly Revicxv, May 1900. 
 
 . . . We have gradually come to think that, in the greatest city 
 in the world, there is no chance at all for artistic enterprise. Every 
 time we visit a Continental capital, even a small Continental town, we 
 feel a prick of amazement and regret ; but the practical person is 
 generally not far off, and we have to be content with his pronounce- 
 ment, in a hard tone of absolute finality, that " this sort of thing 
 wouldn't pay in London." ... As to the desirability of " organising
 
 lyo NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 the theatre," I take that to be admitted. No one whose opinion has 
 been formed by knowledge of the conditions of the drama has even 
 contended that long runs, costly mounting which makes long runs 
 necessary, nervous endeavour to meet every momentary change of 
 mood on the public's part, are healthy conditions. Even if this were 
 not so, there are plenty of theatres which will continue on the present 
 lines. Can we not try at least one theatre of the other kind ? 
 
 Brander Matthews : " The Question of the Theatre." 
 North American Review, March 1902. 
 
 The experience of history seems to show that it is unwise to leave 
 any art wholly at the mercy of the money-making motives. Even in 
 the English-speaking countries, where more is abandoned to private 
 enterprise than is thought advisable among the Latin races, galleries 
 have been built for the proper exhibition of the works of living 
 painters and sculptors ; and concert-halls have been erected for the 
 proper performance of orchestral music. In New York, for example, 
 and only a stone's-throw from each other, stand the Carnegie Music 
 Hall and the Vanderbilt Gallery (of the Fine Arts Building), visible 
 evidences of the aid willingly extended by the wealthy to the other 
 arts. In Carnegie Hall, in the course of the season, concerts are 
 given by three or four different symphony-orchestras, the continued 
 existence of which is conditional upon a large subscription or on a 
 guarantee fund, substantially equivalent to a subsidy. And during 
 the same winter months, a series of performances of grand opera, in 
 Italian, in French, and in German, is given at the Metropolitan Opera 
 House — performances made possible only by a very large subscription 
 from the box-holders, and by a reduction of the rental from the figure 
 which the owners of the building would demand if they sought 
 simply for a proper return on the money invested. 
 
 If men of means had not chosen to sink their money in the 
 Metropolitan Opera House and in Carnegie Hall ; if Major Higginson 
 were now to withdraw his support from the Boston Symphony 
 Orchestra, and if the pubUc-spirited music-lovers of Chicago and 
 Pittsburg were to refuse any further subsidy to the orchestras of 
 which they are justly entitled to be proud ; if music were to be 
 deprived of all artificial assistance and forces, to depend for existence
 
 THEORY OF ENDOWMENT 171 
 
 solely upon the working of purely commercial motives — then, music 
 would be exactly in the same position in which the drama is now. 
 
 Much has been done for music ; just as much has been done in 
 other ways for painting, for sculpture, and for architecture. Nothing 
 at all has been done for the drama. It is wholly dependent upon 
 the law of supply and demand, and so long as this is the case, the 
 manager will naturally seek to produce the kind of play likely to 
 please the most people. He will perform it continuously, seven or 
 eight times a week, for as many weeks as possible. He will proclaim 
 its merits as vehemently as he can ; and he will advertise it very 
 much as a circus or a sensational novel is advertised. 
 
 The manager has to present the kind of play which is calculated 
 to please the largest number of possible spectators, and he will be 
 likely to shrink from the kind of play which would appeal to a small 
 public only, which cannot be forced into a long run, and which does 
 not lend itself to circus-methods of booming. In fact, the conditions 
 of the theatre being what they are now in New York and in London, 
 the wonder is that the level of the stage is not lower than it is actually, 
 and that the more intelligent playgoers ever have an opportunity to 
 see anything other than spectacle and sensation. That we have a 
 chance now and then to behold more plays of a more delicate work- 
 manship and of a more poetic purpose, is due partly to the courage 
 and the liberality of certain of the managers, and partly to the 
 honourable ambition of certain of the actors and actresses, seeking 
 occasion for the exercise of their art in a wider range of characters. 
 
 'o^ 
 
 Thus the drama is at a grave disadvantage as compared with the 
 other arts, owing to the absence of all outside aid. There are public 
 libraries for the preservation of the masterpieces of literature, and 
 there are public galleries and public museums for the proper display 
 of the masterpieces of painting and of sculpture. There is no public 
 theatre where the masterpieces of the drama are presented for our 
 study and for our stimulation. It is true that we can read the great 
 plays of the great dramatists ; we can read them by ourselves at our 
 own firesides ; but how pale is a perusal compared with a performance, 
 how inadequate, how unsatisfactory ! Perhaps a mere reading may
 
 172 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 enable us to appreciate some of the purely literary beauties of tlie 
 play ; but it will hardly help us to apprehend its essential dramatic 
 qualities — the very qualities which give the play its true value, and 
 which stand revealed at once when the play is presented in the 
 theatre. 
 
 William Archer : " The Case for National Theatres." 
 Monthly Review, July 1902. 
 
 . . . We contend for a principle and a system : the principle that 
 the acted drama of the English language ought to rank high among 
 the intellectual glories, and among the instruments of culture, of the 
 nation, or rather of the race ; the system of securing this end by 
 giving public (not necessarily official) recognition and support to 
 theatrical art. 
 
 Is there any reader who cavils at the principle I have laid down ? 
 If so, let me beg him to consider the facts. In every city of the 
 United Kingdom, of America, of Australasia, there are from one to 
 thirty or forty theatres, open seven or eight times a week, and many 
 of them crowded night after night with audiences hungry and thirsty 
 for the enjoyment, the stimulation, afforded by what is beyond all 
 doubt the most fascinating and popularly attractive of the arts. 
 Many people, of whom I speak with all respect, " disapprove " of the 
 theatre altogether — not, as matters stand, without some reason. 
 But their disapproval is absolutely impotent. To disapprove of 
 the theatre is simply to disapprove of one of the most universal and 
 ineradicable of human instincts, which leads men to take pleasure 
 in the mimetic reproduction, idealisation, or caricature of their own 
 characters, manners, and passions. Year by year theatres multiply. 
 There is very good reason to believe that not only the absolute 
 number of those who frequent them, but the relative number in 
 proportion to the whole population, is steadily increasing. Can it 
 be doubted that, for good or evil — or rather for good and evil — they 
 exercise an enormous influence ? Can it be doubted that their in- 
 fluence for good, as places of intellectual recreation, stimulation, and 
 invigoration, might easily be far greater than it is ? And is not this 
 end worth taking some trouble to attain. ... If there were but 
 one playhouse in each of the great cities of the English-speaking
 
 THEORY OF ENDOWMENT 173 
 
 world where the poetry and humour of the past, the thought and 
 aspiration of the present, were enabled to attract to them the better 
 elements in the public — now scattered and unorganised for want of 
 any artistic rallying-point — can it be doubted that the theatre would 
 be, what I have said it ought to be — a potent instrument of culture, 
 and one of the intellectual glories of the race ? 
 
 But I must guard against the ambiguity which lurks in the 
 expression " the theatre." Used in this sense it does not, of course, 
 include all theatres, any more than the word " literature " includes all 
 books. The most admirable system of National Theatres would not 
 supplant or abolish the ordinary commercial playhouses. National 
 Theatres would help the better order of commercial theatres by 
 training actors for them, and by augmenting the numbers of the 
 intelligent public ; but the lower class of playhouses they would leave 
 practically untouched, or, at any rate, would atfect no more than 
 would any other institution tending to raise the general level of 
 intelligence. The dramatic amusements of a people, taken as a 
 whole, will always answer to their lower as well as to their higher 
 instincts ; just as the noblest efforts in poetry, philosophy, and fiction 
 do not prevent the bookstalls from being crowded with trash. The 
 defect of the English theatre — as distinguished from English litera- 
 ture and from the theatres of other great nations — is that while it 
 ministers amply to the lower instincts of the race, it answers very 
 imperfectly to the higher instincts. It is this quite needless 
 inequality that the supporters of the National Theatre idea aim at 
 correcting. 
 
 In considering the merits of any system, one naturally looks for 
 concrete examples of it in operation. And here let me point to a 
 significant fact. The great nations of Western Europe are five : 
 France, Germany (which, for literary purposes, includes German- 
 speaking Austria), Italy, Spain, and England. In two of these 
 countries the theatre — as a home both of the national classics and 
 of the drama of modern life — ranks high among the intellectual 
 glories of the people. In three the theatre is rather a national 
 reproach than a national glory, though two of these nations have in 
 bygone centuries produced dramatic literatures of marvellous wealth 
 and splendour. The two countries in which the theatre nobly fulfils
 
 174 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 its functions are France and Germany ; the three countries in which 
 it leaves its highest functions almost wholly unfulfilled are Italy, 
 Spain, and England. Now, it cannot but seem, to say the least of 
 it, a curious coincidence that France and Germany should be the 
 countries in which the drama receives, and has for long received, 
 all sorts of public recognition and support, while Italy, Spain, and 
 England are the countries in which it has been left entirely in the 
 hands of individual speculators. Is it altogether rash to divine some 
 relation of cause and effect between these phenomena ? Can it be a 
 pure coincidence that, throughout Western Europe, wherever the drama 
 is regarded as a matter of pubUc concern — national or local — it 
 flourishes : wherever it is given over entirely to private enterprise, 
 it more or less obviously falls short of the requirements of even the 
 most modest ideal ? 
 
 People try to get round this argument in several ingenious ways. 
 Some contend that the superiority of the theatrical organisation of 
 France and Germany is illusory, pointing to the attacks that are 
 frequently made by French and German critics upon the Th(5atre- 
 Franqais and the German Court Theatres. This argument we may at 
 once put aside. No human institution is flawless and unassailable. 
 The criticisms which are levelled against the French and German 
 theatres are, many of them, just enough ; but they involve the 
 application of an incomparably higher standard than can be possibly 
 applied to the English stage. If the English theatre escapes such 
 criticisms, it is only by not rising into the region where they come 
 into force. Wherever it does rise into that region, it is open to ten 
 times severer criticism than any competent and candid critic can 
 urge against the leading French and German theatres. To argue 
 that we should be content with the English theatre as it is, because 
 French critics are sometimes discontented with the Th^atre-Francais, 
 is simply to argue against all progress on the ground that absolute 
 perfection is unattainable. 
 
 More plausible, at first sight, is another argument not infrequently 
 advanced. " We English have no theatrical endowments," it is said, 
 " because we are not a theatrical race. The excellence of the French 
 and German theatres is not due to their endowments ; on the con- 
 trary, the existence of these endowments is due to the fact that the 
 French and the Germans are people of inborn theatrical proclivities,
 
 THEORY OF ENDOWMENT 175 
 
 who, taking a profound national interest in the theatre, are naturally 
 willing to give it national support. No endowment will instil into a 
 race a non-existent theatrical instinct." There is a certain spacious- 
 ness in this position, until we look into the facts, which are as 
 follows : This wholly non-theatrical race has produced the greatest 
 dramatist of modern times, and one of the richest of dramatic 
 literatures; for a century and a half (1660 to 18 10, or thereabouts) 
 its theatre rivalled the French theatre in excellence ; it produced one 
 actor (Garrick) who was acknowledged by all Europe to be the most 
 universal genius in his art that the world had seen, and countless 
 actors and actresses of unquestionable greatness ; it not only possessed 
 a rich and vigorous theatrical life for nearly two centuries before the 
 Germans had anything worthy of the name, but it at two different 
 periods fecundated the German drama, feebly in the early seventeenth 
 century, potently and decisively in the latter half of the eighteenth : 
 even so lately as 1827 it gave the final impulse to the romantic 
 movement in France; and at this moment it manifests a passion for 
 the theatre not inferior in strength to that of the French or German 
 public, however inferior in intelligence and enlightenment. The 
 truth is that this idea of an inherent disability for theatrical art in 
 the Anglo-Saxon race is a superstition of very recent origin, begotten 
 of the deep depression which overtook the theatrical life of the 
 country in the middle years of the nineteenth century. It followed 
 on the breakdown of the monopoly system which had since the 
 Restoration (however imperfectly) performed the function which, in 
 France and Germany, is now performed by endowments. We have 
 in the past century fallen behind France and Germany in theatrical 
 art, not because of any innate incapacity, but because, at a critical 
 moment, we omitted to take any reasonable measures to keep abreast 
 of them. 
 
 It may be asked why " commercialism " should require to be 
 " mitigated " by endowment in the case of the drama, and not in that 
 of literature. The answer is very simple. It lies in the enormously 
 greater capital required for the production of a play than for the pro- 
 duction of a book. If the conditions of the publishing trade were such 
 that no publisher would issue a new book, or new edition of an old 
 book, that did not seem likely to find at least 50,000 purchasers in
 
 176 NATIONAL THEATRE 
 
 the course of three months from the date of pubHcation, -we should 
 certainly have either to endow literature or to see it shrink into nothing 
 but shop-girl romance and vulgar chromo-illustrated editions of some 
 half-dozen popular classics.^ As a matter of fact, books can be so 
 cheaply produced, and the book-market is so wide, that no work of the 
 slightest merit fails in the long run to find a publisher, and the highest 
 forms of literary art, old and new, freely co-exist with the lowest and 
 vulgarest, each form seeking out its elective affinities. Not so in the 
 commercial theatre. There no play is ever produced (except by mis- 
 take) which does not seem likely to find, at the very least, its 50,000 
 spectators in the course of three months. A play is allowed no time 
 to seek out its elective affinities. If it does not " catch on " in the 
 course of two or three weeks, its fate is sealed. It cannot, like a novel, 
 bide its time, for its continued existence means continued outlay. 
 Quite apart from the great initial expense of mounting, the sum which 
 it costs a West-End manager to " take his curtain up " every evening 
 is about equal to the whole cost of production of an ordinary novel. 
 If, in order to place a novel by Mr. Meredith or Mr. Hardy before the 
 world, a publisher had to incur an initial outlay of from ^lOOO to 
 ;^3000, and then to publish, so to speak, a fresh edition every day at 
 the cost of ^i 20 or so, how many novels of Mr. Meredith or Mr. Hardy 
 would ever have seen the light ? Their works, indeed, would never 
 have been written. They would have despaired from the outset of the 
 hopeless task of reaching the public under such conditions. 
 
 William Archer : " What can be done for the Drama ? " 
 Anglo-Saxon Review, March 1900. 
 
 . . . That there are difficulties to be overcome in the starting of 
 such an enterprise I have freely admitted. But the main difficulty 
 lies, not in any external conditions, but in the national character, with 
 its instinctive shrinking from anything that savours of idealism. . . . 
 The imagination of the average man — even of the average literary man 
 — is very slow to take fire. His instinct is to suggest and exaggerate 
 
 ^ It is needless to enter here upon the reasons why the stage has not absolutely sunk 
 into this condition. It is the condition towards which, under the long-run system, it neces- 
 sarily tends ; though the tendency may, at certain points, be intermittently and imperfectly 
 coanteiacted.
 
 THEORY OF ENDOWMENT 177 
 
 difficulties, instead of resolving to overcome them. He cannot see 
 that the only insuperable difficulty — if, indeed, it be insuperable — 
 lies in his own infirmity of purpose. Most of the practical objections 
 he urges are met in advance by the experience of other nations. It 
 is alleged, for example, that an endowed theatre would necessarily be 
 a hotbed for backstairs intrigue, favouritism, and jobbery. Human 
 nature being as yet imperfect, it is probable enough that ideal justice 
 might not always hold sway in the counsels of the enterprise. But 
 there is no reason to suppose that an English theatre would be more 
 dishonestly managed than a French or German theatre ; and it is found 
 in France and Germany that, whatever the imperfections in their work- 
 ings, endowed theatres are on the whole advantageous, nay, indispens- 
 able, to sound theatrical art. The checks upon favouritism in a public 
 institution are certainly greater than in a private enterprise. But even 
 if that were not so, how foolish the inertia which says, " Because we 
 cannot devise an ideal instrument for a great end, we will have no 
 instrument at all, and leave the end unattempted ! " Other objectors 
 point to the comparative poverty of the contemporary drama, and say, 
 " Why trouble about a theatre until you have the plays to act in it ? " 
 In other words, they make the very state of things that calls for remedy 
 an argument for not remedying it. The contemporary drama is not 
 what it ought to be, granted. If it were, there would be the less need 
 for a Repertory Theatre, though it would still be extremely desirable 
 for the due cultivation of the classical drama. But the contemporary 
 drama, with all its shortcomings, is sufficiently vital to chafe at the 
 restrictions imposed on it by the present system of commercial manage- 
 ment. Surely, then, it is the height of inconsequence to make the 
 depressing effect of these restrictions a reason for not attempting to 
 remove them. 
 
 M
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 JAN 3 1955 
 JAN 1 8 1355 
 
 WAR 2 1 1957 
 
 '■»< -^ 
 
 gBBfEWAL JAN 
 
 m-^ ¥• 
 
 liti^^ 
 
 .tistti 
 
 141963 
 
 QftA 
 
 Form L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OWVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 LOS AN^BLES
 
 Hf.,^?."I"E'"' REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 """"""" IIIIIIIIU lllllllllll 
 
 D 000 840 785 o 
 
 I 
 
 PLEA«^ DO NOT REMOVE 
 THIS BOOK CARD 1 
 
 s^tL:eRARY6k 
 
 University Research Library 
 
 z 
 w 
 
 to
 
 ..•/- 
 
 ,«> 
 
 €>