' ■ !■ ' .■■■ iliiJiallliiill!!!:- llillil|IM|l|H|Mi ^^~J~^-' '->'-<.^^'--v*^s!, ;■ .. I have no doubt it is perfectly safe in the hands of the people ; for such is the im- , | proved state of education, and the moral and religious feeling, that in any theatre '\y I do not think the audience would suffer anything that was licentious to be said upon the stage. I have frequently seen things, for instance, that have been suffered to pass by the licencer, which have not been suffered to pass by the audience, which is a very strong proof that they are perhaps better guardians of their own moral and; religious sentiments than anybody can be for them. ' 709. Do you not think it probable that plays would be full of political allusions if there were no licencer ? — Yes ; I think there it would be necessary that there should be a supervisor. 710. It occurred in the case of the Coburg ? — I am much obliged to you for men- tioning it ; I intended to have stated that. Look, for instance, at the bill lately issued by the Coburg theatre ; I do not know whether it has come under the notice of the Committee at all ; it was a bill advertising Tom Thumb, with all sorts of political allusions, not only political, but indecent allusions to persons who ought never to be alluded to but with respect ; it is a most shameful licence which they have given themselves, and no theatre ought to be permitted to issue such things. 711. Does a representation of that sort give any pleasure to the public ? — There will be always persons of bad feeling and bad taste in a large community who will rejoice in such entertainments j and you will have all the rabble of London going to those theatres in preference to others, where they can be instructed and improved. There was a bill put out the other day at the Queen's theatre, by which they lowered the price to the public, in consequence of the bill for reform passing ; and I think they ought not to mix themselves up with politics in any way whatever. 712. But they have a right to do it? — Yes, right they may have ; but then they would have an equal right on some other occasion, when you might not be so well pleased with it as upon this. 713. Lowering the prices would give satisfaction to the public ?— No doubt it would. 714. You would find that, I think ? — I do not believe we should have one person more in the theatre if we did. 715. Is it not a fact that there are several theatres now going on acting without any licence ?— 1 believe there are a dozen theatres of which we know nothing, at which they take 10/. and 1 5 /. a night, and so on ; there are two or three I am told out by Portman-square. 716. They cannot do you much harm as you do not prosecute them? — We have endeavoured to prosecute our rights till we are ruined by it. 7 1 7. Then their opposition costs you less than their prosecution, though that would not cost you much ? — But where there are not funds to pay the lawyers, the lawyers are not very willing to act. 7 1 8. But they are liable to be prosecuted by any person, a common informer ? — What is every man's business is no man's business j and the occupation of an informer is so very odious that very few persons will, for virtue's sake, take upon themselves such a degree of odium as that ; and even when we have pursued these persons, and have beaten them, and have obtained verdicts against them, they take the benefit of the Insolvent Act, and you do not get your remedy. 7 1 9. Then as your rights are exercised just now they do not protect you suffi- ciently, and you are not sufficiently remunerated ? — I conceive we are neither pro- tected nor remunerated at present, from the number of theatres which are allowed to open in opposition to us : we are not protected, inasmuch as the Lord Chamber- lain, whom we consider our natural protector, grants licences to the Opera House 679. G 2 for 52 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. C. Kembk. for six nights instead of two, and various other privileges equally prejudicial to our interests. 18 June 1832. 720. Do you remember what effect it had upon Drury Lane when they reduced their prices?— I conceive it did not answer their purpose ; I should conclude it did not, on account of their returning to the old prices. 721. They did not get much fuller houses ? — I suspect not. 722. Do you know what is the amount of capital, exclusive of the cost, now due from Covent Garden to the proprietors, or do you consider the renters as the pro- prietors? — I should consider the proprietors the speculators. 723.^ What sum of money is due by them ?— About 80,000 /., including the debt ; that is independent of the shareholders ; the debt to the proprietors is included in this, and this is mere capital without interest. 724. I think you say that in 1808 Covent Garden was rebuilt at an expense of 300,000/.? — Yes. 725. Then this sum of 76,000/. which was afterwards raised by subscriptions from numerous individuals, was that over and above that 300,000 /. ? — No, that was to enable them to carry on the building. 726. And what portion of that sum remains due at present ? — The whole of it. 727. Of which a portion of it now remains a debt upon the property ? — That is another debt, that is not the renters' debt ; the money that was advanced by the renters is a debt for so many years, of which there are 60 years to come. 728. But then it was laid out upon the theatre ; you are a debtor for that ? — It was laid out in the building of the theatre, and we pay annually the interest for it. 729. I think you say, besides the cost of the theatre, and besides the 76,000 /., considerable sums in addition have been embarked therein, which you conceive would be lost if the present rights were annihilated ? — Yes, within the last few years we ourselves have advanced about 30,000 /. ; three of the proprietors alone have done it, within the last 1 years. 730. Should you say the theatre has been more prosperous during the last year than the preceding years ? — The two last years it has been less prosperous than it was before, but I would say for many years it cannot have been considered pros- perous ; it has not been prosperous ever since these obstacles have arisen one after another ; it has been gradually getting worse and worse ; the last two seasons have been the worst. 731. By obstacles do you mean competition ? — Yes; and the alteration in the hours of society, and many things that combine to make theatres less frequented. 732. Morning concerts, I suppose, among other things? — Yes. 733. You attribute it in a great degree to competition, religious feeling, and the hours of society ? — Yes. 734. You range them under those three heads ? — Yes. 735. Then in fact, you would conceive a more restrictive system to be necessary to your full protection than what prevails at present ? — I should think, as far as I am capable of forming an opinion upon it, the nearer the licences granted, which are now granted by magistrates to certain theatres, were restricted to the original perform- ance which they were allowed under that licence to give, that would be the best thing for the two winter theatres ; they are allowed by their licence music and dancing only. When I was a boy, they used at Sadler's Wells and Astley's, and Hughes's, which is now the Surrey, to give a certain entertainment which they designated burlettas, and these entertainments were accompained always by a piano-forte, were written in a sort of doggrel verse, and were accompanied by a piano-forte, the person playing in the orchestra ; it was, in short, a recitative, accompanied by instruments in the orchestra ; it was entirely recitative and aii"s, there was no dialogue in it whatever. 736. Have you ever made any calculation of what would be a sufficient number of theatres for the amusement of the metropolis, considering the size of the metro- polis ? — I have but one way of looking at it, and that is, that if your theatres are never above one-half full, which is the fact on an average, I cannot for my life see the necessity for any more theatres in London. 737. But if the small theatres are full, and the large theatres are only half full? — I beg leave to say the small theatres are by no means full. Madame Vestris' theatre has been full ; the Adelphi has, I believe, just covered its expenses, not more. Madame Vestris has been successful ; but it is a mistake to suppose the minor theatres are generally prosperous. We see there are two of them have failed within the last six months, the City theatre and llayner's j there are two theatres gone; ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 53 gone ; then there is the Queen's theatre gone ; there are three gone ; therefore you Mr. C. Kemhk. cannot argue that the public want those theatres ; the public do not want them. 738. Why should not they want the attraction, but the cause ? — Where would 18 June 1832. be the attraction if there were additional theatres erected in which the actors were dispersed ? 739. Is it not your fault, for not giving them some other representation more suited to the public taste ? — No ; if you will have the kindness to inquire into it you will find, I fancy, that we give them as great a variety as possible of entertainments of the best sort we can procure. The proprietors of theatres are not authors ; they can only take such pieces as are presented to them ; and they take the best, of which there is very good evidence ; for some gentlemen, who thought they had reason to complain of want of judgment in the proprietors, took upon themselves to publish a volume or two of rejected plays. That publication completely exculpated the proprietors in the opinion of the public ; and they saw very clearly that those plays ought to have been rejected. I fancy there are very few instances where a good piece has been rejected. I question very much whether there is one on record, certainly not for these many years. 740. Do you not think more people would come to your theatre if they could hear well in distant parts of the house ? — My answer is, that an equal number of persons can hear well, I should conceive, in Covent Garden as in the Haymarket, for instance, which perhaps would be the sized theatre you would select. It is the nearest approach, after one of the large houses, to a proper-sized theatre. But I think this is demonstrable, is it not, that an equal number can hear as well in Covent Garden as in the Haymarket ; but if we do not get receipts, what are we to do ? 741 . You do not draw so many people as would fill the Haymarket ?— Not so many as would fill it. I presume it holds nearly 300 /. 742. More than that, I believe ? — Then, certainly not. 743. It appears to be your opinion that it would be a serious injury to all those who ventured their money in the large theatres, a breach of faith and a gross injustice, if the monopoly were suddenly thrown open, without any indemnification ? — Without indemnification, certainly. I think if any good mode could be hit on, the experiment would be worth making ; but without indemnification it really ought not, and cannot in good faith be done. 744. And you consider it would have been a serious injury ? — I think it would be utter ruin to us without indemnification. 745. You stated just now that the only inconvenience and danger you appre- hended from allowing the minor theatres to.act the legitimate drama was a danger of their occasionally abstracting some of your best performers ; then you do not apprehend anything from the public, but your sole apprehension is on that ground ? — if you take away our means of attraction, you ruin us ; if you take away the best actors from our theatre, and divide them among the Lord knows how many theatres ; say there are three or four good actors in one theatre, if they are divided over three or four theatres, you take away from that theatre its means of attraction, and you consequently ruin its receipts. 746. I will just mention an instance of a most successful piece brought forward lately in a minor theatre, and which approached most nearly to the legitimate drama ; I mean Victorine, in which there was not one single performer who be- longed to the large theatres ? — ^Mrs. Yates and Mr. Yates did belong to Covent Garden ; Mr. Reeve did belong to Covent Garden, but broke through his engage- ment, and ran away from it. 747. But they were not taken away merely in this season ? — No ; they have been there I believe for two or three seasons. 748. Do you not think it highly probable, if there were many theatres, you would have many conipanies of the same degree of excellence, from which you might select the best for performers of pieces at the patent theatres ? — I should doubt that very much ; it has taken a considerable time to get Mr. and Mrs. Yates to that theatre ; they were for many years at a regular theatre. They have been regularly trained actors in the best schools that existed in their time. 749. Are you aware how many theatres there are in Paris ? — I do not know the number, but I know the result will be the same here as in Paris. I know that the Theatre Francois, which was not only the glory of France but the admiration of all Europe, is totally ruined by the minor theatres, and if it were not for the assistance government lends them they would not be able to go on. 679. Gi 750- But 54 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. C. Kemhle. 750. But there, I believe, they are entirely restricted to what we should call the — — legitimate drama, in the strictest sense of the word ? — Yes, in the literal sense. 18 June 1832. 751. Because we find in our inquiry that that expression is rather liberally un- derstood here ? — Yes, it has been considered in its legal sense as well as in its genuine and real one. 752. You think a theatre on that principle would not succeed in this country ? — I am by no means sure that it would not ; I think it very likely would. If it were entirely restricted to the regular drama, I think very likely it would. If any such scheme as appears to be contemplated were really put into execution, I should recommend by all means that the theatres should be each restricted to a particular kind of entertainment. 753. Each to be confined to its own description of performance ? — Yes, I should think so ; I should think that would be better than that they should be runnino- against one another, and endeavouring to bribe away each other's performers, which was especially guarded against in the patents of Charles II. : for he says one theatre shall not employ the actors of another without special permission in writing from the governor of such theatre. 754. Would you not attribute the superior success of Mrs. Yates at a small theatre, in comparison to her success at a large theatre, to her playing now at a small theatre, whereas formerly she played at a large theatre ? — I admit the former part, but not the latter. I do not admit that the other theatre was too large for her ; it is very likely she may play with more effect there than at Covent Garden, but I do not admit that the reason is because Covent Garden was too large. There are degrees of power ; every actor would not act as effectively in Covent Garden as in a smaller theatre, but that does not prove that a small theatre is so good as a large one ; it does as far as the natural powers of this or that actor are concerned ; a person of weak power ought not to engage in a theatre of such dimensions as Covent Garden. 755. The play of the countenance, which forms so great a part of the pleasure we derive from good acting, of course the size of the theatre has an effect in making it more or less visible ? — There is not the least doubt of it ; it may be too large, that is admitted; but who shall say what is the precise distance from which to judge? because you may see better than I do, another may hear better than I do, and accord- ing to that scale we should be obliged to have a theatre for every individual. 756. When Miss O'Nell, and other celebrated persons who have engaged very much the attention of the town by their talents, were on the stage, have they or have they not been able to pi'oduce an effect in every part of the theatre } The object is to know whetlier those eminent performers (I have mentioned the name of Miss O'Neil, but I refer also to your own family more particularly,) have not been able to produce an effect in every part of the theatre when they have performed, the theatre being of Its present size ? — All their reputation having been made in these theatres, Miss O' Neil's reputation having been made in these theatres, and the other persons to whom you have alluded having also made their reputation in these theatres, I conceive they must be perfectly well adapted to their powers, other- wise I should suppose they would never have achieved their reputation. 757. Then the inference is, that persons may possess, as actors, talents sufficient to produce an effect in a small theatre, though they do not possess talents equal to produce an effect in a large theatre ? — I would not exactly put it in those words. I should say a more restricted power might certainly produce a better effect in a small theatre than it would in a large theatre. 758. Then the consequence of having nothing but large theatres would have the effect of completely shutting out all persons possessed of powers capable of being appreciated in a small theatre only? — It would certainly militate against a very great reputation ; but I should think it would not have the effect of shutting them out altogether. 759. Would not the fair inference from that be, that as there are a great variety of powers perhaps with the same degree of excellence, in order to apj)reciatc that excellence it would be necessary to have a great variety of theatres? — if it be neces- sary to have more, I do not see any very valid objection to that j but that would be building theatres for restricted powers instead of efficient ones. 760. What is your opinion, from experience, of theatres built of various sizes in order to bring forward persons of mediocre talent ; what effect would that have upon the profession? — I should think it would be destructive of the profession. 761. We are not supposing one of more mediocre talent, but with less powers ? — If ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. sn. If it be of less power it is more mediocre. I think if you were to do what you sug- Mr. C. Kemble. gest you would be building a theatre for infirmity and not for vigour. 762. But as all first-rate performers have begun in small theatres, beginning on '^ June 1832. a small theatre does not prevent their reaching that excellence for which nature has designed them ? — I assure you a very small theatre is destructive of good act- ing ; instead of being favourable to an actor, it brings him so near the audience that he cannot abstract his mind from the audience. 763. Only that proves that that does not prevent their talents from reaching their destination ? — I cannot pretend to say. 764. You have introduced on the stage children to act ? — Children's parts. 765. Young Master Burke? — At the minor theatres, 766. At the great theatres ? — No, he never played there. 767. Miss Poole, then I — She plays little child's parts, and she happens to be a person that may be considered to be an exception, for her voice is a peculiarly fine round voice, and not at all an infantile voice ; so that that instance is a very unfor- tunate one. I do not think she would be a bit better in a small theatre than in Covent Garden, for she is perfectly competent in power to fill that theatre. 768. Would not the small theatres tend to prevent that exaggeration of acting which is obliged to be introduced in the large theatres ? — If does not follow that the actor is to exaggerate because he acts in a large theatre. 769. He must exaggerate anything said aside ? — That is not necessary. If you, as the audience, would but be attentive, you would hear every syllable. 770. I have heard it from the stage box? — I maintain, that if the audience will only behave themselves properly in an English theatre as they do in a French theatre, they would not hear one word exaggerated : the fault is in the audience instead of the theatre. 771. Do you not think that is the fault of the entertainment ? — When you see Macbeth, John Bull is perfectly quiet, as he always is when the representation of any murder is going on. You will hear that scene distinctly though it is acted in a whisper ; and if you were always equally attentive you would hear every other just as well. 772. But a representation of a murder will attract as well as anything else then ? — I am afraid such a representation is very attractive. I am sorry it is so. 773. It was tried at one theatre : Thurtell ? — That was not at a legitimate theatre. 774. Was it attractive ? — I believe it was ; but they added to the attraction by introducing the very gig that had carried the murderer down to the scene : a most atrocious thing. 775. The inference then that is to be drawn from what you have stated with regard to actors of more feeble powers is this, that the great plays of Shakspeare, and the other great dramatic authors, would in the end be represented in small theatres by persons of very inferior talent to those who must necessarily perform the characters, in order to give effect to them, at the great theatres ? — Certainly. 776. In your judgment, would the great authors suffer very much by being so represented, and would the taste for their writings be greatly diminished by being, rejjresented by inferior performers ? — I think they would. 777. Do you not think it would be a great advantage to authors to have a number of different places to take their productions to for performance ? — Not if they could not be well represented. 778. Do you not think, if that were the case, a great number of inferior pro- ductions would be brought before the public? — Certainly. 779. You were talking of the degree of attention which is requisite ; do you not conceive that the noise almost always arises from the one-shilling gallery "? — It does very frequently j they are commonly very riotous. You questioned me just now with respect to authors : they generally prefer bringing their pieces to Drury Lane or Covent Garden to bringing them out at a smaller theatre ; for instance, one of the great advocates for minor theatres, Mr. Serle, instead of bringing out his play at the theatre where he is engaged, brought it out the other day at Drury Lane ; that is a proof that he thought it could be better done there. You cannot hope to have them better done unless you have better actors ; and where are they to be found ; for those that are good are already engaged in these theatres : then where are you to get them r It can only be after the lapse of years that these things can rise up j for it is not increase of theatres that will give you an increase of fine actors. The qualifications of a fine actor are a gift that God gives, and they are not to be multiplied as theatres may be. G4 50 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COxMMITTEE Mr. SamuelJames Arnold, called in 5 and Examined. Jlr. S. J. Arnold. 780. OF what theatre are you the proprietor? — The English Opera House. 781. Have you a copy of the Lord Chancellor's decision with resoect to that 18 June 1832. theatre? — Yes, I have. \The Document was delivered in.'] 782. You do not consider your's a patent theatre? — No, certainly not; I act under an annual licence from the Lord Chamberlain. 783. Do you consider yourself as coming under the denomination of one of the minors? — Hardly; I cannot call those minor theatres which are authorized by the Lord Chamberlain to act any particular part of what is called the legitimate drama; because if so, whenever the winter theatres play English operas, they become minor theatres. 784. Do you consider the Adelphi a minor theatre ?— Certainly, for they are only licensed to act burlettas. 785. You are licensed only for English operas? — Yes, and minor entertain- ments. 786. Have you signed any of these petitions on the part of the minors? — No. 787. You have no cause to complain of the patent theatres? — Not at all ; they complain of me. 788. Do you complain of the rivalship of the minor theatres ; are you afraid of competing with them ? — Certainly, an illegal competition. 789. Would you object to more theatres being licensed in Westminster than there are now ? — Most undoubtedly, for I think there are sufficient. 790. In other parts of the town; take, for instance, Finsbury? — No, certainly not ; not on my own account. 791. As detrimental to the interests of your theatre? — I do not think it would injure me. 792. Or in any part of Lambeth? — Why the communication is so close between Westminster and Lambeth, that I think there they might aflf'ect me. 793. How many months are you licensed for ? — Six. 794. If you had the power, should you like to keep your theatre open longer? — I should like to keep it open as long as the public would continue to visit it. 795. You think it would answer your purpose to have a licence for 1 2 months ? — I have no doubt of it. 796. You have been entirely confined to musical entertainments? — Entirely. I have never attempted to exceed my licence, which confined me to musical per- formances. 797. Do you think it would be to your advantage if you were permitted to play other things ? — Undoubtedly it would be very convenient and agreeable to me to be able to play farces without music. I do not want to step out of my English opera ; my object has been (and I hope to accomplish it) to establish something like a national school of music ; that has been my object from the beginning. 798. You would very much dislike more theatres to exist than there are at present ? — I think when the theatre is opened which is about to be established, it would nip the flower in the bud if any opposition was to be started up at a short distance from me. 799. Then if the Lord Chamberlain were to license any theatres he pleased, you would think it very detrimental to those theatres which at present exist ? — Certainly. 800. Now do you consider it would be of any advantage to you if you were per- mitted to play tragedy, comedy, and the regular drama at your theatre : do you think you could afford to give a regular drama in such a manner as would be satis- factory to the public and productive to your theatre ?— Unquestionably not. 801 . You think then that any attempt at a theatre such as yours, which is licensed for the performance of operas and so on, to encroach on the drama as it is given at the winter theatres, you think it would not be advantageous to the undertaker or satisfactory to the public, in consequence of the inferior manner in which the pro- ductions must be brought out ? — I think so, certainly. 1 think it would be a great disadvantage to the patent theatres, and no advantage to me. 802. Is your theatre large enough to give a representation of the legitimate drama? — It certainly will be ; it will be a little larger, but yet hold considerably less money than the last. 803. I apprehend ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 57 803. I apprehend you mean to say tliat the expense of maintaining a company Mr. for tragedy and comedy, in addition to those for operas, would be so great that you S. J. AmM . could not afford to have those performers who would give satisfaction to the public ; —" ~~ and that, in fact, it would be a ruinous concern?— That is my opinion. ^" ■'""^ ' ^■'• 804. Then you do not desire in the least degree to exceed, with regard to the nature of the performances, those which you are licensed to perform ? — Except, as I said before, that eternal music through the whole night. I should be glad to omit the music in the afterpieces. 805. Are you of opinion that by having a licence for the whole year instead of six months, at the end of the year you would be able, by the state of your finances, to say that you had produced better entertainments for the public than under the present circumstances you can do ? — Assuredly I do. 806. At cheaper prices? -At the prices I have always had. 807. What are they?— Five shillings for the boxes, three shillings for the pit, two siiillings for the gallery, and one shilling for the upper gallery, which I mean to abolish in my new theatre. 808. Are you of opinion, that if you had a licence for the whole year, you would be able to diminish those prices to the public? — No ; because I must improve the excellence of my performances, and I think less prices would not be convenient. 809. \\c all know your performances have been very excellent, I therefore wish my question to apply to the performances as they have been given ; and I wish to know whether, taking the performances such as they have been, and you had a licence for the whole year, whether you could afford to reduce the price of admis- sion ? — I think not. Sio. You would like to have the power of playing farces?- -That I should like to have, certainly. 811. Now, you have had some connexion with the great theatres, I think, in the way of management? — Yes. 812. In your opinion, would the interests of the legitimate drama, Shakspeare and the great dramatic authors, and the public taste for that particular branch, be improved, or materially injured, by the increase of the number of theatres at which those representations might take place? — -My opinion is founded on reflections on this subject for many years ; and upon the experience I have had, my opinion is very decided, and it is, that the higher order of the drama would be destroyed by enlarging the privilege of performing the higher order of the drama. 813. If the public, for example, were admitted at very low prices into theatres where the plays of Shakspeare and other dramatic authors are given, do you conceive they must necessarily be given by actors of so inferior a class as to reduce their effect? — Yes, I do; and I think the size of the theatres would be very much against their doing justice to the higher order of the drama, such as Shakspeare's plays. 814. What do you think of the size of the Haymarket ; do you think that is calculated to represent the legitimate drama with effect ? — I wish I had the plans of my new theatre here, to show you what I consider to be the pattern of all excellence. 815. Will that be larger than the present Haymarket? — It will be wider; the stage will be wider, but the front of the boxes will be about the same distance as the Haymarket. 816. In speaking of the size of the theatres, are you not aware that our drama was created in small theatres, and that Shakspeare's and .Tonson's plays were acted in theatres not half the size we see at present ? — Yes, but with a blanket for a scene ; they had no scenery or dresses. 817. Do you not know that players acted Shakspeare's plays in cocked-hats and not in any costume? — Yes, even in Garrick's time. 818. That did not prevent the production of good plays or the production of good actors ? — But the taste of the public has so much improved since that time, they are not contented unless what they see is attended with perfect costume and good scenery. 819. Do the plays of Shakspeare require better actors than Garrick ? — I should think not ; but the public would like to have better, if they could get them. 820. Suppose Shakspeare was alive at this moment, and went to see Hamlet, or .Julius Caesar, or Coriolanus acted at the Haymarket, or at Drury Lane or Covent Garden, which do you think Shakspeare would prefer? — Drury Lane or Covent Garden, no doubt. 679. H 821. You 58 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. 821. You are speaking of the minor theatres, that the size of them would not S J. Arnold. allow them to bring out the legitimate drama with that degree of splendor which is in a large theatre ? — Yes ; and in the next place, the dispersion of talent, by its ' ^'^' diflFusion amongst many, would deprive the larger theatres of so considerable a portion of their talent as to render both parties unable to act the legitimate drama as it ought to be acted. 822. Would not the encouragement offered for an increased number of actors produce such a nursery as would more than counterbalance the objections you now mention ? — It might in time ; but I should be sorry to reform the drama as it now stands, with the prospect of my grandson deriving the benefit of it, for I should not, nor would my present generation. 823. You mean it would not be to your particular advantage ? — I am speaking of its effects ; and I say it would not have that effect which you speak of, if power were given to the minor theatres to perform the legitimate drama. 824. Is the profession of the stage in that prosperous condition at this moment as to induce men of talent to adventure upon it ? — ^I conceive that wherever talent is discovered it is always most liberally patronized by the theatres, most enormously patronized. 825. Did not the patent theatres oppose your application for the extension of time last year ? — Of course. 826. Did you not consider that a hardship upon you ? — Yes ; for seven years I held my licence from year to year unrestricted, and it was only till I built my late theatre that the theatres opposed me. 827. Have not the proprietors of the minor theatres some right to complain of you ? — No, because they have built their theatres without legal authority, and they knew they were going to act illegally. 828. The Adelphi has a licence from the Lord Chamberlain? — I am speaking of the theatres out of Westminster. 8-29. The Lord Chamberlain has no power over them ? — I conceive he has the power to suppress any theatre within Westminster, but not those that surround Westminster. 830. Do you not think the just cause of complaint which the great theatres and yourself have a right to make, is founded on so many theatres all within one small space of ground, as Westminster and in the Strand ?^ — I think that Westminster being the very heart of the metropolis, the public convenience has been well con- sulted by placing them as they are now placed. 831. You do not object to their being dispersed over the town ? — Undoubtedly not. 832. Have you ever made any calculation as to the number of theatres this town might support ? — No, I have not made any calculation to that effect ; but I should suppose, if it was found expedient to have theatres, not exactly for the legitimate drama, but classified, that they might be at remote parts of the town without being very injurious to the patent theatres. 833. Each theatre restricted to different kinds of representations? — Yes. 834. As it is in Paris ?^ — Precisely. 835. Do you happen to recollect how many theatres there are there now? — No, I do not, they fluctuate so frequently ; there are sometimes about 1 6, and then two or three of them get ruined, and are shut up again. 836. How many are there in London ? — Upon my word it is hardly possible to say ; there are not, I should think, less than 14 or 15. 837. How much fewer theatres that is for a town twice the size of Paris? — Yes, but then the population of London and Paris are different beings. The French run after their amusements ; but the theatres there are in a ruinous state at this time, almost all of them ; their minds are now running after politics instead of pleasure. 838. Do you not think the population would become more a play-going popula- tion if theatres were distributed over different parts of the town ? — Yes ; perhaps those in remote parts of the town might frequent those theatres which were near them, who would not come to the great theatres j and so far only I think that would be a benefit. 839. I should think it would have that effect ? — Yes ; but then you come to the old question, whether you would not, while you were trying the experiment of raising other theatres, be destroying the theatres which are already established ; and 1 think it would injure them most materially. ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 59 Mejxurii, 20° die Junii, 1832. THOMAS SLINGSBY DUNCOMBE, ESQ., in the chair. George Colman, Esq., called in ; and Examined. 840. WILL you have the goodness to state to the Committee what situation you G. Colman, Esq. hold in the Lord Chamberlain's office? — I hold under the Lord Chamberlain the office of Examiner of all theatrical entertainments. 20 June 1832. 841. How were you appointed ? — I was regularly sworn in. My appointment was made out in the Treasury, and went through the Privy Seal, and then through the Lord Chamberlain's office. 842. In what year? — In the year 1824, iii February 1824. 843. What is the form of oath that was administered to you ? — The oath that is administered, or a great part of it, is the oath that is generally administered to per- sons holding situations in His Majesty's household. Then I am particularly sworn (after fidelity to His Majesty, as usual), to serve His Majesty faithfully as the Examiner of plays, and to be obedient to the Lord Chamberlain. 844. What do you conceive to be serving His Majesty faithfully as to the exami- nation of plays ?^ — To take care that nothing should be introduced into plays which is profane or indecent, or morally or politically improper for the stage. I had the honour of sending in to the Chairman of the Committee two or three days ago, but I believe the packet has not arrived till this morning, a paper giving my general opinion upon matters bearing upon this inquiry. I believe if I were to read that it would save the Committee a vast deal of trouble, and if any further questions should arise upon my statement, I am here to answer them. 845. There is a great deal of information in that statement, but it will be more intelligible to the Committee if it is given viva voce. — I am afraid I cannot state so much viva voce, as I can only dryly answer the questions. 846. The Committee wish you to answer questions as to matters of fact : as to your opinion of the necessity of a licencer, we will come to that afterwards. — As to my office, I believe questions have been asked relative to fees. 847. The Committee will ask you that presently, if you will have the goodness to answer the questions that are proposed to you ? — -Certainly. 848. What compositions or what productions upon the stage do you conceive, as Examiner, you are empowered to license, or empowered to prohibit ? — I have not the power to license or to prohibit anything ; I am the Examiner of plays. 849. Deputy of the Lord Chamberlain, you mean? — Deputy, as Jar as reading plays goes, but not as to the power of licensing or rejecting. I have no power over the theatres as reflected from him. 850. But when a play is submitted to you for examination, how do you proceed upon it? — "The Examiner is a very subordinate person, and no further interferes directly from himself with the managers than by recommending them to omit any ., passage palpably exceptionable, and all oaths, as well as all religious expressions and allusions too sacred for the stage." I observe previously in this statement, " the Lord Chamberlain is the licencer, to whom the Examiner forwards an outline, and sends his opinion, of the entertainments which he has officially perused, and then the Lord Chamberlain signs, or does not sign the form of licence, as he may think proper." I may observe here, that as to sending an outline, that is a voluntary act, because my predecessor never sent any outline j but I thought it might be more satisfactory, and I have gratuitously sent it, that the Lord Chamberlain might see what the subject of the play was. 851. What do you consider palpably exceptionable, that is at your own discre- tion? — It must be very palpable to everybody before I should interfere. I allude to political and personal allusions, downright grossness and indecency, or anything that would be profane, which any candid man could not but say was improper, about which there could not be two opinions. 852. The Committee have heard of your cutting out of a play the epithet "angel," as applied to a woman ? — Yes, because it is a woman, I grant, but it is a celestial woman. It is an allusion to the scriptural angels, which are celestial C79. H 2 bodies. 6o MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE G. Colman, Fsq. bodies. Every man who has read his Bible understands what they are, or if he has not, 1 will refer him to Milton. 2oJunei83'2. 8.53. Do you rccollcct the passage in which that was struck out? — No, I cannot charge my memory with it. I do not recollect that I struck out an angel or two, but most probably I have at some time or other. 854. Milton's angels are not ladies? — No, but some scriptural angels are ladies, I believe. If you will look at Johnson's Dictionary, he will tell you they are celes- tial persons, commanded by God to interfere in terrestrial business. 855. Supposing you were to leave the word *' angel " in a play or farce, will you state your opinion as to what effect it would have on the public mind? — It is impossible for me to say what effect it v/ould have ; I am not able to enter into the breasts of every body who might be in gallery, pit, or boxes. 856. But you must have some reason for erasing it ? — Yes, because it alludes to a scriptural personage. 857. Must an allusion to Scripture have an immoral effect? — I conceive all Scrip- ture is much too sacred for the stage, except in very solemn scenes indeed, and that to bring things so sacred upon the stage becomes profane. 858. What would be the result of using ordinary oaths, such as Damme, or any thing of that sort? — 1 think it is immoral and improper, to say nothing of the vul- garity of it in assemblies where high characters and females congregate ; I certainly think it is improper, and beyond that, I believe you will find there are Acts of Par- liament where swearing is restrained under a penalty. 859. Do you speak from your experience as to the immoral effect, or is it your opinion merely ? — It is my opinion of the practice in general. I have seen a great deal of the stage undoubtedly, and so far I can speak from experience. I think nobody has gone away from a theatre the better for hearing a great deal of cursing and swearing. 860. How do you reconcile the opinion you have just given with your making use of those terms, such as Damme, or any of those small oaths which you say are immoral and improper, to say nothing of their vulgarity, in some of your own com- positions which have met with great success on the stage? — If I had been the examiner I should have scratched them out, and would do so now ; I was in a dif- ferent position at that time, I was a careless immoral author, I am now the examiner of plays. I did my business as an author at that time, and I do my business as an examiner now. 861. Do you suppose that those plays of yours (which were so pleasing to the public, and are acted still with great success, from which you have not the power of erasing those small oaths) have done much mischief to the morals of the town ? — They have certainly done no good, and I am sorry I inserted the oaths. As a moral man, one gets a little wiser as one goes on, and I should be very happy to relieve my mind from the recollection of having written those oaths. 862. Do you mean to say you regret being the author of " John Bull ?" — No, that is a different thing ; I might not be sorry to have made a good pudding, but if there are any bad plums in it, I should be glad to have them out. 863. But do you not think that what you call the bad plums contributed to the success of the piece?— No, certainly not; it is from habit; the actors think it hammers the thing stronger if they use a " damme," for which they are liable to 40 .y. penalty. I will give you an instance in one of my own plays. Habit has made it forcible and strong to say "damme," but if "hang me" were generally adopted, it would be as strong ; that is perfectly harmless to me, though not to the person hanged, and it would be quite as forcible to the audience. Sir Simon Rochdale, in John Bull, says, " Damn me,; if it isn't the brazier ! " Now, putting a gentleman in that position is wrong ; in the first instance, morally so ; if lie happened to make a mistake, and it was not the brazier, he would be damned. Now, if he said " Hang me, if it isn't the brazier !" would not that do as well ? 864. In that play also you talk of Eve, there is a very good joke about Eve j one of the characters has no more idea of something, than Eve had of pin-money. Do you call that improper ? — Yes, that had better be omitted. 865. But the audience are always struck with that?— Yes ; but I think all allusions to the Scripture had better be avoided ; and recollect, I only recommend to the mana- gers to leave it out : if they do not choose to leave it out 1 say nothing further about it. My directions to them, if directions they can be called, begin, " Please to omit the following underlined passages," and they do omit them or not as they please. 866. According ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 6l 866. According to the Act of Parliament of the lo Geo. 2, under which your Q.Colman Esq. appointment is made, is not a play or any new piece intended to be represented, to be given in to the Lord Chamberlain's office 14 days before the day of representation ? 20 June 1832. — Yes ; it is sent to me. 867. Supposing, at the expiration of those 14 days, no answer is given to that play either by licence or refusal, can the theatre represent it? — No, certainly not. The Act of Parliament says 1 4 days at least ; but, however, I will explain that, if you will permit me. 868. The Act of Parliament says, "that from and after the 24th of June 1737, no person shall, for hire, gain or reward, act, perform, represent, or cause to be acted, performed or represented, any new interlude, tragedy, comedy, opera, play, farce or other entertainment upon the stage, or any part or parts therein, or any act, scene or other part, added to any old interlude, &c., unless a true copy thereof be sent to the Lord Chamberlain of the King's household for the time being, 14 days at least before the acting, representing, or performing thereof." There is nothing in that clause which at all prevents the performance of that piece, if you make no return to the copy that is given to you ? — I beg your pardon ; I do not conceive that ; there is no actual definite time fixed ; but however, that goes to a point which never yet has arisen, and I should imagine never could arise since that Act of Par- liament, for to accommodate tlie theatres in every point of view that it possibly can be done, they have always their licences long before the 14 days have expired. If it happens that the Lord Chamberlain is out of town at a great distance, I venture so far to take the responsibility upon myself: finding the play perfectly harmless, " I will be responsible to the Lord Chamberlain for your representation of it ; act away, and when the Lord Chamberlain returns I will send you the licence."' Every care is taken to facilitate the business of the theatres under the Lord Chamberlain's control; every possible accommodation is given. 869. On the manager of a theatre receiving back the play or the piece that has been submitted to your inspection, you compel him to pay two guineas ? — I do not compel him, I demand it as a prescriptive claim. 870. Suppose he refuses to pay the two guineas? — I cannot help it. 871. Can you refuse to deliver his play ? — I should imagine so. 872. Can you refuse to license his play ? — I do not license the play. 873. If he does not pay, you will not license it? — I have not the power of licensing or suppressing it. 874. You will not pronounce an opinion upon that play? — I pronounce the opinion of the Lord Chamberlain ; a notice being sent to the managers, saying it is licensed, or cannot be licensed. 875. Could the manager of a theatre who submits that play to you, act the play after you give him a licence, unless he paid you two guineas ? — Certainly. 876". Suppose you give him no answer to the copy of the play he wishes to repre- sent? — I always submit my opinion to the Lord Chamberlain, and supposing my opinion is favourable, and the Lord Chamberlain grants his licence, it is my duty to send that licence to the manager of the theatre. He receives that licence in the first instance, and then I expect, and my expectations are never disappointed, to receive two guineas ; but if I do not receive it, I do not know what I must do. I must inquire what redress I could have under those circumstances ; but it is incumbent on me, as a duty, to send the licence to him, and he must have it if it is granted. 877. Under what authority do you exact the two guineas? — T will tell you that. These fees are two guineas for the delivery of every licence, which sum has, to the best of ray knowledge and belief, been regularly received by those holding my office ever since the Act of Parliament passed, in the year 1 737, which placed theatres under the control of the Lord Chamberlain. Fees therefore appear to be established by a prescriptive claim of p5 years, and fees and emoluments are included in the terms of my stamped appointment. The fee of 40 s. was exacted in remote times, by the Master of the Revels, whose office seems from records to have been equivocal. A fee of two guineas for each licence has been paid time out of mind to the examiner, who is regularly and legally sworn into office, and his appointment is signed and sealed by the Lord Chamberlain ; so that the examiner's fees are very materially less in tlie present day than they were in former times, according to the comparative value of money at the different periods. 878. But what proof have you that the examiner of plays, in 1737, received two guineas for his inspection ? — 1 cannot conjure the dead from their graves, but I believe 679. H 3 it 62 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE G. Colman Esq. it is perfectly well understood from tradition that it was always so ; and if I am required, I think I could make it out to some remote period. 20 June 1832. gyy ^,.g yjjy avvare what salary the Master of the Revels enjoyed at that time, independent of fees ? — I cannot tell ; I have no idea of that. 880. How far back are there any traces of these fees? — Since the year 1737, which makes it now 95 years. 881. Are you aware whether there was any salary enjoyed by the Master of the Revels independent of fees ? — No. If you refer to theatrical history you may pro- bably find that, but I am not aware of it ; that is rather a research into antiquity, which may be more entertaining to the curious in dramatics, than necessary for my purpose. 882. When was the salary of examiner of plays established on its present footing? — Ever since the year 1737, when the Act passed. There has been an examiner ever since. 883. What is your salary exclusive of fees? — The examiner's nominal salary is 400 /. per annum, but the deductions from it (the chief part of them reverting to the government as taxes) are no less than 31 /. 85. per cent., so that the actual salary is 274/. 85. annually, a sum scarcely adequate, without the fees, to the labour of the business as now executed, and the constant residence in or near London. 884. In what way is that 31 /. 8 5. levied on your salary? — I have not got the documents, but there are a great many deductions for taxes, and some fees in the different offices, the Exchequer and the Treasury. 885. That does not amount to 31 /. 85. per cent. ? — Yes, 31 /. 8 s. per cent, each year. There is a tax which is called wrongly in this instance, the land-tax, but it is levied on my place in the same ratio that the land-tax is levied, although I have no land except in the flower-pots out of my windows ; and of the 31 /. 8*., the chief part goes to the land-tax, as it is called. I forget exactly to what that amounts ; but however the whole deduction is 31/. 85. per cent. I have not got the particulars here, but I can furnish them to the Committee if required. 886. Are you sure the land-tax is levied upon the salary, not upon the office ? — Clearly. 887. From what department do you receive your salary? — Regularly from the Exchequer, but there is an agent employed ; it is a round about way of receiving it ; there is some difficulty in the Exchequer about forms, which I do not understand, and there is a gentleman in the Treasury who used to get my salary from the Ex- chequer, and I received it from him ; but it is now altered again, for there have been some regulations made lately as to the Civil List, and it is now paid into the Lord Chamberlain's office. 888. Does Mr. Mash charge any per-centage upon your salary? — No, certainly not ; I do not suppose Mr. Mash does. The other day I had the honour to be lieutenant of the yeoman of the guard, and I received my salary constantly from the Lord Chamberlain's office, and you gave the man, who was a porter, or who sent you notice that your money was ready, a shilling every quarter. 889. Can you furnish the Committee with the items of the deduction? — I have them not in my pocket or my head, but I will send them. 890. There is a retui-n ordered from your office of the number of plays examined by you ? — That is now made out ; I sent it the other day. It is a list of the plays examined by me, and licensed by the Lord Chamberlain, from tlie year 1829 to the present year inclusive. It is prepared in the Lord Chamberlain's oflSce, and if not delivered in already, it will be immediately. 891. Do you know what the fees received by you last year for examining plays amount to ? — I do not know. The year before last the number of plays was 111, which makes it double that number of guineas. 892. You do not receive any fee upon anything that is not licensed ? — Cer- tainly not. 893. Suppose a poor author should bring you a very excellent work, and he should represent that this fee was more than he could conveniently pay ? — I hope I should not be deficient in charitable feelings on such an occasion, besides my esprit du corps in favour of dramatists. 894. But you certainly would not in such a case at all impede the granting of the licence on account of not receiving the fee ? — No, surely not ; God forbid that I should! If I met with any person to whom two guineas was an object, I should certainly withhold the claim, but in general I ought to have my fees. I think Dr. Johmon ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 63 Dr. Johnson mentions somewhere in his Life of Addison, that Addison was very G. Caiman, Esq. scrupulous as to his fees ; he would not give them up to his friends, and the reason was, because two guineas were very little to them individually, but made a great 20 June 1832. difference to him in the aggregate. 895. You do not receive more than 400/. a year after all deductions ? — I may have made at times nearly 500/. It is somewhat ameliorated since the Frenchmen came. Whenever there are more theatres there is more emolument, and therefore, in point of dry and sheer interest, I ought to argue stoutly for there being 20 theatres in London, but my conscience will not permit me to say that ; I believe there are too many already. 896. Have you received 200/. in fees in any year ? — Yes. 897. Three hundred pounds? — No, I think not. 898. Are lectures in astronomy subject to your examination ? — I think every thing on the stage ought to be. The Duke of Montrose thought so, and astrono- mical lectures were licensed at that time. 899. Have they been licensed since ? — I do not believe anybody has been talking to us about the stars lately. 900. Are Mathews's entertainments licensed ? — Yes, certainly. The last part, the Monopolylogue, as he calls it, is a farce, or (I beg his pardon) a comedy. It is a regular dramatic piece, but he acts all the characters himself. 901. That is licensed ? — Yes. 902. It is submitted to your examination ? — Yes. 903. Are oratorios licensed ? — Yes ; in the Duke of Montrose's time they were, and I think ought to be now ; not for the sake of the fees. 904. Why? — Because I think they may be immoral things. 905. Immoral oratorios ? — Yes ; it sounds like a contradiction, but it is so. If you read the Biographia Dramatica, you will find there is one mentioned as scan- dalously immoral. 906. Did not Mr. Hawes resist the Lord Chamberlain, in the case of Joseph and his Brethren ? — Yes ; a licence was granted to him, and he would not pay for it, and he placarded me in his advertisements. 907. Was the licence refused or granted ? — The licence was granted, and he would not pay the fee, but he placarded me and blackguarded me, and that set me, at five minutes leisure I had, upon calculating the amount. He said if the prece- dent were admitted, God knows what expense future oratorio makers and under- takers would be subjected to. I calculated what it would be, and I believe it amounted altogether to no more than four guineas in two or three years. 908. Did you prohibit his playing it? — No; he played it and chuckled at his triumph, and sung and roared away. His oratorio went on ; he had his licence, and I had not my two guineas. 909. Was the performance withdrawn? — No, it took place. 910. Then it appears dramatic performances do take place without paying the fees? — Highway robberies do take place, but they are contrary to law. 911. Where is the law for your taking fees; do you find it in the Act of Par- liament ? — No ; they are the fees prescriptively claimed for 95 years. 912. But you cannot prove yourself they were paid 95 years ago? — No; we have no means to prove anything but records or tradition relative to the time of William the Conqueror. 913. Where are your records? — They will be found in the Lord Chamberlain's office. I beg Mr. Mash may be asked about that. 914. Mr. Mash stated he knew nothing of your fees, or of the power under which you exacted them ? — So I understand. 915. Do you consider it to rest upon custom ? — It is a prescriptive right. yi6. There is no written law upon the subject? — No; the common law is not written law. 917. Is the amount mentioned in your appointment? — ^No ; I only go by what has been paid time out mind. 918. Have you any table of fees in your office ? — That is a question for Mr. Mash to answer : I suppose prescription would be tantamount to a law. 919. From what source have you derived your information that these fees are prescriptive ? — From my inquiries at every theatre when I had my appointment. Depend upon it, had I exacted more than my predecessors in office had asked, the theatres would have told me fast enough that 1 asked too much. 679. H 4 920. It 64 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE G. Culman, Esq. g20. It is HOt Said you have exacted too much ; but is there any authority for their being asked ? — Yes ; when I was manager at the Haymarket, I paid Mr. Larpent 20 June 1832. lYiQ guineas over and over again. 921. There is nothing but a custom from which you can ascertain the amount? —No. 922. Can you ascertain the amount in the time of Charles 2 ?— That was in the time of the Master of the Revels ; this Act of Parliament passed in the time of George 2. 923. But there were fees paid before the Act of Parliament ? — There were fees paid to the Master of Revels, and Cibber and he had a dispute about it. 924. If he received fees, that would be a precedent for you ? — Very well ; the Master of the Revels did receive fees. 925. Can you prove that the Master of the Revels received fees so far back as the time of Charles 2? — Yes; I have no written document, I have only history and records to go by. Colley Cibber, who was contemporary with the Master of the Revels, gives an account of having paid his fees, and at last disputes the point with him ; but it is stated that they had paid them, and that long before this Act was passed. 926. Then you can trace the existence of the custom as far back as that time ? — Yes, on the authority of Colley Cibber. In his Apology for his Life, chapter 8, you will find a long account of the Master of the Revels having received fees. 927. Is there not also an account of those fees being disputed ? — They were disputed, because his authority altogether was disputed. 928. Cibber is no authority in point of law? — I do not know where you will get law so far back. " In the eighth chapter of an ' Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber,' we are told there was good reason to suppose that the Master of the Revels had usurped a control which he did not legally possess ; and we also learn, that having usurped it, he then grossly abused it. The law lately passed, says Cibber, by which the power of licensing plays, &c. is given to a proper person, is a strong presumption that no law had ever given that power to any such person before." 929. Can you prove that fees were paid to the Master of the Revels so far back as the time of Charles 1, for Mr. Malone mentions that ? — I shall be much obliged to any gentleman who will put me in the way of proving so difficult a thing ; how can we prove it, except from records, or tradition ? 930. Mr. Malone quotes those records ; are you aware he quotes the accounts of Sir Henry Herbert ? — The Master of the Revels pretended to have power he did not possess ; and Cibber says, it was under that pretence he got his fees. Now the power is vested by Act of Parliament in the Lord Chamberlain. 931. Cibber does not speak only of his fees ? — No, 932. Have you not a copy of your appointment ? — I was told it must remain in the Treasury, and there it is. g^^. Can you state to the Committee what provincial theatres are favoured by your protection ? — All that have a right to act the whole round of the drama, which power they obtain thus : in places remote from London, so many miles from the King's residence, and so on in provincial towns, there are certain theatres which the magistrates have the power to license for 60 days, with certain intervals between those 60 days. 934. For what purpose ? — For the purpose of acting the whole round of the drama ; but if those theatres, so licensed by the magistrates, produce plays which have not been licensed in London, or which are totally new, they are subject, like the London theatres, to the control of the Lord Chamberlain. 935. Have any of those theatres ever applied to you for a licence ?— Yes. 936. Which? — Several. 937. Can you name one ? — Yes, Liverpool. 938. Liverpool is a theatre royal? — Yes, there are some theatres in the country which are so. 939. Liverpool is not licensed by the magistrates ? — No. 940. You say theatres licensed by the magistrates have applied to you for a licence ? — Yes, some theatres in the circumstances I have stated, as well as patent theatres in the country. 94 1 . What theatre, licensed by the magistrates for the performance of the regular drama, has ever applied to you for a licence to play a new piece ; can you name one? — Yes, Brighton. 942. Brighton ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. '65 942. Brighton is a patent theatre? — Yes, so it is*; but I am positive several G. Colman, Esq. have applied ; Norwich, I am not sure that is not a patent theatre. 943. You are certain the theatre licensed by the magistrate has recognised your 20 J""e 1832. authority ? — Yes, I am confident of it. 944. You are not able to name one ? — No. 945. Birmingham is a patent theatre P — ^Yes. 946. Manchester is the same, and York ? — Yes; Coventry is not a patent theatre, and that will answer two questions; for I remember licensing, or rather transmitting a licence, to Coventry, for a piece written by a poor author who had no fees to pay, for I refused to take them. 947. Coventry is not a theatre royal ? — No ; to the best of my knowledge, cer- tainly not. 948. You are not quite sure about that, are you? — No, these are things I carry on my shelves ; my head is not big enough to hold them. 949. Then your opinion is, that no play can be acted anywhere without having previously received the licence of the Lord Chamberlain r — Yes. As to those theatres over the water, they are perfectly lawless ; they only act under the com- mon magistrates' licence, which is to license music and dancing ; for the Legisla- ture, when it passed the Act of 1737, did not contemplate that the town would get so overgrown as it is, therefore they never thought of those people that have since struck up, who get the common magistrates' licence for music and dancing, and abuse it to the extent you have seen. 950. Do they bring pieces to you to be licensed, or not ? — No, they set us at defiance ; they are outlawed, or at least lawless. 9,51. Then have you no remedy? — 1 suppose I have the same remedy as any common informer ; but as I have enough to do as examiner, I do not choose to turn common informer. 952. Ihere is a remedy, if you choose to exercise it? — There is a remedy, and I believe they have tried it by information, but the expense is so great that those whom it concerns do not like to inform any further. 953. What is the penalty ? — The penalty, if you act anything unlicensed in a regular theatre, is very heavy indeed, 50/. for each time the oflence is repeated, upon every person engaged in it, and a forfeiture of the grant by which they have the right of opening the theatre. If I were an informer, 1 could have shut up all the theatres every night by going strictly into forms, 954. Are you not in the habit not only of licensing dramas, but songs, prologues and epilogues ; do they not require a special licence ? — Yes, it is so stated in the Act of Parliament ; but prologues and epilogues are generally sent with the dramas to which they belong, and they are all lumped in with the drama, unless they are sent afterwards. 955. If any alterations are made, would that require a fresh licence, and would you demand another fee ?- -Nothing on the stage is to be uttered without licence. 9,56. You would demand another fee ? — Yes, to be sure, if there are material alterations. I do not mean to say if you alter a word or two. They do it ad libitum. 957. If a song is licensed for one theatre, is it necessary to be licensed again for another theatre ? — No, certainly not ; but what is licensed for Drury Lane or Covent Garden they have no right to play at the minor theatres, because the minor theatres are restricted to certain perlbrmances, and if under the licence to the patent theatres they perform a species of drama they have no licence to represent, they should not do it. 958. What is a licence for one minor theatre with respect to pieces is a licence for all ? — Yes. 9 -,9. You say, in the paper which you have given in, that a piece was brought forward at Paris, in which incest, adultery, murder, parricide, &c. fonned the groundwork ; do you consider you would be perfectly justified in refusing to licence a piece in which those crimes were introduced ? — No, not precisely that ; let me see how the plot thickens. I should not refuse to licence the murders of Richard III. and so on, but when it comes to such things as human nature and morality shudder at and revolt against. 960. Does • The Brighton theatre i? found, on reference, to act under an annual licence from the Lord Cham- beilain, it being situated in the vicinity of the King's residence. 679. I 66 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE G. Colman, Esq. 960. Does not human nature and morality shudder at Macbeth, if we can sup- pose morality to shudder ? — Yes ; but it is a matter of history. 20 June 1P32. q6i. Do you mean to say in those cases you would only withhold the licence to those plays which seem to have justified such acts, or do you mean from the mere introduction of the thing? — Exactly; things that seem to any reflecting or dispassionate mind really to justify murder. 962. Either to justify or encourage it? — Yes. We have murders upon the modern stage more frequently than the ancients had. 963. You say incest, adultery, murder, parricide, &c. ; are not those crimes the results of the passions upon which the interest of great dramatic performances is founded ? — Yes, in some instances. 964. Would you wholly exclude them ? — No ; nor are they excluded in general. It is only where there is something so shocking as to justify exclusion. 965. Would the mere introduction of anything that is shocking, justify you in censuring or refusing your licence to that performance, or is it only its being intro- duced in such a manner as to seem to justify or encourage the crime itself; would the mere introduction of it be sufficient? — The reason of suppressing every thing of that sort is, when it may make a bad impression on the people at large. It is impossible to answer so comprehensive a question. It must depend upon the dis- cretionary power of the Lord Chamberlain ; and I have already shown how far it is from the wish of the Lord Chamberlain to object. 966. You only refuse your license to such things as tend to justify or encourage crime ? — Certainly. 967. Have you any idea of what you should consider politically wrong? — Yes, certainly ; anything that may be so allusive to the times as to be applied to the existing moment, and which is likely to be inflammatory. 968. You would think under a Tory administration, anything against the Tories would be wrong, and under a Whig administration, anything against the Whigs?— I should say to the manager, " I do not pretend to interfere, but you had better not allow it for the sake of your theatre, as you will have a row in your theatre." It was but the other day the word " reform" was mentioned, and I understand there was a hubbub. 969. Where was that ? — At all the theatres. 970. In the exercise of your censorship at the present moment, if the word reform should occur, you would strike it out? — No ; I should say, " I think you had better omit it ; I advise you to do so for your own sakes, or you will have a hubbub." 971. There was a play of Charles the First you refused to licence? — Yes. 972. Why did you refuse to license that ? — Because it amounted to every thing but cutting off" the King's head upon the stage. 973. So does Julius Caesar ? — Yes, but not in that way. If you took the trouble of reading the two plays, you would see the difference. There is a discretionary power in the Lord Chamberlain. 974. Is it all a matter of discretion and caprice ? — It is the discretion of the Lord Chamberlain. 975. Or a caprice ? — You call it so. 976. Is your appointment for life or at will ? — I understood for life, unless I mis- behave myself. 977. Has the Lord Chamberlain power to remove you? — I do not know how far the Lord Chamberlain's power extends, but it has been always considered the next thing to a patent place ; it is not a patent place certainly. 978. How does the appointment specify it : is it from year to year ?-^No. 979. Is it during pleasure ? — No, it does not say so. 980. Is there a fresh appointment on evei'y new Lord Chamberlain ? — No; there is in every new reign. 981. I'here is no fresh appointment on the change of Lord Chamberlain? — No, I am turned over to the next. 982. Suppose he did not wish to continue you, could he displace you ? — No, I should demur to that ; I do not know what power the Lord Chamberlain has to displace me ; such a thing was never thought of. 983. Is the Dublin theatre under your protection ? — No, there is a Lord Lieu- tenant there ; it is under the control of his household. 984. You are quite sure the Dublin theatre has never paid two guineas to your office ? — Quite sure, for there is a sort of Master of the Revels appointed there ; they are under control, dependent on the Lord Lieutenant's regime. 985. Then ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 67 985. Then upon the Dublin stage anything may be performed ? — No, I am not q Colman, Esq. acquainted with the sort of administration there, but I understand it to be under the . 1^ control of persons or a person appointed by the Viceroy of Ireland. 20 June 1832. 986. They have a Jicencer of their own? — Yes, they have, as I am told. 987. How is it with regard to Edinburgh ? — That is under the Lord Chamber- lain of England. 988 England and Scotland? — Yes, all the United Kingdom except Ireland. 9S9. You stated just now that in those provincial theatres which are licensed by magistrates for the regular drama, in the event of their wishing to act any new piece that may be written in the country, they are obliged to submit it to your in- spection, and the only instance you named was Coventry ; in what way do you claim that power, as the Act does not give it you ? — Yes, there is an Act of Geo. 3. 990. Where do you find the licencer mentioned In that Act ? — If you will look in tfie Act you will find it. 991. Do you mean to say your power is recognised? — Yes, under the Lord Chamberlain. 992. According to your opinion, the only part of England that is not able at this moment to have the regular drama represented, according to the construction you put upon the Act, is Westminster, and 20 miles i-ound it ? — No. 993-6. Suppose the inhabitants wish the regular drama played 19 miles out of London, how could they have that done ? — You must go further still. 997. Then within Westminster and 20 miles is the only part of England where the regular drama cannot be performed? — If you will have the goodness to refer to the Act, that will give you every information. 998. That only applies to 20 miles beyond Westminster. Is there any place within that 20 miles where there is any possibility of having the regular drama performed ? — Not by a magistrate's licence. 999. By what other licence; is it the Lord Chamberlain's ? — No j the Lord Chamberlain has no such jurisdiction. 1000. Then how can it be obtained? — By repealing a part of the Act of Parlia- ment, as in the case of the patent theatres. 1001. Then you think an alteration in the law would be of use ? — If you want to license those people over the water, to put them on a regular footing, you must, as in the case of the patent theatres, repeal a part of the Act of Parliament, which would give them a patent, or, if you do not like a patent, you may repeal the Act as to the magistrates, and give them a power to license. But however, that goes to legislation, and that is beyond me. 1002. You, as examiner of plays, ought to know something on the subject? — As far as my duty goes, I wish to inform myself as well as I possibly can ; and I think I have given you some information. 1 003. Do not you think it hard upon people who live within 20 miles of West- minster, that they cannot have the regular drama performed? — It is difficult for me to give any opinion as to the hardship. 1004. Is is not an anomaly? — 1 think it is hard those people over the water are suffered to do what they are doing, that they are suffered to go the lengths they are now going. 1005. That is not an answer to the question. The question was, why people who live within 20 miles of London should not have the power of having the legi- timate drama performed r — You must ask the Legislature that question. 1006. Do not you think that an anomaly ? — It is so ; seeing one party is admitted to do this and another not, it is so far anomalous. 1007. Does not the Lord Chamberlain's power extend to where the magistrates' power begins ?— No. 1008. They can only give a licence 20 miles out of Westminster ? — No. 1009. Then you think the regular drama ought to be confined to the two patent theatres ?— -I think it would be better for all parties. 1010. Can the Crown by patent licence theatres in Westminster, or within 20 miles? — I believe not. In the present day, although the number of theatres in and about tlie metropolis has greatly increased, the general taste for play-going is evidently on the wane. Still there should be no restrictions, as the honourable Member for St. Ives says, in the performance of the legitimate drama at every theatre. Now it happens that the restricted Adelphi and Olympic theatres are thriving, while of the two legitimate patent theatreS; the lessees of one have lost 679. 1 2 several 68 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE G. Colman, Esq. Several thousands per annum, and the ruined proprietors of the other are letting their bouse if they can to the best bidder. If the minor theatres be wise, they 20 June 1832. would wish for no further latitude than that they now enjoy. 1011. The Committee will not trouble you for any opinion as to the interests of the minor theatres, as they are the best judges of their own affairs. You state that the patent theatres are not flourishing ; do you mean that the regular drama is not in a state of prosperity ? — If all theatres are to be allowed the performance of the legitimate drama, where are their actors to come from r The two patent theatres have a difficult task in finding a company at each adequate to the performance of the whole round of stage business. 1012. If you say the patent theatres are not flourishing, that is admitting the mere performance of the regular drama is not a source of prosperity? — Certainly; and if two theatres which play the regular drama cannot prosper, there is a worse chance if you licen.se 20 instead of two theatres. 1013. Do you think the legitimate drama can be better performed at Covent Garden or Drury Lane than at the Haymarket or Adelphi ? — Yes. 1014. With regard to comedy, do you think legitimate comedy can be better played on the large stage of Covent Garden than in the smaller stage of the Hay- market? — They have a better collective company trained to that style of acting, which is not the style of the minor theatres. The Haymarket theatre can scarcely rank among the minors, as it is licensed for the whole round of the drama. 1015. Suppose the company were put upon a smaller stage, would not a comedy appear to as great advantage at the Haymarket as Covent Garden ? — I think if tlieatres are so large that you cannot see and hear, smaller theatres are preferable. 1016. Do you consider that to be the case at Covent Garden ? — I am near sighted, and I cannot see so well there certainly. 1Q17. Can you hear as well r — Whenever I go the managers are very kind, and tliey have placed me in a private box near the stage, where I hear well enough. 1018. Can those hear who sit in the centre of the house ? — I never did sit in the centre of the house. 1019. Which do you prefer as an author? — I should wish everybody to see and hear ray play, except those who are inclined to damn it. 1020. Now, as an author, would you like John Bull or the Iron Chest to be played on the Covent Garden stage, or the Haymarket, by as good a company ; which stage would do your composition most justice? — I should say, perhaps, one is too large, and the other too small ; I am speaking of my own former Haymarket theatre. 1021. With reference to the present theatre? — I have never been in it. 1022. Have you ever been in the Adelphi? — Yes. 1023. Should you prefer Covent Garden or the Adelphi ? — I should say the Adelphi was too small. 1024. Which would you prefer ? — I have not turned that matter in my mind j the next play I write I will consider of it. 1 025. Will you answer the question with reference to the plays you have written ; suppose you had the choice of performing John i?ull or the Iron Chest at Covent Garden, or the Adelphi, which would you prefer ? — I must hesitate about that. If I sent it to the Adelphi, I should wish it on a larger scale than it is at this moment ; and with a view to my profits, I should wish it much larger. 1 026. But to do justice to your composition and powers as an author, would you choose Covent Garden or the Adelphi ? — With a view to merely seeing and hearing, 1 should perhaps choose a less theatre than Covent Garden, and a larger theatre than the Adelphi ; something between them. 1027. Then, except with a view to the better receipts you would get at the larger theatre, you think it would be better performed at a smaller one ? — I have not exactly said that. 1028. With a view to the essentials of seeing and hearing, you think a smaller theatre would be preferable ? — If it is too large. 1029. Have you ever visited the Coburg? — Yes. 1030. That is a larger stage than the Adelphi ? — Yes. 1031. Then, as between Covent Garden and the Coburg, which would you select for the representation of any new piece or old piece of your own ? — I think, cer- tainly, the theatres are too large, and I should rather see my play acted at such a sized theatre as the Cobuig. - . 1032. You ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 69 1032. You would prefer the Coburg to Covent Garden? — I cannot say which G.Colman, Esq. I should prefer; I could not answer the question to myself until I had taken time to reflect upon it. 20 June 1832. 1 033. Do not you think the size of the theatres compels the managers to seek to amuse the eye rather than the ear, and that it has led to the triumph of scenery rather than of poetry and acting ? — They play all sorts of things ; a drama is now exceedingly popular, and having a great run, called •' The Hunchback," which seeks to please the ear more than the eye. 1034. Is not that an exception, as many such have not been produced of late years, but they have depended more upon scenery and quadrupeds than good acting ? — I certainly think the size of the theatres has led them to spectacle and sing-song. 1035. When you said the minor theatres had been flourishing, and therefore you would wish for an alteration in the present system, is not that rather owing to their being able to invade the present law, than to the present law being in full ope- ration ? — I cannot enter into that. 1036. Do they at present invade the law as far as the legitimate drama is con- cerned ? — Yes, certainly, they do. 1037. Then that is the reason of their flourishing ?— No, I do not know that. 1038. If they only sung and danced, do you think they would flourish? — I am not able to answer that question. 1 039. Will you have the goodness to point out the clause in the Act of the 28 Geo. 3, which gives you authority over new pieces produced at provincial theatres ? — The clause is — 1040. Where is any power given to you in that clause ? — Wliatever new play is licensed by the Lord Chamberlain, they have a right to perform, and no other. 1041. They have only a right to perform plays produced in London, which have been licensed by the Lord Chamberlain ; but how are they bound to submit to you a new play written in the country ? — I think they are. If they are empowered to perform plays which have passed through the strainer of London, a Jbrtiori, they may require a licence for themselves. If there is any doubt about it, let the Coventry theatre send up a play to be licensed, and according to your argument, we have only to make out a licence for Covent Garden and Drury Lane, and it is suitable for Coventry. 1042. But you have no original jurisdiction over the provincial theatres? — I have taken things as I have found them, and it is so understood all over the country, and they send up plays to me : it is no innovation or suggestion of mine, I found the practice existing. 1043. That is in the case of theatres royal, but you have not mentioned any pro- vincial theatre licensed by the magistrates which submits to your autliority? — I have not my book, but I have mentioned Coventry ; and could mention others, but they do not occur to my mind. If the Committee require it, I will send a list. 1044. Do you think performers always adhere to your corrections?^ — I be- lieve so. 1045. r)o you ever take any measures to enforce your correction ? — No, I have no ulterior power ; if there is any necessity to enforce them, it is the Lord Chamber- lain who must do it. If I thought they were going too far, I should certainly represent the case to the Lord Chamberlain, and he would act at his discretion. 1046. You never send anybody to ascertain whether your corrections are ob- served ? — I need not do that ; I have enough occupation not to volunteer that ; I have plenty of information on the subject. 1047. There is a theatre in the Strand, perhaps you are aware of, which is performing now ? — Yes, I think that theatre is performing without any authority whatever. 1048. Does it ever submit plays to your inspection ? — Never. I understand they have been sent to from the Lord Chamberlain's office, and told they are going be- yond the line, and, as I understand, they have answered they do not think so; and they go on ; but that cannot last for ever : the question must be settled one way or the other, I presume. 1049. What means have the Lord Chamberlain's office taken to stop them? — I think the Lord Chamberlain can stop them. 1050. What are they doing in order to stop them ? — I cannot say, that is Out of my department. 679. 13 1051. Do 70 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COiMMITTEE G. Colman, Esq. 1051. Do you think the legitimate drama being played at all the minor theatres within the bills of mortality would operate beneficially or otherwise to the drama 20 June 1832. in general? — If I am asked my private opinion, I am afraid they would injure themselves. 1 052. Never mind themselves ; what effect would it have on the drama in general, or dramatic literature ? — If those who are to conduct the affairs of dramatic literature are to injure themselves, I cannot think dramatic literature itself would be bene- fited. If all the concerns fail which are to perform the drama, what is to become of dramatic literature itself? It would go to the dogs along with the rest. 1053. What injury do you apprehend would result to the patent theatres if the legitimate drama were allowed to be acted at the minor theatres ? — It might draw audiences from one place to another, so that none of them would have audiences suflBcient to pay their expenses. 1 054. Should not you think it would increase the number of persons who like to go to theatres? — I should doubt it. If people have not a relish for going to two theatres, I do not think that relish would be increased because there are 20. 1055. To what do you attribute the loss of money which every year takes place at Covent Garden and Drury Lane ? — I think it is a horrible ruin, there is no doubt. 1056. What is the cause of it? — I do not know ; they are extremely industrious, and the cause is from the taste of the town being very much altered, and from a change of habits. For instance, gentlemen of the description I have now the honour of talking to, go to dinner about the time of half-price, and therefore they are not the supporters of theatres ; that is the generality ; there are some amateurs. 1057. Do you think the theatres should be kept open two hours later? — No; what is to become of your other customers, the tradespeople ? if they are to be kept up as long as fashionable people, they would not be able to open their shops in the morning. 1058. Do you think the tradespeople support the theatres? — I think that a great part of the audience consists of visitors to London, people who have come to see the lions, foreigners, and so on. 1059. Do not you think one great cause for their failure is the theatres being too large ? — I think there is a redundancy of room, if they cannot fill them. lofio. Will you have the goodness to furnish the Committee with the items of deduction made in your salary ? — Yes ; I furnished the other day a list of plays. 1061. Will you also state the amount of fees paid to you ? — I have stated already the fee was two guineas each. At the end of each season there is the number of plays that have been licensed, which will give the amount of fees ; suppose we say i oo plays, that will be enough, as you will see I have received 200 guineas. Mr. William Dunn, called in j and further Examined. Mr. William Dunn. 1 062. WILL you have the goodness to state to the Committee what you conceive to be the privileges granted to Drury Lane theatre by the Killigrew patent which they possess ? — The exclusive right to perform all entertainments of the stage of whatever sort, by the patentees or proprietors of such patent. 1063. Do you mean throughout the year? — Yes. 1 064. Where do you find an exclusive power in your patent ? — I conceive it is an exclusive power. 1 of)5. You say exclusive right ? — Yes, as far as Killigrew's and Davenant's patents go. 1066. Do you mean no other theatre has a right to perform the legitimate drama but Covent Garden and Drury Lane? — Yes, unless another patent should be granted by the King. 1 067. You say only so far as Killigrew's and Davenant's patents go ? — Yes, there are only those two patents existing. 1068. Do you mean the Lord Chamberlain has not the power to license another theatre for the performance of the legitimate drama within the city of Westminster ? — He has the power. 1069. How do you reconcile that to your exclusive right ; your rights are not exclusive if he has the power ? — We claim to play all entertaiinnents of the stage under that patent of Killigrew's. 1 070. But those aie not exclusive rights if the Lord Chamberlain has the power to grant the same right by an annu d licence to a minor theatre ; in that case, what becomes ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 71 becomes of your exclusive riglit r — With that exception, that the King can grant Mr. William Dunn, a patent, or the Lord Chamberlain can grant licences from time to time as he thinks proper. 20 June 1832. 1071. Then the Lord Chamberlain is paramount to your patent? — He has licensed the Haymarket, the English Opera, the Olympic, and Mathews's enter- tainments ; but still we complain of the exercise of that power, and have always petitioned against it. 1072. Have you any remedy at law against the Lord Chamberlain for allowing the representation of the legitimate drama ; at the Adelphi, for instance ?• — No, I do not know that we have. 1 073. Then, in point of fact, the Lord Chamberlain is totally independent of you ? — I apprehend he has the power of granting licences. 1074. You have an exclusive power, but it is at the discretion of the Lord Chamberlain?— Yes, and the King, 1075' Your patent does not prevent the Lord Chamberlain from giving anothei licence ? — No. 1076'. Have not you a licence as well as a patent? — We have, for 21 years. 1077. How many of those years are unexpired? — Five; the renewal was in 1816. 1078. Was there not an arrangement made between the Opera House and Drury Lane and Covent Garden, in 1 792, with regard to the description of performances ? — There was. 1079. ^^ you conceive the Lord Chamberlain has exceeded his power, or at all violated that agreement ? — It was never contemplated at the time that agreement was entered into between those parties that the Lord Chamberlain would have exercised the power he has exercised since. 1080. Then you think he has exceeded his power? — Yes, we conceive so, or we should not have complained of it. 1081. It is rather a breach of understanding than an infringement of your rights ? — Yes, both. 1082. 'Jhen are the Committee to conclude that the proprietors of the two patent theatres did not know of the power of the Lord Chamberlain as to his being able to grant licences for the performance of the legitimate drama? — No, we only com- plain of the usage of that power, when he does it to an extent which is an injury to the patent theatres. 1083. Was not there an application made to Parliament in 1809 for a patent for a third theatre, when Drury Lane was burnt down ? — There was. ' 1084. It was refused, was it not ? — Yes. 1085. Do you know why? — Because it was conceived the town did not require a third theatre, and it would be the utmost injustice to the two patent theatres, more especially Drury Lane, which was burnt down, and the proprietors were using their utmost exertions to rebuild it. 1086. Will you state the circumstances under which Drury Lane obtained the licence for 21 years, which remains unexpired ? — That was obtained for the purpose of rebuilding Drury Lane theatre. The dormant patent, or rather Killigrew's patent, had not been possessed by the proprietors of Drury Lane theatre, who had only paid for that part of it which was Mr. Harris's share. There were other interests still to be paid for ; they only possessed 46 shares out of 60, and there remained 14 sixtieths to be purchased. They had not funds at that time to pur- chase the 14 sixtieths, and therefore Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Whitbread being extremely anxious to go forward with the subscription to rebuild the theatre, applied to the Lord Chamberlain for a renewal of that 21 years' licence, as they could not get subscriptions on the remaining few years which were running on the 21 years' licence then in existence. They got that 21 years' licence renewed, and subsequently paid the balance, to the amount of 9,000/., and possessed themselves of Killigrew's patent entire. 1087. Do you consider that was a good or wise step on the part of the Drury Lane proprietors to possess themselves of Killigrew's patent ; do you consider it was a provident purchase ? — Yes. 1088. At whose recommendation was it done? — It was in the Opera arrange- ment, and took place at the particular recommendation of the Prince Regent and the Duke of Bedford, who refused to grant a lease for a term of years unless they purchased Killigrew's patent. He made objections to granting a lease for 103 •years until Killigrew's patent was purchased. (ijg. 14 10S9. What 72 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE 'Mt. William Dunn. 1089. What v/as it to the Duke of Bedford? — Tlie same necessity existed in the year ly^s (for the purchase of Killigrew's patent for Drury Lane theatre) as 20 June 1832. existed in the year 1810, when the present theatre was built, by paying the balance, namely, that they should possess that patent which was supposed to run for ever. 1090. What benefit did the theatre derive from the possession of that patent? — As I have stated, the exclusive privilege of playing all entertainments. 1091. Then where was the necessity of the licence ? — They had not possession of Killigrew's patent at that time, and therefore they required in the interim to get the 2 1 years' licence. 1 092. Then it was to cover the remaining part of the patent ? — Yes. 1093. Was Killigrew's patent purchased after the subscribers had contributed their money for building a theatre ?— The first portion of it, 11,900/., was paid in 1793, and 9,000/. was paid subsequent to the rebuilding of Drury Lane theatre, 1094. Then the subscriptions were given on the faith of its being purchased? — Yes, the subscriptions came in very slowly, until Mr. Whitbread was able to report they were likely to possess themselves of Killigrew's patent. 1095. What was the arrangement made with the Opera House ? — That they should be confined to Italian operas ; or rather, Drury Lane and Covent Garden were precluded from playing Italian operas, and the King's theatre was to play only 60 nights in the course of the season. 1096. Where is that specified? — In the Opera arrangement. 1097. Have you a copy of that ? — Yes. [// was delivered inJ\ 1098. At the same time Drury Lane gave up its privilege of acting Italian operas ? — Yes, they did, and have continued to desist from acting Italian operas ever since. 1099. Did they consider that a valuable privilege? — A valuable privilege it would have been if they were empowered to do it. They were empowered if they had broken through the arrangement, but they have kept it sacred. 1 100. But it was upon the understanding the patent was valid, and the faith of the theatre having the exclusive privilege, that the subscribers continued their money ? — Yes, generally ; in a great measure it induced the subscribers to go forward. 1101. They put that forward to the public? — It was Mr. Whitbread, in the report. 1 102. Was there any prospectus given out to the public with regard to that? — Only in the report drawn out. 1103. Was there any understanding between Drury Lane and the Crown or the Lord Chamberlain at that time ? —Not that I am aware of. The Act of Par- liament directed that the balance of Killigrew's patent should be paid. 1 104. That was the basis of the agreement? — -Yes. ; 105. Have you got a copy of that agreement, the basis of the present contract? — It is in the Act of Parliament. 1106. Was it not the custom for the Lord Chamberlain to consult the patent theatres whenever an application was made to him for a licence for a single night at a small theatre? — No ; it was in Lord Salisbury's time. 1107. That has never been resorted to by the present Lord Chamberlain? — I think when Lord Dartmouth came in he discontinued it. H08. When you were examined the other day, you stated Mr. Mash received an annuity of 1 00 /. from Drury Lane ? — Yes. 1109. Are you aware how that originated? — I never knew how it originated, but I always understood it was for the renewal of that licence for 21 years. 1110. For the good will of the Lord Chamberlain's office? — Yes. 1111. Do you consider that a provident or a good bargain.^ — It was considered improvident by Mr. Whitbread, who intended to discontinue it as soon as the balance of Killigrew's patent was paid, because there was no further necessity for the Lord Chamberlain's licence. 1112. Why should the Lord Chamberlain's office interest itself in whether Killi- grew's patent was bought or not ? — It made a difference in Mr. Mash's fees every time there was a renewal. 1113. It was an annual licence before? — No, it was for 2 1 years. About 1709 the first licence commenced. 1 114. Then having purchased the patent, you were independent of the Lord Chamberlain's office ? — Yes, having purchased Killigrew's patent, we consider ourselves independent. 1115. From ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 73 1115. From whom was it purchased? — From Mr. Harris, Mr. White, and Mr. IVilUam Dunn. Mr. Martindale ; they were the parties. HI 6. Do you conceive you can play Italian operas at Drury Lane theatre with- ^° ^^^^' out the leave of the Lord Chamberlain? — I think we could, under Killigrew's patent. 1117. Do you consider it an infraction of the patent, by German and Frencli operas being played at the King's theatre ? — Yes, the agreement has been broken by the Opera House proprietor, inasmuch as they play six nights in a week, and play French and German as well as Italian operas. 1118. You would justify your breach by their breach? — Yes, if we were to break it. 11 ig. The condition for which you gave up your right of playing Italian operas has not been complied with ? — Mr. Taylor was to pay a certain amount of the balance of the patent in consideration of our desisting playing Italian operas. 1120. In whose hands was Davenant's patent at that time? — Covent Garden theatre. 1121. Which was Mr. Harris the manager of? — He was the manager of Covent Garden too ; he possessed both the patents. 1122. Then before Drury Lane possessed Killigrew's patent, under what autho- rity tiid they act? — The 21 years' running licence. 1 1 23. Do you know for how great a length of time the two patents had been held together by Covent Garden theatre ; how did it happen they came together, becaase originally there were two ? — I believe the town did not support the two theatres at that time ; and they were united in 1 620. 1 1 24. Do you happen to know how many years they were united ? — No. 1 125. What objection have you to Shakspeare, or any of the legitimate dramatic authors, being acted at the minor theatres ? — I think to throw open the drama would be destructive of it, inasmuch as there are not performers sufficient in num- ber, nor I believe in the country, for we have no school of actors. 1 1 26. It appearing there are not performers sufticient to play on the large stages, tlo you not think there are plenty of performers who would play respectably and satisfactorily to the public upon the stages of the minor theatres ? — No, I think not ; they may play very well for the representation of spectacle and their own pieces ; but if you were to play Macbeth at the Coburg theatre, say with Mr. Young in IMacbeth, and the other parts filled up with the performers who are in the habit of playing at the Coburg, it would be a miserable representation. 1127. Do you not think, if they were in the habit of playing the legitimate drama, there would be many more people come forward to fill those parts than at present? — No, I think not. 1128. Now, are you not aware that all the great actors of the day have come out »t the country theatres ? — Many of them ; but there is no school in the country now. 1 1 29. Do you not consider these numei-ous theatres would be so many schools and nurseries for actors, if they played the legitimate drama ? — The fact is, that actors are not coming forward. 1 1 30. Then allowing the minor theati-es to play the legitimate drama would not hurt you if there were no scholars ? — But during the time you are playing the legi- timate drama with scholars you very much deteriorate. 1131. May not actors succeed on a small stage in representing the legitimate drama, who would fail at Covent Garden or Drury Lane ? — It depends on the powers of voice. 1 132. But power of voice and lungs does not always constitute the most eminent actor ? — No. /1 133. Might not a person who does not possess that power of voice appear to g^eat advantage on a minor stage ; at the Hayraarket, for instance? — I think at pre- sent there are not two companies sufficient to represent a play properly at Covent Garden and Drury Lane, as it ought to be represented ; and if you divide them over the whole town, and place one or two at each minor theatre, you would not have the legitimate drama represented so as to be tit to be seen. 1134. Are all your representations at Drury Lane confined to what you conceive to be the legitimate drama ? — No ; we perform farce and spectacle and pantomime. 1 \35- What description of representation do you, as treasurer, find the most pro- ductive to your theatre, legitimate drama or spectacle ? — Our authors have beqi very deficient in the legitimate drama for some time past. 679- K 1136. Within 74 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. JViUiam Dunn. 1 1 36. Within the last few years have you found spectacles fill your theatre better than the legitimate drama? — Yes, novelty; the old drama certainly is not very 30 June 1832, attractive. 1 137. How many persons can hear well in Drury Lane theatre? — I think almost all the audience, at least three-fourths of the audience. 1138. How many persons does the theatre hold? — I should imagine 3,000 people. 1139. How many does the Haymarket hold? — I am not aware. 1 140. About how many ? — Perhaps half that number. 1141. Because the legitimate drama has lost its attraction at Drury Lane or Covent Garden, (Shakspeare, for instance,) do you conceive it has lost its attraction at the minor theatres ? — I do not think that it has lost its attraction, provided they could get authors to write a good legitimate drama, as in the case of the Hunchback. 1142. We are now speaking of stock-pieces, Shakspeare? — Yes, I think it would be equally unproductive at the Coburg. 1 143. What objection have you to allowing the proprietors of the Coburg to play it, if they think proper?— Because they would not only take the old, but they would take the new productions authors might write. 1144. Then you object to their having the new productions more than to their having Shakspeare ; you would give Shakspeare up ? — Not exactly so. 1 145. You would not mind Shakspeare so much as the new productions? — I think if they represented Shakspeare at the minor theatres under the present existing state of the number of actors in the town, it would be very destructive to the regular drama altogether. 1 146. Do you think comedy could not be as well represented on a small stage as at Drury Lane or Covent Garden ? — On a moderate sized stage it might, certainly. , 1 147. Better? — I think not ; I do not think Covent Garden stage or Drury Lane stage too large. 1148. You think not.'' — No. 1 149. In the centre of the house at Drury Lane or Covent Garden, can the play of the countenance, which in comedy is a great point, be seen at all? — No; but on the other hand, a smaller theatre destroys the illusion. 1 150. What illusion do you mean ? — ^The illusion of the scene ; if you sit in the stage-box, for instance. 1151. That is with regard to spectacle, or a piece in which pageantry is required ; but is that so where no scenery is required ? — The same objection does not apply certainly to a coat-and-waistcoat comedy, as we call it, but to a tragedy, because fine scenic effects are to be produced in a tragedy, which can only be produced on a large stage. ] 152. That applies to tragedy ; a coat-and-waistcoat comedy can be represented as well on a small stage ? — Yes, on a moderate sized stage. On a small stage, you have sometimes a very tall actor, which is preposterous. 1153. Do you think legitimate comedy, when given on a small stage, is better given, and more correctly acted? — No, I think not. 1 154. I understand you to say three-fourths of the audience hear at Drury Lane ; then, by your own admission, you think it one-fourth too large? — That does not follow; I mean, to see and hear perfectly without inconvenience. 1155. Are you not aware one of the first things an actor learns in coming to the stage of Covent Garden or Drury Lane is the art of getting off at the wings, from its being too large ? — It may be ; it is part of his profession. 1 1 56. Was an idea ever entertained of diminishing Drury Lane theatre ? — It has been diminished, to what I conceive to be a reasonable size. 1 157. When was that? — In the year 1816. 1158. Do you recollect what was the outlay on that occasion ? — £. 22,eoo. The whole of the interior was pulled down. 1159. How much was it diminished; one-third, or how much? — I think it was brought forward about six feet. 1160. Then, before it was pulled down, it was found inconveniently large ? — The j^roscenium ; the construction of it altogether was complained of rather more than the size. 1161. The shape as much as the size?— Yes, the great pillars were taken away from the stage, the proscenium was altered. The formation of the theatre was also a little defective in the sight, in the way in which the range of boxes took place. 1162. What ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 75 1162. What do you think the best shape for hearing in a theatre? — I think Ut. William Dunn. Drury Lane is quite perfect in that respect. 1 163. AVhat is the shape? — The horse-shoe. ao June 1832. 1 164. You consider the horse-shoe shape the best for hearing ? — Yes. 1165. You think, if all the plays produced were as good as the Hunchback, the theatres would flourish ? — Certainly. 1166. Why did you refuse the Hunchback at Drury Lane ? — That was a point of management or mismanagement I am not acquainted with. 1167. What species of representation has been most productive within the last year ; which has brought the most money r — It is difficult to say ; we had so little of anything that did bring money. 1 168. Did the lions draw money ? — The lions certainly paid their expenses. 1169. Did any other piece pay the expenses? — A legitimate drama, which was called the Rent-day, was, I think, the most profitable of anything that was played. 1 1 70. The Brigand ? — The Brigand is a favourite piece, but it was not new last year ; it was played with the Rent-day. The Brigand is what we call an excellent stock-piece. 1171. What is the amount of the sum which now remains due upon Drury Lane theatre ; what was the amount of the investment ? — About 212,000/. 1172. What portion of that sum remains unpaid ?— About 10,000/. 1 173. And until that is paid no dividends are received upon that 212,000/.? — None. 1 1 74. Then, according to the present rate, how long will it be before the re- maining portion of the debt will be paid off? — About three years, supposing the present rent to go on. A great portion of the debt which now remains is a part of the compensation which was paid to the proprietors for the patent, 40,000 /., which the Sheridan family received for their portion of the patent. 1 1 75. However, it is a debt upon the theatre which you cannot escape from ? — Yes ; Mr. Tom Sheridan died possessed of a bond of 1 0,000 /., which was the major part of Mrs. Sheridan's fortune, and enabled her to bring up her talented family as she has done. 1 1 76. In three years' time you expect to pay the dividends r — Yes ; provided the theatre is let at its present rental. 1 177. How much per cent. ? — I should think scarce two per cent, on the capital invested. 1178. You only begin to pay these dividends in three years' time? — That is about the time the 1 0,000 /. will be paid off. At the expiration of the lease the theatre may not be let, and the committee may be obliged to carry it on them- selves. 1 1 79. What has been the state of the theatre within the last two or three years ; has it been a winning or losing concern ? — It has not been a winning concern for the last three years. I i8o. Was it before that time ? — Before that time there was a season occasion- ally a winning concern, but generally speaking very unproductive to the lessees ; the proprietors receive their rental, but the lessees are bankrupt. 1181. The lessee is a loser this year? — He is a considerable loser this year. 1 182. Do you speak of the proprietors or the lessees ? — The proprietors receive the rental from the lessee, and the lessee bears the brunt of the loss. The lessee will lose considerably above 10,000 /. this year. 1 183. You mean to say as to the last agreement about this patent, that it was given you in consideration of the property amounting to more than 200,000/. vested in that theatre ? — Y'es. 1 1 84. And in consideration of the expenses to which you had been exposed ? — Yes ; the Act of Parliament particulary directed the balance should be paid of Killigrew's patent. 1185. That Drury Lane should possess it entirely to itself? — Yes. 1 1 86. On account of the money invested in the theatre, you received the indul- gence you claimed ? — Yes. 1 187. You said by the agreement with the Opera House, they were only allowed to play twice a week ? — Yes, 60 nights was the number in the course of the season. u88. Will you point out any part of the agreement which says anything about 60 nights ? — It is in the agreement. 679. K2 1189. Has 76 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. wmiam Dunn. 11 89. Has not the lessee of Drury Lane theatre, whoever he may be, prohibited his performers in playing at the minor theatres, under a penalty for so doing ? — 20 June 1832. No, the articles all run so. 1190. Are they not, in the articles with the manager, prohibited from engaging in a minor theatre ? — They cannot go to any theatre without special permission. 1191. Did not the manager of Drury Lane close the theatre 20 days before the usual time ? — It was some time before the usual time ; but the performers generally have permission to go to a minor theatre when they ask it. Mr. George Bolwell Davidge, called in ; and Examined. Mr. 1 192. WHAT theatre are you proprietor of? — The Coburg theatre. G. B. Davidge. ^ ^ ^^^ jjp^ .^^.^ y^^ licensed ?— By the 25 Geo. 2, 1194. By the magistrates ? — Yes. 1 195. What is the natui'e of your licence ? — Music and dancing. 1196. What construction do you put upon music and dancing? — I generally apply the construction of the Act of Parliament itself, which says music, dancing, and other entertainments of the like kind. 1 197. Do you conform to that Act by giving to the public nothing but music and dancing ? — Certainly not. 1 198. Then, what construction do you put upon " other entertainments ?" — I con- ceive it is a very comprehensive question, which has never yet been decided, what the words " other entertainments of the like kind" might imply. 1 1 99. Do you include Shakspeare's plays .? — I am aware there is an Act of Par- liament which declares that should not be the case, but it has gone on from manage- ment to management to represent plays of that description, ^nd I have fallen into the same course which other managers have adojJted before, without pretending to the legality of it. 1200. You have given Shakspeare's plays on your stage ? — Yes, repeatedly. 1201. Do you find them attract as much as your musical and dancing entertain- ments ? — Considerably more. I am induced to think that the style of entertainment given in the minor theatres some 20 or 25 years ago, and which was popular at that time, would not be tolerated by the play-going public now. 1202. What description of representations were those? — Pantomime, and ex- cessively loose rhymes to the jingle of a piano-forte ; frequently recitative, or the language spoken in rhyme ; horrible doggrel or jingle, which the public now would scout. 1203. Do you not think that species of entertainment tended to deteriorate the public taste ? — Decidedly so. 1 204. What part of the town do your audiences come from ? — I conceive from the west end of the town and the city of London. 1205. Are they persons in the habit of going to the large theatres ? — Decidedly ; the theatre has been patronised by most of the royal family, and noblemen and gen- tlemen attached to theatricals. 1206. Are you one of the persons who signed a petition to Parliament to repeal the different laws affecting the theatres ? — Yes. 1 207. What is it you complain of with respect to the law relating to theatres ? — I complain that it is so obscure that nobody can understand it ; I also complain of the law because it is badly administered, inasmuch as individuals for their own pur- poses have the power of selecting persons for persecution ; and the law is not so generally applied as to prosecute other persons who are equally infringing it. 120S. Who are those persons who have selected others ? — I was selected, I con- ceive, by the proprietors of Drury Lane theatre. A prosecution was brought against me by Mr. Dunn, the treasurer, for representing Douglas and Richard the Third. lijog. Who were the performers who represented those characters ; who repre- sented Richard the Third ? — I am not aware ; not at that time any perforaier of great eminence. 1210. What was the result of that prosecution? — 1 was convicted. 1211. In what penalty? — Two sums of 50/., which I paid. 1212. Where were you convicted? — At the assizes of the county of Surrey: it was tried at Guildford. 1213. Have you ever repeated these representations since ? — Frequently. 1214. Have you been prosecuted or infonned against since? — I have received notice of prosecution, but I have continued to do so and shall until the subject is set at ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 7'7 at rest ; for on the day I was prosecuted, and for years before and since, those per- ^^r. formances were continued at the other minor theatres, the proprietors of Covent G. B. Davidge. Garden and Drury Lane not interfering, 1215. What object had the proprietors of Covent Garden and Drury Lane in 20 June 1832. selecting you ? — Because they knew I was able to pay the penalty. 1216. Because you were a man of substance ? — I suppose so. 1217. Why have not they persevered in their informations ? — They did in their informations against the West London theatre. 1218. But against yourself?—! am not aware why they have not gone against me individually, except that the evidence which came out on the trial was not so complimentary as they wished to their judgment or their feelings ; and I am rather induced to think they were not anxious to come before the public in the same way again. 1219. Did they not prosecute the Queen's theatre in Tottenham -street? — Not at that time, but afterwards. 12 20. You think that prosecution excited the indignation of the public against them ? — It did. 1221. Would not that do them harm in their theatres ? — I should think not in a pecuniary light, but at least the public would judge for themselves whether it was an act of oppression or not. 1 222. Did any of the performers at your theatre who acted Shakspeare belong to the great theatres ?— Yes, a number of them ; Mr. Dovvton, Mr. Kean, Mr. Booth, and very many other actors ; Mr. George Bennett. 1223. Was there a proper supply of performers there already to act those parts ? —Certainly. 1224. You think there would be no difficulty in getting a sufficient number of people who are able and willing to act the legitimate drama ? — Certainly not ; I conceive I could produce tragedy, comedy, opera or farce, quite as perfectly at the Coburg theatre as it could be done at Covent Garden or Drury Lane. 1225. Then you wish the monopoly to be thrown open? — Not entirely; I con- ceive the patent theatres shoiild in some measure be protected, and in fact theatres generally. I do not think it should go on in that sweeping way which it is imagined is intended. I conceive if plays produced at the patent theatres or minor theatres in London or out of London were the property of those persons producing them for at least 2 1 yeai-s, the effect would be entirely answered. I do conceive, after the plays have been performed 21 years in the major or minor theatres, if they become public property, the full end would be accomplished. 1226. Do you wish more theatres to exist than exist at present? — I am afraid there are already too many, because on the faith of licences and on the faith of pro- tections large property has been risked on the minor theatres as well as the patent theatres ; but smaller theatres are daily springing up, without protection or licence. How far that may be conceived beneficial to the drama, I am not at liberty to give an opinion. 1227. How is an author remunerated at your theatre? — Much in the same way as at the patent theatres. Authors who have been successful in some instances at the patent theatres, are the authors at the minor theatres. The author of the Rent- day, which has been instanced as the most profitable production at Drury Lane, was the author of a number of pieces at the Coburg Theatre. 1228. Do you know what is the general mode of remuneration ? — Sometimes a stipulated sum of money ; at times I have given 50 /., and at other times 20 1. 1 229. Has an author any nights ? — Not besides, 1 230. That is the case sometimes ? — Occasionally ; at other times the author will receive half-a-guinea or a guinea a night for each night the play is performed. 1 231. Is that the whole remuneration ; does he retain no right in the play after? — Certainly, the entire copyright. 1232. Then he has no right to any subsequent remuneration at the theatre?- - Not any other remuneration beyond the run of the play, when he has received his stipulated sum. 1 233. Abroad their rights extend to a very considerable length of time ?^ — I am aware of that ; but it is not the case in England. 1 234. Has an author a right to any remuneration from country theatres ?— No ; when once the piece is published, it becomes, according to the present system, (out of London at least,) public property. All persons who can get a copy of the piece play it without advantage to the author or the person who has the copyright. 679. K3 1235. In 78 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. 1235. In France the author has a right to remuneration from any theatre in G. B. Davidge. France ? — From all theatres where the play is performed, and for eight or ten years after his death it goes to his heirs. 20 June 1 32. 1236. Do you happen to know what the law is in Prussia? — I am not aware. 1 237. The copyright is worth nothing to him in England ?— He has the power of publishing. 1 238. What number of spectators does your theatre hold ? — Near 4,000. I have received money at the gallery door for 1,800 ; I have received money at the pit door for 1,130, and I have received money at the box door for 1,200 persons. 1239. On what occasion was it you received money for 1,200 persons at the box door ; what was the representation ? — I do not remember. 1240. Do you mean on one night? — I have stated the extent, the greatest amount I have received at different parts of the theatre at different times. 1241. What will the theatre hold? — Three hundred and sixty pounds. 1242. Then it will hold above 3,000 persons ? — Yes, considerably. 1243. On those occasions did they pay full price ? — Yes ; on the occasion I am alluding to. On the night the Queen came to the Coburg theatre there was 317/. in the house. 1 244. Then your house must be larger than Drury Lane ?— The pit is consider- ably larger. 1245. Not the stage ? — The stage is larger than Drury Lane. 1246. What is the largest sum you ever gave an author for a new piece? — I do not remember ever having given more than 50 guineas. 1 247. Will you name any piece for which you gave that sum ? — Yes ; George the Third, a drama founded on some of the incidents of the life of George the Third. 1 248. Any other ? — Yes, the Horatii and Curiatii. 1249. George the Third was prohibited, was it not? — No; I think I played it nine or ten weeks, and the theatre was visited by the different branches of the Government, and they could not see anything obnoxious; but at the next licensing day the magistrates, who held discretionary power, told me they thought such representations injudicious, if not improper, representing sacred characters and the highest personages in the realm. 1250. You are now representing the old piece, Tom Thumb? — They are not sacred characters. 1251. The King and Queen are introduced into that? — King Arthur and Queen Dollalolla. 1252. You leave people to apply them as they please? — Yes ; if we find them a piece, we are not compelled to find them comprehension. 1253. You think there is no danger of the magistrates giving you the same hint at the next licensing day as to Tom Thumb ? — It is played as it has been played for the last 50 years, without the alteration of a single line. 1 254. But the play-bill does not announce it in the usual way ? — No, I do not defend that play-bill. It was issued during my absence from town, and I was much annoyed at it on my return, for I conceive managers of theatres have notliing to do with politics or party ; they are open to all parties, and they have nothing to do with one party or the other. I must take the onus upon myself, but I do not for a moment defend it. , 1 255. Does it draw ? — As much as Tom Thumb would generally draw. 125G. Not more ? — Certainly not. 1257. Why should not you give it as Tom Thumb, without issuing that play- bill r — I think it was unnecessary, if not injudicious. 1258. Why was it continued? — It was stopped on my return to town ; it was stopped in the course of a week. In fact, I received a polite communication from Mr. Roe, the magistrate of Bow- street. 1259. -^"o I'oa MiNtTTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Captain 1753- Do you receive any annual income from it ? — While the debts are paying John I'orbes. off, that is an annual income. If I owed 20,000 /., and I pay off 4,000/. a year out of the profits of my business, surely that is an annual income of 4,000 /. a year »5 Jane 1832. f^^ jj^^ ^^^^^^ 1754- You receive 4,000 /. a year and pay 4,000 ;. a year ? — Yes; that is an annual income, because at the end of five years I am less in debt by 20,000/. 1755. You mean it is an annual income, whether you lay it out in paying debts or buying commodities ? — No doubt, because I am better at the end of five years by 20,000/. than I am at present ; e?'go, I have an annual income of 4,000/. 1756. Have you invested 20,000/. in Covent Garden theatre? — Yes, more. 1757. What interest do you receive upon that annually ? — I do not receive in- terest until the debts are paid. 1758. How many years will it be before the debts are liquidated ? — It is not intended to liquidate the claims of the shareholders ; they hold upon bonds coeval with the extent of the lease ; the other debts will be liquidated in the course of a certain number of years. 1759. Then you received no interest for the money you advanced ? — I receive interest if I pay off my debts. 1 760. Who receives interest now ? — There is some part upon interest, and some part not upon interest, and the interest accumulates whilst the debts are paying ofi' by the proprietors of the theatre. 1761. How many shareholders are there? — There are 152 shareholders in 500 /. shares. 1 762. Then you consider the 76,000 /. was about the value of the property ? — ■ As I stated before, 1 have never given the thing the least consideration. 1763. You consider there are 152 shareholders entitled to 500 /. ; do you con- sider the shares worth 500 /.? — They considered them so, or they would not have advanced their money upon them. 1764. You consider 500 /. was an equivalent for a 500/. share ? — Yes. 1765. Then we may ascertain by that what the property is worth ; you consider the property is worth 76,000 /. ? — I do not understand how that arises, the theatre cost 300,000 /., the patent cost 60,000 /. 1766. You state there are 152 shareholders, at 500/. each ?— Yes, that is 76,000 /. 1767. And besides that, you say there has been a considerable sum of money embarked since ? — Yes. 1 768. Upon the faith of those patents ?— On the faith of the patents, of course, as well as the Acts of Parliament. 1769. Out of the 60,000/., did not you receive 20,000/. from Drury Lane? — The 20,000 /. was paid before the new theatre was built. 1 770. You received 20,000 /. from Drury Lane, for Killigrew's patent ? — Yes, J believe that was the sum. 1771. The 60,000/. includes both patents? — No, I believe that is the price of Davenant's alone. 1772. Then how did you become possessed of Killigrew's patent? — I do not Jcnow. 1773. Having received 20,000/. back of the purchase money, that reduces it to 40,000/., that is what your patent is worth? — The value of the property is the amount which has been invested, in consequence of the patent and the Act of Parliament. 1774. You bought that theatre with the 60,000/. as well as the patent, it was not the mere piece of paper you paid 60,000 /. for ? — I am speaking without book, as I am not aware of that fact. 1 775. Having embarked your property in the speculation, you are not aware of that fact ? — The property came to me by marriage. 1776. Has a copy of your patent been given in ? — Yes. 1777. What has been the practice hitherto with regard to the shareholders, have you paid off any part of the principal, or have you paid them only interest ? . — We have paid them interest generally; some of them have not even got their interest. 1778. Then you have not paid off any part of the principal ? — No. 1779. But paid the interest when you could? — Yes. 1 780. Of what value in the market arc your shares ? — I do not know. 1781. Have any been sold publicly of late ? — I do not know. 1782. In ON DRAMATIC LITERATURK. 103 1 782. In short, you are not aware of the real value of your property ? — I am Captain not. John Forbes. 1 783. But you think that property would be considerably deteriorated if the minor theatres were allowed to play the legitimate drama?-- Yes, I think not only ^5 June 1832. that property, but the property, if such it can be deemed, arising out of the indus- try of every performer in either of the patent houses. 1784. How can you anticipate that as to the performers, because they would obtain salaries at the other theatres ? — They have attempted it at the minor theatres, and how have they been paid ? 1785. Would they not be better paid, if the minor theatres had the opportunity of ])roducing more attractive pieces ? — I think not. There has been a calculation made that a certain sum of money was given to the theatres annually by the public, that sum of money we have ascertained, by the best experiments in our power, of late years has not been increased, therefore if it be divided it must be so sub- divided as completely to ruin all the prospects of the superior performers. 1786. Has not that calculation been answered, because it has been shown you could not suppose that sum would not increase if the character of the performances should be more attractive, but it has been limited, because the patent theatres have not been attractive ? — The minor theatres have acted legitimate drama, in defiance of the law, and they have not found that sum increased. 1787. What is the sum named? — I do not recollect at present; I think about 1,200/. a day was the calculation, but it is some time since I turned my mind to it. 1788. Are you aware that the performers take a different view of their own interest, as they are in favour of the minor theatres playing the legitimate drama ? — The evidence I have heard, with the exception of one of the performers, has tended the other way. 1789. What do you think of Mr. Dowton's evidence? — If I were inclined, I could account for that, but I am not obliged to do so. 1 790. Mr. Dowton's was in favour of the minor theatres ? — It was so. 1791. Mr. Braham's was in favour of the minor theatres? — I did not under- stand it so. 1 792. Have the shareholders free admission-tickets ? — They have. 1 793. How many apiece ? — One, either personal or transferable, once a year. 1 794. No plan of compensation, except that of a lottery, suggests itself to you ? — The plan I mentioned on Friday, which is in evidence. 179,5. Who is the new lessee of Covent Garden theatre? — Mr. Laporte. 1796. How many bidders were there? — There were two. 1 797. What does Mr, Laporte give ? — Altogether it comes to nearly 1 1,000 /. a year. 1798. Has he taken it for a term of years? — For seven years. 1 799. You said on Friday, the plan you proposed was, that if the proprietors of the minor theatres wanted your property, they should come to the patent houses and ask to make some agreement with them, as with the Duke of Bedford for leave to build ? — I did say so. 1 800. That would leave them quite at your mercy, as to the terms you would propose ? — It is like every other property ; like every other royal grant in this country, and the whole property of Ireland. 1801. Do you complain of the Lord Chamberlain licensing Italian and French operas at present at the King's Theatre ? — I do not recollect that we have made formal complaint of that ; but I think we have reason to complain of it, as I will show, if the Committee will allow me to go into the evidence which I was required to furnish. I am now prepared with the compact made with the Opera-house. 1 802. What information have you to give with respect to that ? — It is an agree- ment signed by R. B. Sheridan, Thomas Holloway and William Sheldon, and approved by the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Bedford and the Marquis of Salis- bury. The sixth clause states, *' It having been agreed on all sides that Mr. Harris should derive a just compensation in respect to his doimant patent from the Haymarket property, at the same time the various and necessary charges laid on this theatre rendering it very desirable that the arbitrator should add as little as possible to those expenses, it is agreed that the Haymarket theatre shall be charged only with an annuity of 250 /., redeemable for 5,000 /., towards that compensation ; and that all further expenses attending the settlement with Mr. Harris shall be borne by the proprietors of Drury Lane theatre, upon the said dormant patent 679. N 4 being 104 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Captain being annexed inseparably to that theatre, with the consent of the Duke of Bed- Jolm lorbes. ford." 7th. " In this case, it is to be understood as a part of the settlement bona " Jide between the three theatres, that the patents of Drury Lane and Covent Garden 25 June 1832. gj^jjjj jjgygr ^e exercised for the performance of Italian operas, and that the Hay- market theatre and patent shall be for Italian ojjeras oidy, with such occasional aid as has been usual from balls and masquerades." 27th. " To be referred to John Maddocks, Esq. and Arthur Piggot, Esq. to prepare a proper deed for the carrying the above outline into execution ; and in which deed are to be inserted all such clauses, provisions and declarations, as in their opinion shall be proper or neces- sary for effecting the trusts proposed, and securing the rights and interests of the several parties according to the true spirit and meaning of this outline of the arbi- trators." 31st. " Every part of this arrangement to be subject to His Majesty's approbation." 1 803. Has not the King's Theatre received a subsequent licence from the Lord Chamberlain ? — That I do not know ; it is part of that arrangement that a licence shall be granted for 2 1 years. Upon this subject, I will take the liberty of reading an opinion of Mr. Hargraves, who was the counsel we consulted at that time. He says, " A plan, of which the proposed transfer is a part, has been approved in writing not only by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, as well as by the Duke of Bedford and the Marquis of Salisbury, His Majesty's Lord Chamberlain, subject to his approbation, but has in effect been approved by the King himself. The approbation of His Royal Highness and the Marquis of Salisbury appears from the Opera arrangements signed by them ; for, according to the sixth article of that arrangement, Mr. Harris is to be compensated for his dormant patent. The Hay- market theatre is to contribute to the value of 5,000 /., and the further expense is to be borne by the proprietors of the Drury Lane theatre, on having such dormant patent inseparably annexed to it. The approbation of His Majesty appears in effect from a letter of the Marquis of Salisbury to Messrs. Sheldon, Needham and Burton, the trustees of the Opera undertaking, dated at the Lord Chamberlain's-oflice the 24th February last ; for by this letter. Lord Salisbury officially informs those three gentlemen of his having laid the extract of the Opera arrangement before the King, and of His Majesty's not disapproving it. This negative manner it seems is the usual form of giving the royal approbation. To suppose that a transfer of the royal patent thus sanctioned by His Majesty, by the Heir-apparent to the Crown, and by the Lord Chamberlain, whose office is so peculiarly connected with the theatres, should be hereafter quarrelled with by the Crown or its officers, would be, as it is submitted, to suppose that the Crown may break faith with those who, under the royal sanction, embark in plans of vast expense and magnitude." 1804. What is the date of the compact? — 1791. 1805. Then a licence was granted to the King's Theatre for 21 years? — Yes. 1 806. That must have expired ? — Yes. 1807. Have you a copy of the new licence? — I have not. 1808. The new licence may not restrict the Italian opera in the way that the licence of 1791 did ? — If it does not it is a breach of the compact. 1809. The Committee have a copy of the licence granted to the King's Theatre, and that reserves to the Lord Chamberlain the power of licensing the performance ■of German and French operas on a separate nightly applicatioij made by the King's Theatre ; therefore, on application, it is quite clear the Lord Chamberlain has the power of licensing German and French operas ; so that it is worded different from the agreement which you have just read? — Will you permit me to say this is not to be dealt lightly with, because it was the act of the Monarch ; it was further the deliberate act of the Legislature, and I have now before me the Acts of Parliament which confirm it, as well as other royal documents. 1810. Who do you mean as dealing lightly with it ; if anybody, it is the Lord Chamberlain, and that is what we wish you to prove if you can? — I have already proved it by this agreement, with the signatures of the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Bedford and the Marquis of Salisbury, and approved by the King. 1811. That licence has expired, and tliere is an end of that compact ? — This Act of Parliament is perpetual, the 52 Geo. 3. 1812. According to that, you have your remedy in your own hands, as it only says you shall abstain from acting Italian operas ? — I am very glad the suggestion comes from the Committee, because I am prepared to prove that had we not consi- dered that Act as permanent, we should have let the theatre for 3,000 /. or 4,000/. a year more, with the permission to perform Italian operas. 18,13. If ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 105 1813. If you had the power of performing Italian operas, you could let the Captain theatre for 3,000/. or 4,000/. a year more r — That is so. Jolm Forbei. 1814. Should you consider that an adequate compensation for the minor theatres being allowed to perform the legitimate drama? — Certainly not; that is a separate *^ * "^'' thing altogether ; that would take out of our hands the means of performing the English drama. 1815. But if the Legislature give you the power of playing Italian operas, do you mean to say the minor theatres do you more damage than 3,000/. or 4,000/. a year ? — Unquestionably more. I will prove by the books they do us damage to the extent of 20,000/, a year ; I will not give it on my ipse dixit, but if the Com- mittee think proper, I will attend with the books, and they are the best authority, for they were made up without the previous knowledge of this Committee. 1816. How do you calculate that? — By the receipts of the house. 1817. Suppose this evening the Coburg theatre was shut up, what difference would that make to Covent Garden.? — It is a different thing to calculate that, because that is an individual case. 1818. Then how do you calculate the damage that has been done to Covent Garden by the minor theatres ? — By the receipts of the house having fallen off so very much after the increase of these minor theatres. I think it was 1,200/. a day that was calculated to be given to the theatres by the public, and up to the time of the increase of these minor theatres, the receipts were 20,000/. a year more than they are at present. 1819. Do you suppose the minor theatres are necessarily the cause of that loss, because the loss has happened since ? — I took the liberty of stating so on Friday. 18 JO. At the same time you stated the theatrical population had fallen off, with- out any reference whatever to the minor theatres, but in consequence of the late hours, the want of the patronage of the King, and so forth ? — My answer is before the Committee in writing. 1821. Do the profits of the theatre depend very much on the concourse of strangers into London ? — Yes, very much. 1 822. Do strangei's go to the minor theatres as generally as they go to the large theatres ? — No doubt. 1823. Do you not consider that late hours, the want of the patronage of the King, certain religious feelings, and other circumstances, may have contributed to decrease the theatrical population for 20 or 30 years past ? — I have stated that already in my evidence, but the principal reason is the increase of the minor theatres. 1824. That would be only auxiliary to other reasons? — It is not an auxiliary but a primary cause. 1825. Do you mean to say the minor theatres abstract 20,000/. a year from Covent Garden theatre ? — I do. 1826. How do you set about proving that? — By the receipts of the house from the time of rebuilding up to the year 1820, and from 1820 up to the present time. 1827. Are there no other circumstances likely to operate upon the public? — I rate that one circumstance at 20,000/. a year. 1828. What proportion of that sum do you suppose is abstracted by the Coburg theatre ? — I stated before that would be a very difficult thing to determine. 1829. If you put them together you can make out the items? — I very much doubt it. 1830. How do you calculate the whole? — I confess it would be somewhat objec- tionable the calculation ; but you asked me the amount, and I answer to the best of my judgment and belief. 1 831. What damage do you think the Adelphi does you? — The Adelphi does us a very material damage indeed. 1832. To what amount? — I should say the Adelphi alone must be at least 2,000/. a year. 1833. The Olympic? — The Olympic I am not quite so sure about; it is only open part of the year ; the Adelphi you may say is open the whole year ; perhaps it might be 700/. or 800/. a year. 1 834. Do you not think the class of persons who attend the minor theatres is different from the class who attend the large theatres ? — No, in the aggregate they * are the same. 1 835. Must not the difference of price, supposing the minor theatres did not exist at all, exclude from the large theatres a great number of persons who now 679. o go io6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Captain go to the minors ? — The difference of price is not so material, because when those John Forbes. persons go to the patent theatres they pay pretty much the same as at the minors. 1836. How does that come to pass, when the price is 75. to the boxes? — There is 25 June 1832. ^ great part of the public who can go to the gallery for 1 s. and at half-price for 6d.; and therefore they can go for the same price to the patent theatres as to the minors. 1837. That is at half-price ? — At whole price ; for they can go for 1 s. at whole price. 1838. But to a different part of the house from a part of the house to which they would go in the minor theatres 1 — Yes. 1839. For instance, instead of going to the boxes in the Adelphi, they go to the pit of Covent Garden theatre ? — Just so. 1840. Can you inform the Committee what the annual receipts of Covent Garden theatre have been within the last three years ? — In the last three years, 134,000/. 1841. What were they each year? — In the present season about 42,000/.; the last season was about 42,000/. ; and the season before that was turning 50,000/. 1842. Were the preceding seasons more or less profitable? — They fluctuated very much ; three or four seasons ago it was 70,000/. ; another season, 55,000/. ; and another, 63,000/. ; they fluctuated very much. 1843. Have not the receipts been as high as 90,000/.? — Yes, higher. 1 844. Were the minor theatres in as full operation as they are now ?— No, not in any one instance. 1 845. In point of fact, the receipts have never been so low as they have been during the last three years ? — Never ; by the increase of the minor theatres. 1846. But frequently fluctuating? — Yes, perhaps 10,000/. a year fluctuating. 1 847. Perhaps you can give us in a paper of the annual receipts of the theatre since the rebuilding to the present time? — Certainly; the average amount of receipts from the rebuilding up to 1820, is 86,000/. a year. 1 848. What the Committee wish to ascertain is the year of fluctuation, in order to see how the increase of minor theatres operated upon the receipts ? — The Com- mittee shall be furnished with the documents that show that. 1 849. Do you think that the minor theatres within Westminster, or those out of Westminster, do you the most damage ? — As to the number, I think pretty nearly equal. 1 850. Which does you the most harm ? — I think the Adelphi. 1851. The Adelphi does not play the legitimate drama? — I am rather of a different opinion. 1852. It is not licensed for it? — No, it is not. 1853. You think it is violating the law? — Certainly. 1854. Every night ? — Certainly. 1855. Then why do you not prosecute it? — We have instituted prosecutions repeatedly. There was one action tried by the Chief Justice of the King's Bench, about six weeks or two months ago, and he directed the jury to give a verdict for us, because he said he was bound on his oath to administer the laws as he found them, and the jury had taken the same oath when they entered the box. He stated there was no question for the jury to determine, they were bound by their oaths to give us a verdict. 1856. The jury formed a different opinion from the judge? — They did not. 1857. They confirmed the judge's opinion by their verdict? — They did. 1 858. What was that ? — That each party should be amerced in the penalties that were sued for. 1859. Who had to pay them? — The defendants. i860. Were the penalties paid ? — There is the mischief; we lay out money to prosecute, and whom do we prosecute ? Men of straw. Mr. Chapman failed ; he was one of the parties ; and where was our money ? We laid out our good money seeking for bad, which we never got. 1861. Was Mr. Chapman the manager ? How came he to be responsible for the whole of that money ? — He was one of the parties we sued. There was another party at the Queen's Theatre, Mr. Macfarren. 1862. Mr. Chapman was not at the Adelphi? — No, it was the City Theatre he was sued upon. 1863. Why have you never sued the Adelphi? — As I stated before, we sued different parties ; and after two years elapsed we got a verdict, but they are men of straw, and we get nothing. 1864. They ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. ^ 107 1864. They are not men of straw at the Adelphi. You seem to select, as Captain subjects for prosecution, persons from whom you could not by any possibility -^o*" Forbes. recover any penalty; why have not you taken Mr. Yates or Mr. Mathews? — I have already stated the amount of money required would be more than we ^^ ^"°® ^^'^'^' possess. 1 865. Why do you not proceed by a warrant before a magistrate ? — We did proceed by a warrant before a magistrate, and I regret to say (if it is necessary, I will prove it by the evidence of the nobleman who is present) the magistrates stated they would not convict for the patent theatres, but they would if the Lord Chamberlain proceeded. These are magistrates upon their oaths, as well as the ^ ^}^Q ^jjg ^j^g sitting magistrate ?— Sir Richard Birnie and Mr. Halls. 1878. Could not you try it before other magistrates ? — It is in the district in which it must be taken. 1 87c). Did the magistrates hear witnesses on both sides ? — Yes. 1 880. And they decided the onus of proof lay upon you, to show they had no licence ? — Yes ; and the Lord Chief Justice said they were bound to prove they had a licence. 1881. Did you not make any complaint of the magistrates at that time ? — I do not believe there was a complaint ; for these things are so numerous, that we should have nothing to do but complain from morning till night. 1882. Did you not complain of the magistrates ? — 1 gave it as my humble opinion we ought ; and I thought we ought to have got a mandamus from the King's Bench to compel them to do their duty, but I was overruled. 1883. If you thought they neglected their duty, it was your duty not to leave it where it was ? — I'hat was my opinion. 1 884. Covent Carden theatre seems to have been very ill-used by the Lord Cham- berlain, by the magistrates, and by the minor theatres ; what course would you recommend to remedy that evil ? — That the magistrates should do their duty. 1885. What would be the result of that ? — That our rights and interests would be maintained. If the Committee will allow me to go on, I will show the various Acts of Parliament which enjoin them to protect us ; also the decision of the King and Council in 1816, which I will read; 10 Geo. 2, c. 28; 25 Geo. 2, c. 36; 28 Geo. 3 ; 50 Geo. 3, c. 214 ; 52 Geo. 3, c. 19 ; 1 Geo. 4, c. 9. 1886. If the magistrates were to do their duty, at least in your opinion, the minor theatres would be confined to dancing and singing ? — No question about it. 1887. That you would not object to? — No, I do not object to the law as it is. 1888. Do you object to burlettas ? — What they are licensed for we do not object to. 1889. They are licensed for the performance of burlettas? — They are so. 1 890. What do you conceive is a burletta ? — A musical piece. 1891. Then anything that has a song in it is a burletta ? — By no means ; that is an evasion of the law. 1892. It is a musical piece? — It is termed so ; but it is improperly termed so. 1893. In your opinion ? — I have had the best opinions the country affords upon that subject. 1 894. What is the best opinion ? — That a burletta is exclusively a musical piece, not a piece with one or two songs put into it. 189.5. What Italian word does it come from? — I believe you will find that in Barretti's dictionary. 1896. What do you consider the best authority in the country, from whom you derive your information ? — Parties whose education has made them acquainted with the law. 1897. Who are they ? — Barristers. 1898. You say you have derived it from the best authority that exists in the country ? — I said so. 1899. Can you name any individual? — In conversations I have referred the question to different barristers, and they told me there could not be a dispute upon the subject. 1900. According to your own expression just now, a burletta would mean a laughable thing? — It is the same thing; a joking, laughing, musical thing. 1901. It has nothing to do with music, has it ? — I believe it is a usual word in Italy. 1 902. Your opinion is that a burletta means a dramatic piece, in which the whole is song or recitative ? — Just so. 1903. Suppose the minor theatres were only allowed to perform musical pieces, yet if they continued to draw as good houses as they draw now, or as they would draw by the performance of the legitimate drama, you would suffer as much as you suffer now ? — That is a suppositious case, but the fact proves otherwise. When they performed according to their licences, they did not deprive us ; they do now. We merely go by practice. 1904.' What houses did they draw then ? — I never had any means of knowing what houses they drew. 1905. You ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. log 1905. You never happened to hear ? — No. Captain 1 906. Have they trespassed in point of time as well as in pieces they represent ? •'"*" Forbes. — I do not know. ' ~ 1907. Do they act longer than they are licensed for ?— Their licence, I believe, ^^ •'""® '^^' is for a year, but I am not certain. 1908. They do not act throughout the year?— I do not know the time they act ; the licence is annual. 1909. The Act of the 52 Geo. 3, to which you refer, is merely an Act for incor- ' porating the proprietors of Drury Lane, and enabling them to sell their shares? — It enables them to purchase the patent first of all. mI 1910. It does not give them any exclusive rights, but enables them to sell their shares ? — The patent gives them those rights. 1911. The arrangement to which [you are referring of the Opera-house was in 1 792 ? — Yes. 1912. Are you not of opinion that the great increase of the metropolis since the year 1792 might make it extremely necessary for the public that a greater latitude in the number of theatres should be allowed than was allowed at that time ? — If it is allowed, it is allowed at our expense. 1913. Do you mean to say, that although the metropolis is doubled in size, it should never be provided with more theatres ?— I am very far from saying that ; but ours is a grant from the Crown, recognised by various Acts of Parliament, and any infringement of that grant is an infringement of our rights. 1914. Will it be reasonable that your patent should continue uninterrupted, con- 'i trary to the interests of the public, having no reference to the increase of the metro- polis ? — I stated before, when a man wants the property of the Duke of Bedford, which is also a royal grant, he goes and pays for it. 1915. What further do you wish to state? — I have read the opinion of Mr. Hargrave, which I will hand in, 1916. Have you any other paper which you wish to give in ? — There are Sir Arthur Piggott's, Mr. William Adams', Mr. Richards' and Mr. Const's joint opi- nions. They say : " As the Lord Chamberlain is the servant of the Crown, and although the exceptions in the Act of 10 Geo. 2, c. 28, and 25 Geo. 2, c. 36, recognise the licences by the Lord Chamberlain as legal protections for persons to whom they are granted to perform plays, &c. ; yet there is no Act of Parliament by which his power is expressly granted, or the extent of his power is defined, nor anything from which it can be collected at what time it was first exercised, although the 5th section of 10 Geo. 2, c. 28, by restricting the power of the Lord Chamber- lain for the time being to the city of Westminster, and to such places in which the King shall reside, and the 4th section of 25 Geo. 2, c. 36, which distinctly recognises the licences granted by the Lord Chamberlain as distinct from licences of the Crown, certainly have the effect of protecting the persons who act under such licences in those places from all the penalties of those Acts ; but as there is no specific power conferred by either of those Acts, it may certainly be considered as not being any part of the subject intended to be restricted, but that the power and authority (if any) remained as it was before. It therefore becomes material to inquire how long such power has been exercised, and to what extent it has been exerted ; for viewing it originally as a branch of the prerogative, the Crown, by the grant of these patents, seems to have conferred a privilege which cannot be broken in upon by any inferior authority, nor does such a conclusion appear at all unreason- able, for it is not more than is universally acknowledged, and has been established in the case of the patents to the Universities, &c. &c., to permit them only to print certain books ; and although the subjects differ, the analogy as to the monopoly seems very strong ; and as on the faith of it such heavy sums of money have been advanced, the proprietors appear to have a strong claim to the protection of the Lord Chamberlain in the enjoyment of their undisputed patent rights. As to the third query, we are decidedly of opinion that the licences granted by the magis- trates in session under 25 Geo. 2, do not authorize the parties to perform plays, nor any other of the entertainments of the stage described in the former Acts, but were intended only for those places which were kept for public dancing, music, or other public entertainments of the like kin company perhaps the theatre ever had) performed in the great theatre at the Opera-house, and the receipts averaged 338/. ii.y. each night, the last week before they went to perform at the small theatre of the Haymarket ; the same company performed in the small theatre in the Haymarket, and the receipts averaged 153/. gs. jd. nightly. 1921. How much will the Haymarket hold ? — Between 300 I. and 400 /. 1922. How much will Covent Garden hold ? — I believe about 600 /. 1923. Not more.? — We have had a great deal more on nights of excitement ; the people went into the lobbies, and merely went because they should say they had been there. 1 924. It would not hold 700 /. ? — I am not sure that it would fairly hold 700 /. ; but thus it will appear to the Committee, that in the large theatre the receipts were more than double the receipts in the small theatre with the same company in the following week ; that was in the year 1808. 1925. What was the piece that was performed? — The Exile was the first piece for five nights, with the afterpieces of Tom Thumb, the Review, the Portrait of Cervantes, Who Wins, and the Poor Soldier ; then follows Macbeth and the Forest of Hermanstadt ; the receipts that night were 416 Z. 19*. 1926. When Macbeth was played at the small theatre, what were the receipts? — ■ £. 267. 16*. 1927. What was the afterpiece when Macbeth was performed? — The Forest of Hermanstadt at one, and the Portrait of Cervantes at the other. 1928. Perhaps it might have been the Forest of Hermanstadt that drew the 460 /. ? — No, we attributed it to Macbeth ; for we altered it principally for our own benefit : if the Forest of Hermanstadt had produced more than the Portrait of Cervantes it would not have been altered. 1929. You played the Forest of Hermanstadt to Macbeth at the Opera-house, and the Portrait of Cervantes at the Haymarket ; did not the Forest of Herman- stadt draw as well as Macbeth ? — No ; we ascertained that by the money we received at half-price. 1930. What did you receive? — The half-price did not satisfy the theatre, in consequence of which it was altered. 193 1. There is no half-price at the Haymarket ? — There was when our company was there. 1932. What was the amount of half-price that night ? — That is not extracted here ; the reason was, that we wished to put the Committee in possession of every information as shortly as possible, without inveigling them in figures. 1933. Do you suppose it was 200 /. .^ — No, never above 60 /. This was drawn up as much as possible against the interests of the theatre, because we wanted to show the Committee what was done one week at a large theatre, and what was done in the following week at a small theatre. These dates are November and December ; but when I refer back to September and October, I find Macbeth and Raising ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. in Raising the Wind, 545 /. 7 s. at the great theatre in the Haymarket. So much for the Captain comparative receipts of a large theatre and a small theatre, with the same company. •/'*» Forbes. 1934. What was the greatest receipt at the Haymarket ? — £.267. 16s. 66?. 1935. Then the piece had been previously acted at Covent Garden? — One week "^^ "^""^ ^^^^' only had elapsed between the two actings. 1936. Some of the novelty was gone off? — It had been repeatedly acted, but it was only the want of what we conceive the public demand, which is a large theatre. I have further evidence, to which I will draw the attention of the Committee. When Covent Garden theatre met with an accident by fire on the 1 7th Novem- ber 1828, the company continued their performances in the English Opera-house. These accounts are not in our writing, but in the writing of the clerk in Mr. Ar- nold's theatre, which was afterwards burnt down. The first performance is Richard the Third and Charles the Second ; and the receipts amounted to 145/. os. 6 c?.; that was on the 1 7th November. 1937. What would the Lyceum hold? — £.300. Then on the 13th October, before the accident occurred, with the same play similarly acted at Covent Garden, with Raymond and Agnes, the receipts were 350/. 13,?. 1938. That is half the receipt of Covent Garden at the Lyceum ? — Yes j there was every auxiliary alike in the two theatres. In the next page there is As you Like it, Bombastes Furioso, and Rosina, 88/. 6s. 8c?., at the Lyceum ; October ist, at Covent Garden, As you Like it, with Peter Wilkins, 179/. 55. ; the next is the Merchant of Venice, and the Barber of Seville, 192/. 135., at the Lyceum ; October 16th.. at Covent Garden, the same play was acted, with the Carron Side, and the receipts were 248/. 35. Gd. 1 939. If that is the case in a small theatre, why are you so alarmed at the legi- timate drama being performed at the minors? — Because they already abstract from the value of my property to the amount of 20,000 /. a year. 1 940. Uo you conceive, under the patents of the two theatres, the Crown has not the power of granting another patent ? — We never question the rights of the Crown. I stated on Friday what Lord Thurlow said on this subject : "it is unques- tionable that the Crown has the right to grant other patents, but would the Crown do so ?" would it not be the grossest act of injustice ? The next is the Belle's Stra- tagem, with the Deserter of Naples, 74/. 1 3*. 6 d. at the Lyceum ; October the 7th, the same play, with the Barber of Seville, 112/. gs. at Covent Garden. — [Here » the reading was stopped. The sequel shows a similar diminution of receipts in the Lyceum as compared with those of Covent Garden. 'The account was handed to the Chairman.] 1941. Do you think the minor theatres do Drury Lane equal damage, to the amount of 20,000/. a year? — Yes. 1942. That is 40,000/. a year ? — Yes. 1 943. What damage do you suppose the Italian Opera does you ? — Whilst the minor theatres were kept in their proper places we did not complain of the Italian Opera in any shape ; besides, I consider we had no right to complain ; we had made our bargain, and by that bargain we were bound to abide. 1944. Do you include in that 20,000/. the damage done to each of the large theatres by the theatres out of Westminster ? — I do. 1945. How far out of town do you go? — Our patent goes 25 miles from West- minster, with the exception of royal residences. 1946. How far does the damage reach? — There are no theatres that I know of at any distance. 1947. There is a theatre at Richmond ? — The Crown has an undoubted preroga- tive to grant a patent at Richmond, it is a royal residence. 1948. Does that do any damage? — No; and if it did, we could not help ourselves. The patent theatres and the minors are confounded, because the Coburg and the Surrey are very nearly as large as Covent Garden or Drury Lane. Mr. Davidge stated that the stage at the Coburg was 40 feet wide ; he said it was as large as Drury Lane. 1 949. It holds more people ? — Yes. and therefore it is a misnomer to call it a minor theatre ; it is to all intents and purposes a major. The next point I beg to draw your attention to, is what has been the immediate cause of appointing this Committee, namely, the rewards given to authors. I will state the remuneration which has been obtained. I have a document which proves that for the last ten years the two patent theatres have paid to authors 1,500/. a year each, that is together 3,000/. a year. 679. 04 1950. You 112 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Captain *95"- ^ou have paid authors 3,000/. a year? — At Drury Lane and Covent John Forbes. Garden. 1951. What have you paid this year? — £.1,750, and Drury Lane nearly the 25 June 1832. same. I wish to get rid of the notion of there being any want of encouragement to authors on the part of the theatres. 19,52. In the number of authors, do you include musical composers ? — No, they do not receive anything but the copyright. Musical composers are generally desirous of writing music for the stage. Sometimes it is otherwise; for instance, for the authorship of Obcron we gave 400/. to Mr. Planche, who undertook to produce the manuscript, and we gave 500/. to Weber for the music. I trust the Committee will think there is no want of encouragement to authors. ^953- What did you give Mr. Sheridan Knowles for the Hunchback? — It is included in the sum of 1,750/. for authors last season. 1954. Is it the practice, if there be no specific contract between the author and the theatre, to give 100/. the third night, lOo/. the sixth night, 100/. the ninth, and lOo/. the fortieth night? — Yes; but there are very few pieces will go 40 nights. They are always very liberally dealt with. 1955. That is the rule, but there are special contracts made with authors? — There are special contracts. With reference to this subject, I beg tu state what remuneration authors receive at the minor theatres. The City Theatre agreed for four pieces at 10/. each, and they were produced, but they were never paid for, because Mr. Chapman failed. The maximum given by the Coburg Theatre, as was stated to this Committee by Mr. Davidge, is 50/. ; our maximum is 900/. 1956. For what piece? — Oberon. 1957. You never gave that for a tragedy or comedy? — We have given 500/. for a tragedy or comedy. 1958. That is rather more than half what you gave for Oberon ? — Yes, we gave 400/. for the manuscript and 500/. for the music. 1959. Did that include the copyright? — I understand that did include the copyright of Oberon, because having laid out so large a sum of money as that, we wished to secure it. In general it is part of the profits of the authors, who pub- lish their works in any shape they please. We sometimes make contracts for the copyright. i960. Oberon is the exclusive property of Covent Garden? — Yes, I understand so. At the Queen's Theatre, Mr. Macfarren failed, and he played every thing. Rayner, in the Strand Theatre, likewise failed under circumstances of excitement ; placarding the oppression of the patent theatres, and performing the regular drama. These are all within a few weeks. 1961. What is your average remuneration for a three-act piece, a translation from the French, with music ? — It depends entirely on the merits of it. 1962. What is the average? — PVom 200/. to 400/. 1963. Mr. Peake is a very successful play-writer; do you imagine Mr. Peake has made much by his works ? — Yes. 1 964. When you pay for the music, is not the bargain usually so much a night ? — It is just as they choose to make the contract ; we are not tenacious upon that subject ; we would rather pay by the night. 1 965. Is it not generally so much for nine nights for a piece ? — Yes ; we would rather abide by that practice, because then they take all the risk ; but when people follow a trade, they get as well acquainted with it as their neighbours with whom they compete. 1966. But the bargain generally is so much for nine nights, and so much more if it exceeds the 20th night? — Yes. 1 967. Has it not been a very common practice to stop on the 1 9th night ? — No. I am probably speaking before authors, and I am therefore on my trial. If they think there has been any act of illiberality, I am willing they should come forward and state it. 1968. That is not the case? — No. 1969. What is the most you gave for any composition by Mr. Peake r— I think 200/. was the most that ever was given; that was for the Chancery Suit, and it was only acted a few nights. I now hold in my hand a volume of Mr. Moore's Life of Lord Byron, from which I will read a passage with reference to authors : '• When I belonged to Drury Lane Committee, and was one of the Sub- committee of Management, the number of plays upon the shelves were about Jive hundred. Conceiving that amongst these there must be some of merit, in person and by proxy I caused ON DRAMATIC LITEUATURE, 113 I caused an investigation. I do not think that of those which I saw there was one Captain that could be conscientiously tolerated." — Moore's Life of Lord 13yron, vol. iii. John Forbes. p. 183. 1970. There was no money paid for those? — As much as they were worth. ^S J""e 1832. 1971. There was no money paid, and therefore there was no loss to the theatres? — I state this to show there has been no want of encouragement to authors. 1972. Who is the person that decides upon the merits of plays at Covent Garden theatre ? — -Sometimes one and sometimes another. On one occasion, I will take the liberty of stating, there was a play of a man we wished to please, and I put it into Mr. Fawcett's hands. I had not read it, but I was obliged to decide myself whe- ther the play should be produced or not, as we were anxious it should, and after Mr. fawcett had read it, he came to me and said, " Bring this out? Why, it is no more like a play than it is like a leg of mutton !" 1 973. As you have the monopoly of performing the legitimate drama, will you give a list of the tragedies and comedies, or legitimate dramas, you have produced at your theatre ? — For one season, or for a number of years? 1974. For the last ten years. — That can be done, but I am not in possession of such a list at present. 1975. Was not Clari first brought out at your theatre 1 — Yes. 1976. What did you give for that?— £. 100. 1977. Has any new piece of yours you produced run so long as that? — No, I believe not. 1978. When you have bought the copyright of new plays, do you not sometimes make a bargain with the other theatres to allow them to perform them occasionally? — No, I believe very rarely ; I do not know an instance. 1979. Does not the production of a new play depend very much on its being agreeable to particular actors? — I am very glad that suggestion has come from the Committee, because I will state some particulars as to that. The greatest pains are taken in every possible way to obtain the best plays ; they are read attentively, and the party will not trust his own judgment ; but unless it is exceedingly good, he submits it to a second, and sometimes a third party ; and the play is then read in the green-room. 1980. That is when it is accepted? — Yes. 1981. But before a play is accepted, must it not, generally speaking, go through the ordeal of the approbation of the leading actor or actors of the theatre? — No. Sometimes we find, on reading the play over, that they will not act their parts ; but in reply to that question, I beg to state, that after a play has been read in the green-room, I have seen the performers delighted with their parts, and I have seen that go on until the day of the night of representation ; and then I was more ner- vous than when every one of them hated it, because three times out of four when they are delighted with their parts, the play does not succeed ; and I have seen when they were of a contrary opinion, it has succeeded. You see this is what the theatres are subject to. We cannot bring out a piece under 200 /. generally, and some pieces cost us 2,000 /. You see what risks we run, and often our sole hopes are blasted in an instant. 1 982. How do you account for the performers being so deceived ? — You cannot account for it ; it is the most capricious thing in the universe. 1983. You stated a new play is immediately read; is that the fact? — It is sometimes immediately read. 1984. Do you not know that Tobin's Honey Moon remained 16 years without being read ? — I do not know the fact ; it was before my time ; we frequently have only the first act of plays, and we are anxiously waiting for the second and third. 1985. That is, if you know the author; if you know by experience the author is likely to succeed ? — Yes. 1986. But if the author is not known, and if the play is sent in without some special recommendation, you do not mean to say it is immediately read? — No; but 1 have read what Lord Byron says upon the subject with reference to Drury Lane. 1 987. There probably would not have been 500 plays on the shelf if they had been read? — That is the account of Lord Byron I have read. 1988. Have any of them been played since ? — I do not know; I stated that on the subject of the inferred want of encouragement to authors. 1989. What other information do you wish to give? — I beg to state, that in the time of Buonaparte, 36 theatres were open in Paris, and the proprietors were 679. p ruined, 114 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Captain rulned, and neither authors nor performers were paid. He restricted the number John Forbes., ^q eight, and limited the performances. With reference to the weekly remunera- tion to performers, the books will afford abundant information, if the Committee 26 June 1832, ^jgj^ ^j^gy should be produced. This is a document which may be sworn to, if required, and it will show the weekly expense with regard to performers. At the latter part of the season, which is much the least expensive part, the most expen- sive being at Christmas, the six nights' salary amounts to 7S6 /. 1 .?. 6 d. 1 990. For how many performers ? — That is a difficult question to answer. 1991. That does not include the supernumeraries? — No, the expense of super- numeraries is 385 I. 13 s. 10 d. It is sometimes above 500 /. 1992. What are those expenses for? — The last is the weekly expense for atten- dants, carpenters, scene-shifters, painters ; in fact, for the whole arrangement of the theatre. 1993. How many persons are dependent on Covent Garden theatre ? — I should think certainly 2,000. 1994. Directly and indirectly? — The number constantly employed is about 1,000 ; at particular periods the theatre is full of people. 1 995. You have no idea how many people are employed upon an average, directly and indirectly? — No. 1996. Do you mean to say your expense averages more than 1,000 /. a week ? — Yes, between 1,100/. and 1,300/. These are expenses that are paid every Saturday morning. 1997. What are called the current expenses ? — Yes, besides tradesmen, taxes, rent, and remuneration to authors. 1 998. Have you any objection to give that account in ? — None whatever. [// was handed to the Cliairman.~\ Covent Garden Theatre cannot be conducted for so small a sum as 50,000/. a year. 1999. And your receipts last year were 42,000/.? — Yes; in consequence of these minor theatres, there was a very serious loss last year of 8,000 /. and upwards ; I believe about 10,000/. 2000. Then how came it Mr. Laporte was so ready to take the theatre ? — That is not my business ; he is the party responsible for his acts. 2001. He has just taken it, you say, for seven years? — Yes. 2002. In the face of these tremendous losses? — Yes, and not only that, but these losses were not cloaked from Mr. Laporte ; I showed him the receipts of the house from 1820 to 1832. 2003. Do you think political excitement affects the interests of the theatres ? — ■ No doubt of it. 2004. Have you ever heard that in the year 1819, when the Manchester meetings took place, the theatres were greatly injured ? — No doubt of it ; and when a general election is going on, that is one of the most destructive things that can be. 2005. You have attributed the decline of Covent Garden and Drury Lane almost exclusively, at least you said primarily, to the minor theatres ? — I was taking the average of the receipts from the rebuilding. 2006. Did you not say the minor theatres were not only an auxiliary, but a pri- mary cause of the decline ?- -I did. 2007. Now, do you not consider political excitement one of the primary causes ? — It has acted in this ratio ; from the rise of these theatres we have lost 20,000 /. a year in this way ; we do not obtain it ; but since this political excitement has taken place, it has been a great loss to us of 8,000/. or 10,000 /. a year. 2008. You have received so much less since those things have taken place ; but can you decidedly say these things were the causes of that, because many things happen after other things, which are not caused by them ? — I have stated that to the best of my judgment and belief, and not only that, but I confirm it upon oath. * 2009. We may have a bad harvest this year after the Reform Bill has passed, but can we say it is caused by the Reform Bill ? — 1 merely state facts ; the loss has been 20,000 /. a year, since 1 820 ; since the minor theatres have grown up into existence. 2010. But precedence does not prove a cause ? — No; but this is not only pre- cedence, but succedence. 20 1 1 . Do you not think the passion for theatrical amusements is on the decline ? —I do. ■ 2012. Do ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. iig^ 2012. Do you not think that is another cause ? — I stated that in my evidence on Captain Friday. - ^"'"^ ^"''"'' 2013. Have you heard that the copyright of a very successful pay fetches by no means so large a sum now as it would 30 years ago ? — No doubt of it. The taste for ^^ the legitimate drama is depraved by inferior representations in the minor theatres. 2014. Does not that arise from a diminution in the public taste for theatrical literature ? — It is very probable. 2.015. You say Mr. Laporte pays between 10,000/. and n,ooo/, a year; how much of that sum will he receive back by letting the different houses about the theatre, the refreshment room ? — That is 500/. a year. 2016. Is that what you call the saloon? — Yes; but we include all that in the receipts of the theatre, and I stated every item with the expenditure. 2017. Does the box-keeper pay any footing upon coming in? — Not one farthing; I cut away every perquisite in my power, and made the thing as honest and as honourable as could possibly be. I have done every thing to accommodate the public, and I am glad the question was put that I might state that. 2018. £.500. a year is all that is paid within the walls of the theatre ?— There is 50/. a year for the rent of a house, and 300/. a year for the Piazza Coffee-house. He has all that. 20 ig. Why does the Piazza Coffee-house pay you 300/. a year? — It is a part of our property. ^ 2020. What is the other house ? — It is a house belonging to the theatre, and Mr. Laporte contracted to get all the property. 202 1 . What description of house is that ? — It is where Saul the carpenter lives. It is up the passage in Princes-place, next the box-office. 2022. That is where Saul the carpenter resides? — It is where he resides, and where any one else may reside, for he lets it out in lodgings. 2023. It does not come under the denomination of a house of ill fame? — It does not; and if it had any such appellation attached to it, it would have been removed. 2024. Are neither of the proprietors of the large theatres owners of houses of that description ? — I do not know ; in Covent Garden theatre we are not ; we are as ready to answer to our characters as any men. 2025. Do you wish to state anything further? — If you take the average expen- diture of the public in theatres, including the minors, you will find it is about the same as when they did not exist to the extent they now do. I will not trouble the Committee with any further evidence, but I will hand in the documents, and in doing so, I trust the compact will be clearly understood ; that the interests being tlie personal interests of myself and my property, it will be made a subject of consideration. 2026. With respect to the encouragement of authors, was not Mr. Kenney the author of Massaniello ? — That was at Drury Lane ; Mr. Dunn is here, who will be very ready to answer that. 2027. Was not Mr. Kenney the author of the Irish Ambassador? — Yes, he was. 2028. Has Mr. Kenney been paid for that ? — I believe not entirely. 2029. Is not he a creditor of Covent Garden ? — Yes ; the receipts of the theatre have been so extremely low from the circumstances I stated, that it has not been in our power to pay moi'e. 2030. Do you know the fact that he has not been paid? — The treasurer informs me that he has not been paid, and I believe that is so. He has been paid a part, not the whole. 2031. How many nights has it been performed ? — Thirty nights. 2032. Can you state how much he has been paid ?— I can tell you what Mr. Kenney's agreement was. 2033. Has that agreement been fulfilled ? — In part it has. I have stated the receipts of Covent Garden theatre have been so low, there being nearly 10,000/. lost this season, that it is but reasonable to conclude it was not in the power of the proprietors to pay more. 2034. Have you paid the salaries of the performers, and not paid authors? — We have. 2035. Should you not consider that a hardship?— -I should. It is a hardship we should have remedied if we had had it in our power. 2036. You say the authors have no reason to complain ? — Of that isolated case they have. I do not know what the sum due to Mr. Kenney is, but I believe the sum due to authors is a trifle. ' G79. ¥ 2 2037. Have ii6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Captain 2037. Have the performers been paid ? — Not regularly. John Forbes. 2038. Are they paid up to this time ? — Yes. ~ ~~ 2059. Has not the Irish Ambassador been a successful piece ? — It was, but it 25 une 1 32. j^gg j^Qj. jjggj^ attractive ; it was a successful piece, but it has not been well paid for by the public. {Mr. J. P. Collier handed in the following statement, which was read by the Chairman ;] " Captain Forbes having stated in his evidence that the proceeding against the proprietors of the Strand Theatre had been abandoned, it is necessary to mention in behalf of the office of the Lord Chamberlain, that the suit has not been relinquished, but that, in consequence of unavoidable legal delays, the trial has been postponed until ]Vlichaelmas term. That proceeding was instituted in vindication of the autho- rity of the Lord Chamberlain, because the Strand Theatre is within his Lordship's official jurisdiction. With regard to playhouses beyond that jurisdiction, the par- ties interested in the patent theatres have been left to the remedy given to them by the statute of 10 Geo. 2, c. 28." Mr. Thomas James Serle, called in; and Examined. Mr. T. J. fkrle. 2040. I THFNK you are the author of the Merchant of London ? — I am. 2041. Is that piece performing at this time ? — No, Drury Lane is closed. 2042. It was performed until the close ? — Very nearly ; until the benefit and ticket nights. 2043. How many nights ? — Nine. 2044. What profit did you expect to get for it ? — Ninety pounds for the nights performed ; had it been played 15, I should have had 150 /, 2045. Was that one of the most successful plays that has been performed at that theatre? — It was considered successful in its performance, but I believe, to speak candidly, it did not bring them money. 2046. Have you ever written anything else ? — Nothing but occasional translations, in which I used myself to play when I considered the character such as would fit me as an actor, at the minor theatres. 2047. You have acted at the large theatres as well as the minors ? — I have. 2048. Did you perceive there was any difference in the efficiency of your acting at the large and small theatres ? — Decidedly ; I consider it pertectly impossible, except with a particular frame of body, to render acting at all effective in a theatre so large as Covent Garden. If I might venture to enlarge upon the point, I should say, in every other art a man may choose his materials, to make them colossal or not, but as we have only our natural physical powers to act with, such as they are given to us, we cannot so extend them as to fit our powers to the size of any theatre. 2049. Then you think an actor in a large theatre may owe his success not to skill but physical organization ? — ^There must be a combination of both. 2050. But a man may be a very successful actor in a small theatre, who would not be able to show his talent in a large theatre ? — I am certain of it. 2051. Do you mean the average run of actors would not be able to fill a large theatre ? — I think the average run of physical power would not be sufficient to fill a large theatre. 2052. I believe you have paid considerable attention to the question which occupies this Committee, and you have written upon the subject r — I have, in the Monthly Magazine. 2053. Have you any property in either of the small theatres ? — Not the slightest of any kind. 2054. What would be the consequence of breaking up the monopoly of the patent theatres ? — I think the effect of absolutely destroying the monopoly, as a monopoly, would be beneficial, but still some limitation would be necessary ; because I think as acting, or rather as the composition of companies, must be a matter of considerable management and complication, to throw the trade abso- lutely open would be perhaps to disperse those means too much which are necessary to produce complete effect. 2055. In what manner could the monopoly be limited ? — I think the principle of monopoly should, for the sake of the art, be entirely destroyed, by placing it in '( the power of the public to say, wherever they felt the necessity of a theatre, wherever they felt they were not adequately entertained, they might call for a new one. 2056. Then ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 117 2056. Then you would leave it to the majority of the inhabitants of a particulai* Mr T.J. Serk. parish to sign a requisition to the magistrates ? — I would ; if not a majority, a portion. ' 35 June 183s. 2057. And to make it compulsory on the magistrates to licence it? — Yes; to take care the theatre should be large enough for its purpose, and should involve asurticient outlay of capital to make the manager responsible for the style of enter- tainment. 2058. Now I ask you as an author, and as a man well read in dramatic history, what the effect of that would be upon authors ? — I am certain it would be bene- ficial ; I do not think they would be rewarded possibly to the same extent for great instances of exertion as they are now, and I am sure they would not lose so much time in getting their plays performed ; that they would be enabled to have, what they ought to have, more of the control of the stage, and instead of writing for certain actors, the author would not have to go to the actor, but the actor would have to come to him. 2059. Then you consider the general practice is for a successful author to adapt his composition to the talent of a particular actor ? — No, because those authors who write the best do not condescend to do it ; but they are obliged to consider the interests of actors, and frequently postpone their plays in consequence. I have by me a letter from Mr. Bartley, which I will place before the Committee, in which a play of mine is said to be fit for Covent Garden theatre, but postponed, because it would not be fit to be Miss Kemble's second original part. 2060. What should you say the size of a theatre should be at the least? — I can give perhaps no better idea than the Coburg or the Surrey, or the late English Opera-house, with some alteration of construction. 206 1. Is the Theatre Fran^ais as large as Covent Garden? — I have not been in Paris. 2062. Are you aware that the stage of the Coburg theatre is as large as that of Drury Lane ? — I rather think that must be an error. I have walked the stage of Drury Lane and the stage of the Coburg, and I believe the depth may be as great, but the width certainly is not. 2063. The manager gave that in evidence ? — He gave, I believe, the admeasure- ment of the Coburg theatre, but I do not believe he gave the actual admeasurement of Drury Lane. 2064. I understand you consider the opening of the monopoly, with the limita- tion you have mentioned, would be beneficial to the actors ? — It would. 2065. You consider it would be so far beneficial to the actors, because it would enable many actors who cannot obtain from their physical organization that in- fluence over the public which their skill would enable them to do, that it would be beneficial to them by allowing them that arena which is suited to their powers ? — I do. 2066. Then as you consider it would be beneficial to actors and authors, who form part of the public, what effect do you consider it would have on the great theatres ? — I consider any alteration of the law, throwing open the legitimate drama, must have an effect contrary to the interests of the great theatres, and considerably affecting those interests, for they are ill suited to the representation of it them- selves; and if any theatre were legally authorized, and therefore rendered equally respectable, to play the legitimate drama in their neighbourhood, with the same company, it would have a ruinous effect upon them. 2067. Owing to their size ? — Yes. 2068. Supposing they could contract their size, could they draw sufficient profit to repay the outlay of capital? — I think if a classification were to take place, if they were not to employ three companies instead of one, their receipts would probably equal their expenditure. 2069. Since you think it would injure the interests of the large theatres, in what way do you think the public could be accommodated in the manner you suggest, without injuring the interests of the great theatres ? Is there any plan of compen- sation that has occurred to you ? — No plan of compensation has ever arisen in my mind, unless it could be obtained from the Government, and that perhaps by way of lottery. For the actors to compensate, who would benefit by it, would be im- possible, because it must be recollected they are the less fortunate, and consequently the poorer part of the profession, and could not bring forward sufficient funds by a very considerable sum. 679. p 3 2070. If ii8 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr T. J Sir/ 2070. If there was an Act of Parliament obtained for granting a lottery to the , ' great theatres, do you consider that would be no risk, that they would be certain of 25 June 1832, remuneration? — I should think they would. There is so great a spirit of theatrical speculation afloat, that as soon as we see one manager ruined we see another ready to take the theatre, in the very face of accounts ; and consequently, that dramatic spirit would have an excellent opportunity of venting itself in a lottery, and it would be exceedingly successful. 2071. No other plan has occurred to you ? — No ; no other I am sure would be likely to succeed, if it were to be drawn from the individuals likely to be benefited by it. 2072. Have you had a large acquaintance with dramatic authors ? — I have had some. 2073. Do you think, upon the whole, they have considered themselves well treated or have been satisfied ? — I do not think they consider the sums paid them too small, but 1 consider they think the opportunities considerably too few, and the time consumed in getting their pieces read and decided upon considerably too long, so that they cannot produce the same number of pieces they could do had they been allowed the full devotion of their time to the art. 2074. That is not the case vvith those who have already succeeded? — It was the case with Mr. Knowles with respect to the Hunchback ; Miss Mitford with respect to Kienzi, which lay four years in Covent Garden ; and with respect to Foscari, which lay four years in Covent Garden : these are instances. 2075. Do you consider the throwing open the monopoly would be beneficial to the great actors, in point of salary ? — That is a question upon which 1 can only give the opinion of others rather than myself; Mr. Macready thinks he would be the better for it. 2076. What do you think yourself? — I do not think they would be essentially the better for it. 2077. Do you mean you would restrict the theatres to different kinds of repre- sentations? — I think you must consider, first, within what distance, in so large a me- tropolis, it is possible for any person wishing to choose a particular performance, to see a performance of that kind which he desires ; and with due regard to that distance, it would be fit perhaps to classify them. 2078. Then you would restrict the theatres ? — Certainly; I think it would be advantageous. 2079. Do you not think the ability of an actor to make himself heard, depends more upon his articulation than the body of his voice ? — Yes, certainly. 2080. Have you not heard persons with very thick voices who could not be heard ? — Yes. 2081. And persons with thin voices, who could be distinctly heard ?— Yes, cer- tainly I have. Mercurii, 27° die Junii, 1832. EDWARD LYTTON BULWER, ESQ., in the Chair. Mr. Thomas James Serle, called in; and further Examined. Mr T J Serk. 2082. WHAT do you consider to be the cause of the decline of the drama?— ' ' ' Some of those which have been adduced, I think, may mean something, such as the ay June 1832. lateness of the dinner hours ; but I think the great cause of the decline of the drama has been its separation from the literature of the country. It has become a difficult matter in the theatres to hear the language of a play from the size, conse- •; quently managers have been obliged to resort to spectacle; the public have left ofi' going to see and to hear, and consequently the stage itself has deteriorated in public estimation. 2083. How long have the minor theatres been performing against the law ? — The theatre with which I have been latterly connected has been open 14 years, and, I suppose, constantly playing against the law j the Surrey, I think, 20 years. The law, as it stands, at present, I believe, permits no performance even in pan- tomime in which the scene is shifted, or any dramatic action represented. 2084. Have ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. ng " 2084. Have not the late attacks against the minor theatres been rather more Mr. T. J. Strlc. vjororous than they were before ? — They have ; and notice was served upon every manager of a minor theatre, stating that not only the legitimate drama must be 27 June 1832. abandoned, but that if any species of dramatic performance were resorted to, according to the words of the Act, the theatre would be proceeded against ; which notice was given on behalf of the proprietors of Covent Garden and Drury Lane by their solicitors. 2085. You consider that in that they overstretched the spirit of the law ? — If they did not overstretch the spirit of the law as it was originally framed, at all events they went beyond the present practice and the feeling of the public upon the subject. 2086. Do you consider that if it were lawful to act the legitimate drama at other theatres besides the two great ones, dramatic performances would be cheaper ? • — Certainly. 2087. Do you consider that that would produce a greater taste in the public for dramatic performances? — I think there are two points in which the public might be acted upon so as to produce a greater receipt, to make it a cheaper amusement, and so to manage the hours of performance as to make it a more habitual amuse- ment. 2088. You think the performances will last a shorter time? — Certainly. 2089. Do not you consider that the enormous rent of the two great houses operates unfavourably upon the drama also, as it subtracts something from the profits of the authors and actors?— I do so consider it; I think the rents of the theatres are unnecessarily large, because, first, an unnecessary outlay of capital has been made ; next, because a certain value is charged in those rents for the licence ; and I consider that wherever an interest is paid upon a value of that sort in the shape of rent, whether it be for the privilege of a patent for the great houses or a licence for a minor house, it must become a tax either upon the profession or upon the public. 2090. Do you conceive that there is any difference, so far as the public is con- cerned, between granting a licence for the season and granting a licence for the year? — A very considerable difference : the granting a licence for a year provokes competition ; the granting a licence for any particular time induces such an arrange- ment of the seasons as will enable the principals, at least of the same company, to serve in two theatres. 209 1 . Do you think that any theatre ought to be licensed for all the year round ? —I think every theatre ought to be licensed for the whole year, in order to provoke competition. As the theatres are at present arranged, a very considerable number, if not a great majority, of the performers at Drury Lane and Covent Garden fill the situations at the English Opera-house and at the Haymarket. 2092. Drury Lane and Covent Garden have the power of remaining open the whole year, and do not avail themselves of it? — Because they agree with the Hay- market that they will give the Haymarket three clear months, as the licence for the Haymarket is now for four months, but it would be for seven if they infringed upon those three months. 2093. Do you think that if that arrangement did not exist with the Haymarket theatre, it would answer for the great theatres to remain open ? — If it answered their purpose, they would do so ; the Haymarket, at any rate, would get seven months, and remain open in competition, instead of being closed by combination. 2094. Do you consider that the manner in which the legitimate drama is sur- reptitiously performed at the minor theatres now is any criterion of the manner in which it would be performed if the performance was lawful ? — I do not consider it any criterion at all, because those who have already arrived at something like a respectability in their art are of course deterred, if they have any other means of exercising their art, from going to theatres not legally authorized. 2095. Which should you prefer for a performance, the large stages of Drury Lane and Covent Garden, or one of the minor stages ? — A theatre, in my opinion, should not be so large as Covent Garden or Drury I-.ane for the performance of the historical tragedies. It should possess considerable stage room ; but as it is utterly impossible for an actor to extend his power ad Ubituiri, the theatre should be con- fined within such a space as that the actors should exercise that power easily. 2096. Would it not be possible to combine such a sized stage with a smallelr theatre ? — Certainly. 679. p 4 2097. Do 120 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. T. J. Scrle. 2 097. Do you conceive that your own play would be perfonned more to your satisfaction at a moderate sized theatre, or in one of the large theatres ? — In a mode- 27 June 1832. j.^^.g si^ed theatre, where every word could be distinctly heard without pain. 2098. Captain Forbes mentioned that it was no use prosecuting Mr. Chapman because he was a man of straw ; do you know what was the exact cause of Mr. C'hap- man being a man of straw ; do you happen to know whether he was ruined in con- sequence of a prosecution against him, or whether he was ruined by performing the drama previous to the prosecution ? — I have heard him say that he is prepared to show that had it not been for the prosecution entirely taking up his time, and costing considerable money, he should have been a gainer instead of a loser by his theatrical speculation. 2099. With respect to Mr. Rayner, do you conceive the same observation holds good with respect to him ? — Mr. Rayner told me that he has cleared 600/. between Christmas and Easter, and the cause of his now letting the theatre, which is let for 1,000/. a year, is, that he had miscalculated the sura that was necessary for the building of it, having expected to complete it for 1,200/. or 1,300/., and it costing him between 3,000/. and 4,000/. 2100. Do you consider that the saloons attached to the theatres have any influence either in promoting the attractions of the theatres, or in decreasing the respecta- bility? — I think that they have done a great deal towards destroying that constant attendance upon the theatres of respectable people which they were in the habit of giving before. I do not know what was the practice in Garrick's time, but I am quite sure that they would never have been attached to the theatres by the actors themselves, who would never have ventured upon such a breach of morality for the purpose of attracting the public. 2101. Whom do you consider that that breach of morality arises from? — From those who have a share in the theatres ; from those who have rebuilt them. 2102. Did they not exist in the old theatres ? — They might ; but I do not think they are the kind of alliance which the actors themselves would have sought as an attraction. 2103. Do you happen to know whether the young ladies that frequent the saloons enter gratuitously in any instance ? — I know nothing of tha^ part of the management of a theatre. 2104. With respect to the remuneration to actors, supposing the legitimate drama was allowed at all the theatres, do you consider that the actors would be equally remunerated ? — I was asked that question before, and I replied, that I had not sufficiently considered it, but my own impression was, that they would not ; I have, however, thought of it since, and when I recollect that Mr. Liston has 60/. a week at the Olympic for six months together, and that Mr. T. P. Cooke has been largely remunerated at the Surrey for a considerable time together, besides the various temporary engagements that have been made at the minor theatres, I have reason to think they would be equally remunerated in the gross, though it might affect some individuals variously. 2 1 05. As a proof of the advantage that the minor theatres are of in giving an opening to actors in general, is not Mr. Abbott at this moment about to enter into some engagement with one of the minor theatres ? — He and Mr. Keeley have both engaged to perform in the new comedy of Mr. Jerrold's which was rejected at the Haymarket, and now purchased by the managers of the Strand theatre. 2106. Then you consider that a proof of the advantage of competition to both actors and authors ? — I do. 2107. Is not Mrs. Orger also going to one of the minor theatres ? — I understand she is going to the Olympic. 2108. You stated that the only scheme of compensation you can think of would be by a lottery ? — Yes. 2109. You do not think it would be worth the while of any theatre that has not now the right of acting the regular drama to purchase it ? — I think that right has been always considerably overvalued, consequently it could not be purchased at any- thing like what would be considered a remuneration. 2110. Supposing it were fairly valued, should you consider it worth the while of any minor theatres to contribute a proportion of that value for this right of acting the regular drama ? — The proportion must be a very small sum ; it would also have this objection, that the interest of that value must be charged upon the rent, and so become still a considerable tax upon the profession, at it is now in the shape of rent upon the large houses. *^ 21 u. Still ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 121 2111. Still, jf you consider that the loss of the minor theatres, in not being Mr. T.J. S(rle. able to act the regular drama, is considerable, and that their gain, in being permitted to act it, would be proportionably great, how do you consider that the 27 June 1832. proportion would be so very small which they might in justice be expected to pay ? — 1 do not think it would be advantageous for all the theatres in London to play the legitimate drama ; I think it would be advantageous to classify the styles of performance to which each theatre should be restricted ; that the inhabitants of the extreme east end of the town should not be obliged to come to Westminster for the legitimate or any other part of the drama ; but still, where there are theatres tolerably near together, it would be better to classify theili than to allow all to play every kind of performance. 2112. Would it be worth the while of those theatres that wish to act the regular drama to pay a fair proportion of the compensation? — A fair proportion it might ; but 1 consider that the value of that privilege has always been raised upon a fictitious foundation, and that the payment for any privilege must operate either as a tax upon the actors or the public. 2113. In what respect do you consider it has been fictitiously estimated? — I think that the value has arisen from a privilege,' which privilege ought never to have existed as a value ; that, for instance, if the personal conduct of any other manager would entitle him to such privileges, that ought not afterwards to be made a matter of bargain and sale, enabling any other person who had not his talent to raise thereby a rent upon the privileged place. 2114. When the question of compensation is considered, do not you think, in common justice, it would be fair to consider the fortunes of those persons who have embarked large sums upon the theatres, whether upon a right or a wrong under- standing of the real value of the patent ? — 1 think, certainly, it would be fit to consider them, but I think they ought to be compensated by the Government which has permitted those things, and not by the actors who have been already wronged by them. 2115. Then do you incline towards the opuiion of a lottery? — I do. 2116. Have you ever much considered the question of compensation r — I have in every way that has lain within my means of considering it. 2117. Has any alternative but that of a lottery been ever suggested to you ? — Never. 2118. What do you consider to be the objection to a lottery ?— None, unless some objection on a false score of morality ; if there is no objection upon that ground, I can see no other objection of any other kind. 2119. Do not you consider that the fair way of estimating what should be paid by the minor theatres, would be to estimate what they might gain by it .''--If it were advantageous to keep up the principle of a monopoly at all. 2 1 20. Supposing the wish to be to do away with it as soon as possible, without injury to any individual ? — But such a plan as the purchase of a part would only be to extend, and not to abolish the monopoly ; I think one of the most useful prin- ciples would be entirely to abolish the principle of monopoly; to allow the public to say where they were sufficiently entertained, and where they were not sufficiently entertained. % 2121. You say that you think it would not be desirable that the regular drama should be acted at all the theatres, and therefore you would have some classification ; do you mean that that classification should not be previously determined by the licence, but should be determined by public taste ? — I would have it thus, that within a certain distance a certain number of theatres should be started, whether for the purposes of the drama, legitimate or illegitimate, properly classified, and that if the public, upon an increase of any particular district, or the misconduct of any manager, had not afforded them that opportunity of amusement to which they consider they have a right, that they should then have the liberty, by the majority or a portion of house- holders within a certain district, of demanding a licence for another theatre, for the purpose of that theatre whose licence was abused. 2122. Do you think that all theatres ought to be classified, or that the major of the theatres ought to have the power of playing all descriptions of drama ? — Certainly not, because 1 consider that one of the greatest arguments against them is this, that from their size they are tempted to make other things than literary works their staple commodity, and that, being obliged to resort to spectacle, they do not, there- fore, depend upon histrionic or literary art for their support. 679. Q * 2123. Would 122 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. T. J. Serle. 21 23. Would you confine them entirely to spectacle ?— They might, I conceive, from their very situation, as having now patent rights, claim some priority of" choice 37 June 1832. as to what species of performance they would prefer, confining themselves to taking care that if they choose the legitimate drama, they should adapt their theatre to the performance of it. 2124. Do not you think you might leave that to the effects of competition ; be- cause if they perceived that the legitimate drama was not attractive at their theatres in consequence of the size, and that the legitimate drama was preferred elsewhere, they would give it up ? — If you throw it open altogether, but if you classify you cannot do that. 2125. Do you suppose it was ever in the contemplation of the Government, when they licensed the two great theatres, that French plays should be exhibited there ? — Certainly not ; I believe the patents express for the encouragement of the English drama, both as regards English literature and English acting. 2126. Are not you aware, at the same time, that the Opera-house is restricted to 60 nights performance ? — I know nothing of the Opera-house. 2127. In addition to the instances that have been mentioned of pieces that, having been rejected at the large theatres, were brought out at the minor theatres, do you recollect whether Luke the Labourer was not rejected at the large theatres ? — I do not know ; Fazio was, I believe, rejected at both theatres, and then acted at the Surrey, and afterwards acted at Covent Garden. 21 28. Was there not Black Eyed Susan P^That was first played at the Surrey, and then transferred to the large theatres. 2129. Do you believe that the minor theatres deprive the great theatres of 40,000/. a year of their receipts? — Certainly not, the sum is by much too large, as might be easily perceived by the items that Captain Forbes mentioned ; I think he put the Adelphi down at 2,000/. a year, and the Olympic at 1,600/., which mu.st be to them infinitely more destructive than all the rest of the minor theatres put together. 2130. Do you believe that those persons who contribute the 3,600/., if the Adelphi and the Olympic were not open, would necessarily go two nights to the great theatres? — Certainly not; I think that competition in this respect produces a taste for the art, as well as consumes the money which is expended upon it. 2131. Do you find that at present any of the theatres are principally supported by the neighbourhood in which they exist? — Generally, I think, except in the case of some remarkably attractive piece, which, gaining a great reputation from the newspapers and from public report, draws people from all parts of the town, and even from the country, to witness it. 2 132. Is not the Surrey theatre supported from all the western parts of the town ? — Occasionally, if there is any piece that excites that kind of general attention to draw from beyond the immediate vicinity. 2133. Which of the theatres would you say is principally supported by its own neighbourhood ? — I should say the Pavilion theatre, at the east end of the town, and the Coburg decidedly from its own nighbourhood. Astley's, I think, draws from every part of the town, as having a peculiar performance of its own, to which most people go once a year. Mr. Peter Francis Laporte, called in ; and Examined. Mr. P. F. Laporte. 21 34. HOW long have you been in England ? —About 12 years. — — 2135. What theatre have you been proprietor or manager of since your resi- dence ? — That of the French plays, when they were at the Tottenham-street theatre and the Opera. 2136. And the Adelphi? — I consider that to be the same thing as the French plays. After the burning of the Lyceum, they were obliged to go from one place to another, but it was the same thing, 2137. Have you not been manager and proprietor of the Italian Opera also?- - Yes. 2 1 38. And now you are so of Covent Garden ? — Yes. 2139. When you had the French plays at the Tottenham-street theatre, under what licence did you perform them ? — Under no licence whatever ; at the English Opera-house it was under a licence from the Lord Chamberlain. 2140. How did you manage at the Tottenham -street theatre? — Like many others, we were suffered, and went on. 2141. Did ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 123 2141. Did you receive money at the doors? — We did ; that is, if not exactly at Mr. P. F. Laporte. the doors, at night we had a regular letting-place, to take boxes and tickets. — 2142. Did the patent theatres ever dispute your right or power? — They did a? June 1832. not. 2143. Upon what term have you taken Covent Garden theatre ? — For a seven years' lease. 2144. Have you taken that upon any understanding that you possess any exclu- sive powers or privileges with regard to the drama ? — I took the thing as it was. I was fully aware of this inquiry going on, but yet I thought that I ran no risk in taking it according to the ancient rights, or at least customs, that were established in those theatres. 214,5. Then with regard to your theatre, you do not consider that it would be prejudicial to your interest the drama remaining as it is, and the minor theatres acting as they do the legitimate drama, but you are prepared to take your chance ? ■ — If there is no increase upon what goes on at present, I think I may take my chance. 2 146. You are not afraid of the Coburg, for example ? — It depends upon what pieces the Coburg performs ; if the Coburg performed the same pieces as those which I give a great deal of money for at Covent Garden, it would injure me. 2147. Supposing it performed a piece of Shakspeare's .? — I think it must be a great injury to me. 2148. But you are aware that they have done it up to this time.' — They did it very seldom, and I think not much to their advantage. 2149. Then in all probability they will not continue it ? — I hope not. 2150. Then are the Committee to understand that as long as no other theatre interfered with any new piece you bring out, you do not much mind what they do with the old pieces that have been represented, but you wish to have the exclusive power over any representation you bring forward ? — 1 think that is but right. 2151. And you would wish to be protected in that way? — Decidedly. 2152. Do you consider the French opera and the German opera that is now licensed by the Lord Chamberlain an infringement of your compact or understanding in taking that theatre ? — I consider it a very unfortunate thing for the patent theatres. »i 2153. Do you think the Lord Chamberlain is exceeding his power in doing it? — I am not acquainted enough with the Lord Chamberlain's powers, nor would I presume to judge how far they go. ;{ 2 1 54. If you had the power of playing Italian operas, would you have given more for that theatre than you have done ? — Perhaps I would. 2155. Would you like to have the option of playing the Italian operas ?— Yes. 2156. Where do you think is the most encouragement given to theatres, in France or in England, by the public and by the government?— I think in France. 2157. Is not there a tax upon the minor theatres in France? — No, quite the contrary ; there is an encouragement given to enable the proprietor to bring for- ward the great sort of drama, which is expected to be the best. 2158. To which of the theatres ? — To all the royal theatres, such as the Francois, Opera and the Comique Opera. •J\^g. Do not the minor theatres at Paris contribute a portion of their receipts towards the three great theatres ? — They do, a large portion. 2160. Then how do you reconcile that with your opinion that the theatres are more encouraged in Paris than they are in England, as there is no tax here upon minor theatres? — No, and that is why the great ones cannot support themselves. 2161. Is not the cause of the drama better supported here, taking it as a whole, than it is at Paris? — I do not see how ; the minor theatres in all countries, being cheaper and having less expense, have more chance to support themselves than the larger ones. 2162. What proportion of the receipts of the minor theatres at Paris are contri- buted to the large ones? — One- tenth. 2163. Are they not obliged to contribute to the poor ? — They contribute to the poor, but they make the public contribute that, because they are allowed to increase what is taken for the purpose. 2164. What proportion is given to the authors?— Twelve per cent, of every night's receipt. 2165. Do you think that the minor theatres are more flourishing there than they are here ? — I think they are. 679. Q 2 2166. Do 124? MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE AJr. P. F.Laporte.. 21 66. Do you think the public taste in France is in favour of minor theatres ? — The public taste is decidedly for the best performances, and whenever there are 27 June 1832. good performances at the large theatres they go there in preference to the small ones ; but the smaller theatres being cheaper they have a claim upon many more people. 2167. Has not the question been very much agitated at Paris, whether the legi- timate drama ought to be confined to the two great houses r— It has been. 2168. How many theatres are there in Paris ? — About 14 open at a time. 2i6g. Do you think that in France the legitimate drama ought to be confined to the two great theatres ? — I think it ought. 2170. You are aware that the question has been very much debated? — It has. 2771. Have not the theatres royal a regular allowance from the government ? — They have. 2172. Do you know the amount ? — It is very large indeed ; the Opera has as much as nearly 40,000 /. sterling a year ; the Francois about 8,000/.; but then the Franpois were very rich in former times, they had a great deal of funded pro- perty. I think the Opera is now given to a lessee, who receives 32,000 /. from the government, taking all the chances. 2173. Have the theatres flourished during the last year in Paris ? — They have, as much as can be expected in these times. 2174. Has the public excitement there been prejudicial r — In Paris, public excitement is sometimes favourable to the theatres, because everybody likes to go, and get entertained at night after business. 217,5. How is a theatre managed in the provinces? — The provincial theatres are divided into three classes, and each class pays a certain price to the authors. 2 1 76. Is there any connexion at this time between the theatre you have and other great theatres with regard to the management ; is it at all likely that they will be at all united under one management ? — Decidedly not. 2177. Are not the actors at the minor theatres at Paris bound to go to the theatres royal if they become so distinguished as to make it desirable to do so ? — There is in France an idea that the theatres exert a great influence upon the manners of the nation, and therefore the large theatres, in which the best music and the best drama is to be produced, are greatly encouraged, and there is a public school, called the Conservatoire, supported by government, in which new performers are educated, and those new performers are decidedly the property of the large theatres, and they are not allowed to go on the small theatres, except after trying their skill at a large theatre, and then, if they do not answer, they may go where they can. 2178. If persons, having begun to act upon the small theatres, become distin- guished, have not the large theatres a right to demand their services? — They have not ; but such is their desire of getting for the first theatres the best talent they can, that sometimes government makes sacrifices to obtain them, and I could quote several actors who received large sums, one who receives a thousand a year from the government to go nowhere else but to the Francois. 2179. What do you understand you shall continue to be able to act at Covent Garden ? — I conceive that what has been acted till now, I have a right to continue the same. 2 1 80. That is to say, both the regular drama and spectacle, pantomime, opera, and in short the various things which have hitherto been acted, you imagine that you shall continue to be able to act ? — I do, of course. 2181. Are you prepared to say that you should not call upon the lessors of the theatre to maintain those rights which you imagine yourself to possess in virtue of their patent, if they should be invaded ?— I did not go so far into the question ; but 1 considered, on taking the theatre, that the lessors would give me v/hat has hitherto been performed at the theatre. 2182. Supposing you found that that was no longer so? — Then I would give up my lease. 2183. Have you the power to do so ? — Yes, there is an understanding that it should be so. 2 1 84. Is there any clause in the lease enabling you to give it up ? — There is no lease granted at present, but that was the understanding with the proprietors, that if they lose part of their property, of course they must lose part of their rent, or even to set me at liberty, because if the theatre were to be done away with, or thrown open to large competition, of course there is not talent enough in Ihigland to uiain- tain more than one or two theatres. 218,). Then ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. ,25, 21 85. Then if the monopoly was thrown open, you would throw up your lease ? Mr. P. J. Laporte. — Decidedly. 2186. You have the power to do so? — There is no special arrangement entered *7 June 183a. into, because there is no lease granted, but such is the understanding. •2187. Then, in short, you would suffer no injury by the breaking up of the monopoly, beyond that of losing your engagement ? — Yes, I would, indeed, because I must prepare for the next season. 2188. If you think that you should throw up your lease on the monopoly being thrown open, you must be of opinion it would be very injurious to Govent Garden ? — Certainly it would ; but the proprietors of the theatre fully understand that if the monopoly was to be thrown open, they would accept my resignation. •2 1 89. Can you define what you mean by the monopoly being thrown open ; what state of things would induce you to throw up your lease ? — If the regular drama was to be performed everywhere, after a little there would be such competition for actors, few as they are, that they would be called away to the other theatres. 2190. Is not the regular drama performed at this moment at all the minor theatres, and should you be in any worse situation than you are now ? — But we are not in a good situation now, and it has been expected that the law could be so defined as to prevent those infringements by the other theatres. 2191. Did you expect that it would be more restricted? — I expected that the rights of each theatre would be classified. 2192. Have you looked into the finances of Covent Garden theatre? — Yes. 2193. And you know that their affairs have not been very flourishing the last year r — Yes. 2 1 94. Do you attribute that failure to want of management, or to the state of public taste? — I think there are many causes within the last few years that have reduced the theatres to that state they are in now ; I think the dinner hour is the main point ; then the many nights offered to the public at the Italian Opera- house I consider to be very injurious ; and then taking into consideration also the state of the country, and the excitement of politics and occupation, which has not permitted the public to attend to amusements so much. 2195. But you think that in Paris the excitement does not operate unfavourably ? — I think we cannot draw a comparison between the spirit of the French people and the English, the French are such a play-going people ; and I believe there never was such a fine house, the French Opera-house, as when the Prussians were under the walls on the 30th of March. 2 1 96. You once had a theatre that was not licensed ? — I had. 2197. Now you are the manager of a legal theatre, have you it in contemplation to attempt to prosecute any of the minor theatres? — I think the prosecution, if any, must rest with the proprietors, and I would not make myself a party to it. 2198. Should you call upon the proprietors to prosecute? — I think that is their affair, they must manage better than I can ; if I felt myself injured by it, I would call upon them to put me in as good a situation as they can. ,i,. 2199. What is the manner of reading plays at Paris, does it rest with one person, or is there a certain committee established for the purpose ?— It is different almost at every theatre ; there is a committee in the large theatres ; there are some where a committee is established, and some others where the manager himself takes the reading of the plays. 2200. In Paris are there many instances of plays being detained for some years by the committee before they are read over ? — The answer is given the very day that it is read. 2201. How long is that generally ? — There is reading every week. 2202. Is it always read in due course, or is there any preference given to favourites ? — There is a preference which the manager has of selecting what he considers of actual advantage to the theatre. 2203. Then, in fact, the committee there are merely agents of the manager? — They are judges and advisers. 2204. What is the manner of licensing plays there? — There is no licence at all. 2205. Do you find that there is any want of a licence ; are there many indecent plays permitted? — The public would not suffer them; the public is the best judge. 2206. How long has the censorship ceased to exist ? — It has ceased since the fall of Charles the Tenth. Before that time there was a licence, because they were so afraid of political allusions. -^^-^ . .-gv^-^- 679. Q 3 2207. Are 126 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr P F. Lavorte 2207, Are there many political allusions now in the plays produced at Paris? — ' ' There are. 27 June 1832. 2208. With respect to the manner of rewarding authors at Paris, does not he derive a profit from every time his play is performed ? — He does. 2209. Does he really bond fide obtain it ? — He does. 2210. How is it in the provinces? — In the provinces it is divided into classes, and each town, according to its importance, pays a certain sum for each play nightly. 2211. How does the author know that his play has been performed r — There is an agency in every town, and it is collected every year. 2212. Is it pretty regularly remitted ?— Always. 2213. What sum does the author generally receive from the profits ? — In the large places, such as Lyons and Marseilles, which are supported by government, they receive nearly one half of what they receive in Paris ; in minor towns they receive according to a scale, I could not say exactly at present. 2214. Does not it rest with the author to allow his play to be performed or not ; and if he chose to say, " I am not disposed to take the terms you offer me," might not he refuse to have it performed ? — There are no terms, except the 12 per cent, upon the receipts. 2215. But he might refuse to have his play performed ?— Yes. 2216. Is not his play for a certain number of years the property of his wife and his children? — For 10 years ; there is now a talk of making it a downright inherit- ance for ever. 2217. Do you not consider that that would be a great encouragement to persons to produce plays that would be permanent? — Decidedly. 2218. And it would tend to give a lofty character to the drama? — -Decidedly. 22ig. Was there not also a law passed that rendered copyright free from the arrest of creditors ? — I know of no such arrangement. 2220. The minor pieces that are produced at Paris are generally considered exceedingly good ; but is it not the general impression that the higher order of the drama is not so good as the minor pieces ? — It is. 2221. What do you consider the cause? — The minor theatres being so cheap, the manager can obtain the best performers, because the public come there. 2222. Is not the drama better in those departments at Paris than it is in the ti'agedies and comedies that have been produced ? — It is much easier to produce a short performance of that description. 2223. Do you consider that that arises from this, that the author is only able to go to two theatres ? — Decidedly not ; there is never an overflow of good pieces ; besides, it has been talked of several times to increase the number of theatres the moment the public should show that they are not satisfied with 5nly two. 2224. Supposing the public were to express a desire to have more theatres at which the legitimate drama would be allowed, you think that they would be increased ? — They would decidedly. 2225. Do you estimate the desire of the public in proportion to the manner in which the theatres are filled ? — Yes. 2226. Do you think that would be a fair calculation to go upon ? — Decidedly. • 2227. Is not the Theatre Francois of very great size? — It is. 2228. Which is the largest, that or the Covent Garden theatre ? — I think about the same ; I think Covent Garden is a little smaller. 2229. Have you not many publications attributing the want of merit in the recent tragedies to the overgrown size of the Th64tre Francois ? — No. 2230. Do you consider that the Theatre Francois, from the form and the shape of it, is better constructed for seeing and hearing than Covent Garden ? — I do not think it is. 2231. Is it the same shape ? — No; Covent Garden is longer, and the The<\tre Francois is more of a semicircle. 2232. Could you name any five-act plays, comedy or tragedy, that have been successful, that have been written in the last five or six years ? — I could, a great many ; Henry the Third, Louis the Eleventh, and many others that do not strike my memory now. 2233. Do you recollect any comedies in five acts? — Yes, L'Ecole des Viellards, and many others. 2234. You state that you think the late hours and the public excitement are main causes of the decline of the theatres j do not you think that the introduction of ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 127 of French playis and other foreign entertainments has also given a different turn to Mr P. F. Laporft. the public taste, and thereby subtracted from the receipts and attendances at the — great theatres ?— The attendance at the French plays has been very moderate 27 June 1832. indeed. 2235. Have not the public remunerated you by their attendance for your expense and trouble ? — For the two or three last years we have not been very fortunate. 2236. Have not your French speculations answered very well ? — Very well, in- deed ; it was a novelty ; it answered for a short time, the same as the German now answers. 2237. Do you consider Covent Garden to be too large, or do you consider the construction of it perfect ? — Very good indeed. 2238. Do you think that the private boxes are advantageous to the theatre? — I think they are, according to the present wishes of the intelligent classes of society. 2239. Does not it often happen that people who are in waiting in expectation ©f having a private box given to them do not attend the theatre ? — It does, because in fact there are not enough private boxes ; I would say that private boxes are clearly an advantage for the sake of the higher classes of society. 2240. Supposing you had your option to make six or ten more private boxes, would you do it in Covent Garden theatre? — Supposing the public would be satisfied with it, I would do it instantly. 2241. Do you consider that if the public were to express a great desire generally to have the legitimate drama performed at the other theatres in Paris, the public would obtain that desire ? — Yes, they would, because the power that would grant that extension has also the power of granting indemnities. 2242. In what manner would indemnities be granted? — To support the theatre so that they are no losers ; the large theatres are so supported that they cannot be losers, because the government gives a sufficient sum to pay for losses, so that the authors and performers and everybody are sure to get their money. 2243. Does not the French government interfere in the administration of the theatres ? — To a certain extent they do. 2244. Much further than the English government does? — Much further ; there is a committee appointed for those large theatres, to report upon their good management. 2245. Do they direct a particular piece to be performed? — No ; but the wants of the proprietors come within the budget, so that it is for the Chamber of Deputies to grant the allowance or not. 2246. Is not the proprietorship of a theatre invested in individuals as it is here ? — Yes. 2247. But with the understanding that the government will protect them from any considerable losses ? — Yes. 2248. Are not the accounts regularly laid before the Government every year? — Yes. 2249. -^^^ ^'^ the theatres in that predicament ?— All the large theatres; they must make sacrifices, in order to keep up the dignity of the stage. 2250. Have you any idea whether the pecuniary losses that have been sustained upon the large theatres in Paris are at all in 2)roportion to the losses that have been sustained here by the two great theatres ? — I think the losses are not so great there, because the French are more of a play-going people altogether, but yet the Opera costs government about 40,000 /. a year for about 1 60 nights ; the Theatre Fran^f ois costs much less, because the property is vested in a company, and that company was very rich from former success, they had a great deal of funded property, so that I do not consider that that theatre costs government more than 8,000/. or 10,000 /. a year. 2251. Are there any other theatres to which government contributes? — There are five theatres to which government contributes. 2252. Do you know the amount that government contributes? — I think very little short of 80,000 /. sterling. 2253. Does it appear in the budget as an item ? — It does. 2254. Then is it not probable that the theatres, as mercantile concerns, are very losing concerns ? — Yes, because no sacrifice is spared there to keep up the dignity of the drama ; it is thought mucli more important there than it is here. 2255. Does not the government derive some emolument from the theatres? — None at all j a good performer is never suffered to be anywhere except in a large 679. Q 4 tlieatre. 128 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. P. F. Lapoi-te. theatre, and as there is no compulsion, he must be paid accordingly ; and there are ' ~ some performers who are paid by government a very large salary to go nowhere 7 uue I 3-. gjgg j^y^ ^^ ^l^g principal theatres. 2256. Do they ever act in the small theatres? —Yes, in the melo-dramatic theatres. 2257. Was not there a process against Perlet for acting? — Yes, there was ; he was articled to the National School, and when he chose to go to another theatre, he was called to his duties. 2258. Then it would appear that although the French are a more theatre-going people than we are, yet they do not support their own theatres ? — Yes, it is alto- gether according to chance. I consider that the large theatres in Paris might be conducted at a cheap rate ; but the government, in protection of the public, will not allow a cheap rate to be taken ; and they say, you must spend every thing that is necessary to have a good theatre, you must allow no good performer to escape you, and if there is a loss at the end of the year, we will pay for it. 2259. ^'^ y^^ consider that they could go on so advantageously to themselves without an allowance from the government ? — Not without reducing the scale of the expenditure, and consequently the quality of the company. 2260. Would there be sufficient attractions if it was so reduced? — If they could get one or two good pieces, they might carry them on for some time, but 1 think in the long run they would fail. 2261. Are not the small theatres able to support themselves without the aid of government ? — Yes, because of their expenditure being so small. 2262. Is not that an argument in favour of the small theatres being a better mercantile concern than the large ones? — They are certainly; light pieces are much easier found than large pieces. 2263. If the French theatres were not supported by government, would they not fail ? — They would. 22C4. Then are not the large theatres in the two countries in the same predi- cament, inasmuch as they both equally want support ? — They do. 2265. Do not you consider that a hardship upon certain performers being restricted to a certain number of theatres ? — Indeed I do not, for so few as the theatres are, there are not performers enough. 2266. Is it not a hardship upon a performer, taking the liberty of the subject into consideration, to be confined to two or three theatres ? — They are not confined ; they may act upon a different line, because every theatre has a classified line of business j a vaudeville there cannot play comedy. 2267. Are all the theatres in Paris restricted to a certain specified representation ? — They are. 2268. Is not the legitimate drama played occasionally at the Port Saint Martin ; is not a good performer often removed from the Port Saint Martin to one of the great theatres ? — There is a very narrow line between a tragedy and melo-drama, and there are melo-dramas that have been produced at the Port Saint Martin that would do honour to a French drama. 2269. Then cannot a performer that succeeds at Port Saint Martin be compelled to be removed to a large theatre? — Certainly not, he may be bought in. 2270. Suppose he is a pupil of the Conservatoire? — if he is a pupil of the Con- servatoire, he is articled for a certain number of years, and his education having been at the expense of the government, of course the government has a right to his services. 2271. As the number of actors is very limited in France, would their number be increased if the competition was thrown more open? — Decidedly not ; there is plenty of encouragement there, because the first theatres are made so important that it is the aim of all performers to arrive there. Samuel Beazley, Esq. called in ; and Examined. S Beazley, Esq. 2272. HAVE you not been concerned in the construction and alteration of , 1 several theatres ? — Yes, I have built six or seven theatres ; the late English Opera- house ; I have built the whole interior of Drury Lane, and I have built the Dublin theatre and the Birmingham theatre, and several others. 2273. And you are now engaged in the construction of the new English Opera- house ?— I am. 2274. Were ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 129 2274. Were you not alsoconcerned in the alteration of Diorry Lane ? — I rebuilt S. Beadcy, Esq. the whole of the interior of Drury Laue. 2275. How many years ago is that ? — About 1 1 years ago. ?7 June 183a, 2276. What do you consider to be about the best size with regard to hearing and seeing at a theatre ?— I do not think that a theatre .should exceed above 50 feet in diameter, that is from box to box, or 55 feet from the curtain to the front box. With the permission of the Committee, I will state the dimensions of the theatres we have in London, and I have the plans also here ; I think it should not exceed the present size of the two large theatres. 2277. Do you think that is the proper size ? — I think that is a proper size for the performance of historical plays, and of tragedies and comedies. 2278. Would it not be possible to have a stage sufficiently large, and at the same time to have the place for the audience not too large? — I should think it very diffi- cult to construct a theatre with a large stage and a small theatre, without bringing the audience so close to the stage as to destroy in a great degree the dramatic illusion. 2279. -^'"^ you not aware that that very circumstance exists at the Coburg theatre ? — I have been in the Coburg theatre once or twice, and when I was there, it struck me that I was too close to the stage, for the size of the stage, on account of the width of the stage ; the Coburg is a semicircle, but it is impossible that that can be upon any extensive scale, because it would make the stage so very large. 2280. Did you consider that you were too near on account of the actors or on account of the scenery? — On account of the scenery and the actors both, and particularly with the sort of pieces they performed when I was at the Coburg, because it was a melo-drama. ^ 2281. Do you believe that all the audience in Covent Garden and Drury Lane have a fair chance of seeing and hearing? — I think those at the back of the boxes had not a fair chance, and I think the defect in our theatres is the great depth of the boxes. 2282. Then you consider it is from the faulty construction of the boxes rather than from the size of the theatres ? — Certainly. . 2283. Do you consider that those persons in the centre or in the galleries can sufficiently well perceive the countenances of the actors upon the stage? — I have myself seen Mademoiselle Mars in the Theatre Francois in the upper part of the boxes, and I have never lost any of her effects, which are very nice effects, not great, palpable effects. 2284. Did not she appear diminished in size? — No, I do not think so at all ; there is no theatre I have been in in which the distance has been sufficient to have that effect. It has scarcely that effect in the Italian Opera in the gallery. The Italian Opera-house, which is the best theatre we have for hearing, is ten feet wider than any English theatre, and nearly 90 feet from the curtain to the, front. 2285. Do you consider they can hear well in all parts of the Oper^-house? — 1 think in every part of it. 2286. How did you account for the sound being better in the Italian Opera- bouse than in Covent Garden? — 1 should think from the great use of wood in its construction, and I think that would have created too much vibration, if the vibration had not been damped by the draperies that the boxes are filled with. 2287. Supposing the interior of that house was arranged according to the con- struction of one of the English theatres, would not that impede the sound .? — No, 1 do not think it would. 2288. When you re-constructed Drury Lane theatre, was it left entirely to your own discretion, or were orders given you to provide room for a certain number of persons? — It was left generally to my own discretion. I think I had no particular orders, but not to make it too small. 2289. ^ ou think that 50 feet is the best size ? — I think it is. 2290. Both for sound and for scenic effect? — Yes ; and you get by that a pro- scenium of such a calibre that you can perform anything. 2291. Are you not aware, that at the Italian C^pera-house the singers complain of the efforts they are obliged to make in order to be heard ; are not you aware that they call that house the tomb of singers ? — I am aware of that with respect to some pai'ticular singers ; but I think it depends more upon the management of their voice than upon the construction of the theatre. I have known Miss Stephens say that at Drury Lane theatre she sang with perfect ease, and the same in the 679. R Dublin 130 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE S. BeazUy, Esq. Dublin theatre ; it depends upon their articulation ; there are certain persons of great physical force that I did not hear so well as others, persons of much less phy- 27 June 1832. sical force, but who articulate more clearly. 2292. Should you say, as a general position, that the more stone there is in the construction, the theatre is less favourable to sound? — If that stone is near to the speaker, certainly. 2293. You think that no theatre should be larger than Drury Lane and Covent Garden ? — Certainly not. 2294. What shape do you consider the best for seeing and hearing? — I think a little variation from the horse-shoe shape is the best you can adopt. 229.5. Who built the Coburg theatre?— A Mr. Bonelli, I think, a very expe rienced person, who built a great number of theatres. 2296. What is the shape of that ? — That is a semicircle. 2:?97. What are the dimensions of the English Opera-house which you are now building ? — ^The new will be 42 feet across. 2298. What are the dimensions of Covent Garden ? — Fifty feet. 2299. What are the dimensions from the stage to the boxes in the English Opera- house ? — Fifty-four feet from the curtain. 2300. What is the distance at Covent Garden? — At Covent Garden it is 63. 2301. Since you are constructing the English Opera-house so much smaller than the two great theatres, are you not of opinion, that a theatre may be smaller than the two great theatres, giving great effect to all scenic representation? — I think so, certainly, but not giving such good effect to the representation of historical plays and tragedies which require long processions ; I think that spectacle is a great adjunct to legitimate drama. 2302. You think a large theatre is better for spectacle, whether it is employed in legitimate drama or any thing else? — Yes. 2303. Do you get the same price for a large theatre as for a small one ? — I am myself only an architect, not a builder ; we are paid a commission by a per-centage, and of course as a large theatre costs more than a small one, our per-centage would be larger, and also probably it would require more science in the construction. 2304. Then supposing it were possible that a gentleman in your profession should be actuated by any kind of mercenary feeling, he would be inclined to advocate a large theatre rather than a small one? — I should imagine that he would. 2305. You have yourself produced several pieces ? — I have adapted several pieces. 2306. So far as they have gone, have you been satisfied with the remuneration you have received ? — Perfectly. 2307. Do you consider that the law that relates to dramatic copyright could be improved ? — Upon that I am no judge ; with regard to myself, I have always been very well satisfied with the remuneration I have received. 2308. What is the size of the Haymarket theatre ? — It is 35 feet across from box to box, and 47 feet from the curtain to the boxes. 2309. Is not that rather smaller than the new theatre you are building ? — Con- siderably smaller. 23 1 0. Do not you think that the legitimate drama is very fairly acted at the Haymarket? — I think it is very well acted. 231 1. Then you think it is large enough for that object? — I think it is ; but I question whether it is large enough for the performance of large plays, such as Coriolanus, and the performance of such a play as Mr. Shiel's play of the Apostate, with all the necessary appendages. 2312. Is it your opinion that historical plays cannot be acted in a theatre less than the Haymarket ? — Certainly not ; I think that a theatre too small is much more destructive of dramatic illusion than one too large. 2313. Did you ever have any pieces performed at the Adelphi ? — Yes, I have. 2314. Were you satisfied with your remuneration there? — Perfectly I have received a great deal more money at a large theatre than I have at a small, but 1 was perfectly satisfied with both. 2315. What sum have you received in one year from Drury Lane? — 1 received 840/. from Covent Garden in one year. 2316. For how many pieces? — For three pieces. One was the Steward, a comedy ; another piece was Ivanhoe j the third was a single act piece, the Cozening. -^ 2317. How many nights were they performed ?• -The Cozening, I believe, ran a great ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 131 a great many nights, and Ivanhoe a great many nights j the Steward about twenty s. Beazky, Esq. nights. ■ 2318. What proportion of the receipts do you suppose that you got ? — It is im- 27 June 183a. possible for me to tell ; I have always made my arrangement with the manager upon the old plan of 33^. 6s. 8d. for the first nine nights, and then 100/. the twentieth night. 23 1 9. Is that the general plan ? — That is the general plan, I believe, which brings it to 100/. the third night. 2320. You have stated that the processions and the adjuncts add very import- antly to the effect of historical pieces ; but may there not at the same time be a con- siderable diminution in the excellence of the acting or in the power of conveying that excellence to the audience? — ■! have never felt it so myself; and I think Mr. Shiel would say that he would not have liked his play of the Apostate to have been acted upon a less theatre than Covent Garden theatre. 232 1. Do you consider that the size of the new theatre you are building is equal to any purpose? — I do ; I should have built the theatre larger if we had greater funds, and a large space to have covered. 2322. How many persons will it hold? — I should think from about 1,500 to 1,700 persons. 2323. How many does Covent Garden hold? — About 2,500 people; we gene- rally reckon by money. I should think that Covent Garden and Drury Lane would hold about 600/., and that would hold about 400/. 2324. Of course you have avoided the faulty construction of the boxes? — -Yes ; there are only three seats ; and I did the same in Drury Lane in the dress boxes. 2325. Do you recollect what was the expense of the alteration of Drury Lane theatre, when you re-constructed the interior? — Between 17,000/. and 18,000/. 2326. If it was an object to reduce either of the large theatres still further with- out altering the stage, what sort of expense would that involve ? — In Covent Gar- den it would require a great deal more than Drury Lane theatre. At Covent Garden theatre, 1 think, it would cost about 15,000/. without touching the stage, but I am afraid it could not be done without touching the stage ; I think it should be put at 20,000/. 2327. What would a second reduction of Drury Lane cost? — I should think about 10,000/., but much of that depends upon the scale of the reduction; the great difficulty will be, that in reducing the circle you alter all the levels, so that you will have to adopt all the lobbies to the new levels. 2328. Is there a saloon or not in the theatre you are building? — Yes, there is a very handsome saloon. 2329. If you consider the plan of the English Opera-house is so much the best, how is it possible that the Italian Opera-house, which is on a very different plan, should be so eminently excellent?— I do not think the outline of the Italian Opera-house is so very different, it is merely a modification of that form; it is no doubt a very elongated horse-shoe, but then the stage is within nearly 30 feet of the audience. 2330. Then, in fact, those who sit in the centre are not much further from the stage than they are in other theatres ? — No ; it has been elongated twice, and it is that which gives it its present form. 2331. Although there are certain principles and rules which are favourable to the conveyance of sound, does it not after all very much depend upon accident ? — I am decidedly of that opinion ; there are certain principles that you must not violate with regard to space and with regard to materials, but in general the doc- trines of acoustics are perfectly inapplicable, and if you attempt to build a new theatre upon those principles the object may be defeated at last. It was the case with the theatre at Lisbon, which was considered the best theatre in Europe, and after a short time they found that the sound was lost, and it was discovered that it was in consequence of certain passages having been stopped up, and when they re-opened them the sound returned. 2332. Had those openings been made at first for the purpose of the sound? — No, they were mere accidents. 2333. Is your time and labour increased in the construction of a great theatre in an equal degree to the increase in the remuneration which you obtain as com- pared with contracting for a smaller theatre ? — That is a question that it is rather difficult to answer. The mere labour of making the drawings larger and making a larger design would not perhaps be equal to the larger remuneration ; but taking ;.. .t)79. K 2 the 132 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE S.Beadei/, Fscj. the additional responsibility of all the bearings, I think the extra remuneration is : very well earned by a person that builds a large theatre ; but as to the labour of 27 June 1832. j.jjg actual architect, I should say there was not a great deal of difference, but there is a great deal of difference in his anxiety and his responsibility. If you had to put a roof, as I had at the Biraiingham theatre, of 84 feet span, without any sup- port at all, you would feel a great deal more anxiety than you would about one of 64 feet, as I put to the last British Opera-house. Mr. William Charles Macready, called in ; and Examined. {^fr. 2334. HAVE you any share in any theatre ? — No. W.C.Macready. ^335- You are at present engagetl for Drury Lane? — I am. 2336. Has there not been a very considerable time in which you have not beett engaged at either of the two large theatres ? — Not for two years ; I was absent from London. 2337. Was it your own option that you were not eng^ed at that time? — One year it was, when I went to America, the rest of the time it was not at my own option. 2338. Do you consider that if there had not been several minor theatres open at that time performing the legitimate drama, you would have had it in your option to be engaged at that time V — I dare say I should, and I think it is probable that I should even without, but that particular circumstances shut one of the theatres against me ; it was a personal question. 2339. Have you acted at one of the small theatres ? — Yes. 2340. Do you conceive that you were able to act sufficiently well there ? — I feel it to be much easier to act in a small theatre than in a large one, and I should say that for merely domestic scenes and for simple dialogue, where there is nothing of pomp or circumstance attending it, I should prefer a small theatre ; but for Shaks- peare's plays, I should think very few of them can be found which can have due effect given to them in a small theatre. 2341. Should you consider that the Haymarket would be large enough to allow a fair acting of Shakspeare's plays? — I speak from having seen Kean act in the Hay- market. In scenes where only two persons have been upon the stage, I have lost myself to the size of the theatre, but when a great number have occupied the stage, 1 have felt the want of space, and too great proximity of the performers to me. '2342. Supposing the legitimate drama were to be allowed to the small theatres, would it not appear that, if the public generally shared in your opinion, the large theatres could not be much injured, because, as they would perform Shakspeare's plays better than the small theatres could do, they would not be injured by that competition ? — I do not wish to be supposed to say anything against the interests of the small theatres, but that is only one of the ways in which they would injure the large theatres ; they would oflf'er so many markets for talent, that they would take those as nightly auxiliaries that ought to be stationary actors in large theatres, in order to make an efficient regular company, which never could be the case if we had opportunities of going for large sums of money to the small theatres ; it would be better for us, but I think it would be for the loss of the public, inasmuch as there would be a great many plays tolerably done, but it would be almost impossible to congregate an efficient company in any one theatre. 2343. Do not you think that in consequence of there being more theatres open more good actors would be found ? — I am sorry to say that we do not find it so at present ; I do not perceive that it is so in France, nor did I observe it in America. 2344. Did not you perceive that in France there is a great deal of good perform- ance } — They are very good actors indeed in the small theatres, but then they require a very small company. 2345. Do most good plays require a small company? — You are obliged in our theatres to have large companies both for tragedy, comedy and opera. 2346. Would it require very large companies for most comedies ? — For Shak- speare's comedies. 2347. Are not many of our pieces now taken from the French, and could not those be performed with a small company ? — Yes. 2348. Do you consider, therefore, that if the legitimate drama were acted upon a small theatre, it would be injurious to the public, by dividing that force of actors which exists at present in the country r — I think so. If there were not some distinction between ON DRAxMATIC LITERATURE. 133 between the theatres that prevents many actors of the patent theatres from going to Mr. small ones, they would go there. /^. C. Macrcady. 2349. You do not think that it is an evil that would cure itself? — I do not see how it could. ^7 ''"°« '83Q. 2350. Do not you think that if the larger theatres were able by large capital to get better companies, that the public would so encourage those theatres that the others would not be able to flourish? — I think that small theatres would proceed upon the plan of engaging the best actors as auxiliaries ; they would be able to pay them for a fortnight or a month's engagement much more than a large theatre could pay them for the season, which is the way in which they now engage them : I think that actors being paid by the night in London is particularly injurious. 2351. Do not you find that that is the plan at present? — The last two years I think that has not been the case, with one or two exceptions. 2352. Are there not very few great actors that engage to enter into all the busi- ness of the house ? — They ought to do so of course; it must be according to his profession. I do not conceive that a tragedian, for example, has any right to scruple to perform that character, supposing it to be the grade of first, second or third in which he may be engaged. 2353. How many times a week do you perform ? — I am quite at the mercy ot the manager in that respect ; as many as he pleases. 2354. Have you found in the course of your experience that a great number of pieces have been written solely for you ?— Never, but in the case of one or two plays in which I did not act, namely Caswallan, and a play written by Miss Mitford, called Rienzi. 2355. Was it not in consequence of Rienzi being written for you, and your not acting in it, that the play was detained for some time, and afterwards acted in another theatre ? — From mine being a nightly engagement, it expired before the play could be got ready ; in consequence of that, I was anxious then, for Miss Mit- ford's sake, that it should be acted ; and I presented it to Mr. Elliston, who refused it, and it remained unacted till Mr. Price came to the theatre ; and, I believe in consequence of a young lady coming out, it was brought out. 2356. Are you aware that at one time a great number of theatres existed in London when the population was so much smaller ; and are you aware that at that time there was no complaint of a want of audience ? — There is extant a petition of Massinger and Field, in consequence of the ill success of their theatres ; and in Hamlet, we find that Shakspeare himself complains of the public being run away with. 2.357- Did not the public at that time attend those theatres and support those theatres ; and were they not witnesses at that time of some of the greatest plays that were ever produced, and therefore can it be said that the public suffered by the state of things at that time ? — They did not suffer certainly as it regards the com- positions ; in fact, I do not know how to account for the constellation of genius that then arose. 2358. Do not you think it could be accounted for in some measure by the num- ber of houses which existed then ? — No, because I think we have evidence of the poverty of authors at that time : and we may recollect that there is a complaint in one of Shakspeare's choruses of the small sum which they had to represent one of his historical plays ; but I imagine that those men wrote because their genius was irrepressible in them, whether those theatres existed or not. 2359. Would not the public have lost many of tliose plays if those theatres had not existed ? — Those plays of Beaumont and Fletcher that were unsuccessful were not lost, they were published. 2360-1. Do you think there is the same quantity of dramatic talent to be found in the provincial theatres at present as there was 15 or 20 years ago ? — No, I think not. 2362. How do you account for the difference ? — That is a very perplexing question. I think it is so very unrequiting a profession, that no person who had the power of doing anything better would, unless deluded into it, take it up. 2363. If the field was more open, and the performers had the power of repre- senting the legitimate drama at the minor theatres, do you think that it would increase the number of performers ? — I cannot see how. 2364. Supposing the quantity of talent to be greater than the demand, what is to become of the surplus 1 — We can only argue for what will be from what has 679- H 3 been, 134 MINUTES or EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. been, and I never recollect a period when we were overstocked with good per- W. C. Macready. formers. ~ 2365. You yourself prefer acting upon a large stage to acting at one of the 27 June 1 32. minor theatres?— So far as my personal convenience is interested, and as far as my impression goes, I should prefer the theatres being thrown open, but I think it would be a loss to the profession itself. I think it would press hard upon per- formers who could not command what I call auxiliary engagements, for I think they would be ground down in order to pay those performers who had the good fortune to be considered more attractive to be engaged in a temporary way ; I think the public would suffer in consequence of the efficient companies being broken up. 2366. Do you find the public prefer witnessing large performances upon the great theatres, or that they pi-efer witnessing the performances at the Haymarket, for example ? — I can better answer that question by referring to the period when Covent Garden was burnt down, and when the company was particularly strong, consisting of Mrs. Siddons, Mr. Cooke, Mr. Kemble and others ; at that time, when they played in the Opera-house, I believe their success was very great indeed ; they were obliged to leave that and go to the Haymarket ; it was expected that, because they would be seen and heard so much better, the houses would be full to the end of the season, but they fell off directly, and 1 believe they did not make their expenses there. 2367. Do you consider that a solitary instance of that sort is a strong argument either one way or the other? — I think the necessary appurtenances are wanting in a small theatre ; as a spectator, I feel the actors are too close upon me. 2368. Are you speaking of tragedy r — Yes. 2369. With regard to comedy, does not that appear to great advantage upon a moderate-sized theatre ? — Provided the audience are sufficiently far removed, which I do not think they are in the Haymarket. 2370. Do you think that persons in the centre boxes of Covent Garden and Drury Lane witness the School for Scandal with as much satisfaction as at the Haymarket? — I could wish Covent Garden and Drury Lane somewhat reduced, but not very much. 2371. Do not you consider that the state of the laws at present is not quite satisfactory to any party ? — Certainly. 2372. Then as something must be done, do you conceive that that something should be to restrict the present monopoly or to open the present monopoly ? — I think it should be to define the rights of the minor theatres, and not to allow them to perform the legitimate drama. 2373. How would you define the legitimate drama ? — I know no other way than by taking what has been considered as the rule hitherto, by appropriating the five act plays as belonging to the large theatres. 2374. Would you allow the minor theatres to purchase new pieces, either tragedies, or comedies, even if they were in five acts ? — Yes, I think so, because if you retain Shakspeare as the property of the large theatres, the leading actors in general would prefer to be in the theatre where Shakspeare is played, and therefore it would prevent that competition for the actors, which 1 think v\'ould be a great injury to the large theatres, by dispersing their companies. 2375. Then you would not mind their being able to have the new plays, because you think they would not be able to act them ?— I do not think they would be able to act them so well. 2376. Then you do not see any objection to allowing die minor theatres to have the power of purchasing any new plays that may be produced, of whatever kind they may be ? — I think not. I think it is an injustice to authors that they should not have an open market ; but the large theatres would be able to pay authors so much better, that the authors that would be successful at the large theatres would not go to small ones ; but it may happen that an eminent author may have written a piece which is not fitted for a large theatre, and it would be very hard that it should lie upon his hands when he might find a market for it in a small theatre. 2377. How many years have you been at Drury Lane in your present engage- ment ? — My present engagement is of two years' standing. 2378. Can you recollect how many times you have played Shakspeare's charac- ters in those two years? — I think the play of Macbeth has been done six times in the ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 135 the last season, and Richard has been acted, I think, five times, and Hamlet once, Mr. and the Winter's Tale once. W.C.Macready. 2379. Does it appear, then, that Drury Lane theatre avails itself very often of Shakspeare's plays ? — Under the present management it does not. '^1 J""* ^832. 2380. So that the public are deprived, in point of fact, of Shakspeare, unless the proprietor of Drury Lane thinks proper to give it ? — That is the state of things. 238 1 . Do you not conceive, then, that by limiting the performance of Shakspeare to the two great theatres, you leave it to the caprice of the proprietors of those theatres? — Yes ; but they pay for that caprice, and the losses have been very heavy indeed in consequence. 2382. During the time that the lions and those spectacle pieces were represented, had they not large houses ? — I believe they lost money by the lions. 2383. Is not the public opinion rather set against the exhibition of those monsters now ? — I think persons seldom go twice. 2384. Do you think it right that French plays should be exhibited at Covent Garden and Drury Lane ; was that the original intention of those theatres ? — Certainly, it was not the intention ; but I think that our taste is not injured by the production of such performances as Mars'. Speaking for myself, I should be happy to be saved a journey to Paris by seeing them here. I do not see whom it can injure. 2)8.5. Are you of opinion that your line of acting has been properly appreciated at the minor theatres, or would not such talents as those of Mr. Liston in all probability be preferred to yours ? — No doubt they would be greatly preferred in a very small theatre, such as the Olympic ; perhaps in theatres of the size of the English Opera-house, for a continuance, they would wish for a change. 2386. Are the tragedies of Racine the most attractive of the Theatre Francois? — Not now, because Talma is no more. 2387. Generally speaking, have you not understood that Racine did not attract great audiences in the 'Lhdatre Francois ? — I generally understood that the chef (Tceuvres of Talma were attractive. 2388. Then was it Talma or Racine that drew houses ? — Both, I should imagine. 2389. Is it not the fact that the immense population of France, amongst whom the strongest theatrical taste prevails, has not since the death of Talma produced one great actor? — No, I believe not. 2390. To what cause do you attribute it? — Simply to this, that persons who'; -1^ could find any other occupation would not take to one in which they are depending- " " entirely upon the humour of the public. 2391. Is there not a great demand for genius upon the stage in France? — It would be paid amply no doubt in France, much more highly than here. 2392. Is it not the fact that there is no very eminent dramatic writer in France ? There is Jouy and De la Vigne. 2393. Do you not conceive that of late years the diffusion of intelligence and of literature throughout the country has been such as to afford to individuals in their \/^ own homes and in their libraries those resources which were formerly sought for at | the theatres?' — No doubt ; and to that is veiy much to be attributed the decline of the drama. 2394. So that without any reference to minor theatres or to political events, you consider the general diffusion of literature to have been among the causes of the decline of the drama 1 — I do, particularly to the novels and romances which have been . / written, by vvhich a person can procure the same excitement and amusement at his fireside for the small price he pays to a circulating library. 2395. Have not you understood that about 30 years ago a bookseller would, for a successful play, give nearly three times as much money as he would now ? — More than three times ; 100/. was a low price for a play then, but now frequently 10 /. is offered, and sometimes even that is considered a hazard, 239(3. Then, under the present system, authors do not get any great remunera- , tion } — Not by the publication of their plays ; but for the performance of their plays, I have never known the case of an author who has not been rewarded to the amount that has been mentioned of 33 /. G s. 8 d. a night. The case of Mr. Serle I have not heard of before. If his case had been mentioned to me before, I should have recommended him not to allow it to be acted for that price, which I consider was not equal to its deserts. 2397. You consider that what Mr. Beazley has stated is the average remunera- (379. H 4 tion ? — 136 MINUTES OF'EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. tion ? — I never understood any other; I think aii author is unjust to his brethren W. C. Mncready. ^]jq takes iggs. I always understood 50 /. every three nights for a farce, and 100 /. for a play. 37 June it?3a. 2398. So that the booksellers give less encouragement than they formerly did 1 — They scarcely give any now. 2399. ^^^ '^^^ y^" consider that as a proof, that amongst the reading public the passion for the drama has greatly decreased ? — Very much indeed. 2400. Do not you think that it arises from the impression that the new plays that are produced are not very good ? — Those that have been very successful on the stage have sold very well ; but a bookseller will not speculate upon a play so readily as he will upon a novel. 2401. You have performed in the country a great number of tragedies which have been first produced in London, and you receive for those performances in the country a part of the profits resulting from those performances } — Yes. 2402. But the author received nothing ? — Nothing. 2403. Do you conceive it would be a benefit to dramatic literature that such an arrangement should be made as would insure to the author any portion of the profits of his play from the performances in the country ? — Most undoubtedly, I do ; I think it would be only justice to him and a benefit to dramatic literature ; at the same time, it should be done very carefully, inasmuch as sometimes the receipts of the provincial theatres may be very small ; you may prevent the play from being acted altogether ; and therefore, if it had a reference to the second or third night upon which it was performed, it would be hard, because a play which succeeded in London might fail in the country. 2404. Would you think it right to prevent a manager in the country from acting any play in the country without the author's sanction, and to leave the autlior to make his own agreement with the country manager ?■ — Undoubtedly ; and that was the law excepting in the case of publication. Macklin, for a considerable time, held the pieces he wrote in his own power, and threatened to prosecute country managers that performed his plays ; I believe It is the author's property till it is published ; but 1 think it is very hard that the author should not derive benefit from the acting of it even after it is published. 2405. You would think it right to give the author a species of copyright in the acting of his play ? — Yes. 2406. Could not a country manager evade it by altering a few passages ? — That was done in the School for Scandal. 2407. Might not he do it by altering the title ? — That would not answer, because it would not attract unless he gave the same title. 2408. Do you recollect that Lord Kenyon decided in the case of O'Keefe, that acting was publishing 1 — I have a vague recollection of it. Mr. David Edward Morris, called in ; and Examined. 2409. ARE you the proprietor of the Haymarket theatre? — I am principal proprietor of it, I have seven-eighths of it. 2410. Do you consider your theatre one of the patent theatres ? — It was origin- ally a patent theatre ; a patent was given by George the Third to Samuel Foote, for life ; that patent expired with Mr. Foote. 24 n . Do you consider that you have any peculiar privileges or rights attached to your theatre ? — I consider the Haymarket has the power of playing the whole range of the drama. 241 2. What other theatres do you suppose enjoy that right with you ?— Only Covent Garden and Drury Lane. 241 3. Do you consider that other theatres are infringing upon your rights r— Yes, the Strand Theatre, the Queen's Theatre, the Surrey Theatre and the Coburg Theatre, and I believe others in the city. 2414. Have you any complaint to make against the Lord Chamberlain ? — I think the Lord Chamberlain has exceeded his power in granting foreign licences. The arrangement with Covent Garden and Drury Lane, and I believe with the Hay- market, was, that only the Italian licences should be permitted to play on Tuesdays and Saturdays ; the Opera-house then being open twice a week ; whereas now it has been open every night ; French plays on the Monday, and Italian operas on the Tuesday, German 0]»eras on the WednesUay, and so on, which I conceive is greatly prtijudicial ON DKAMATIC LITERATURE. 137 prejudicial to the interests of the Haymarket, and most severely felt in its Mr. D. E. Mnrru. receipts. ' 2415. Have you laid any complaint before the Lord Chamberlain ? — I have sent ^^ •'"°® ^^S^- a representation to the Duke, but I have not received any answer. 2416. Does not Mr. Kean perform at your theatre ? — He has been engaged for 12 nights, 10 of which he has played. 2417. Do the public appear as well satisfied with his representation of Richard, or any other character on your stage, as at the great theatres? — Quite as well satisfied. 2418. Does he ever complain himself that he does not perform as efficiently as at the large theatres? — Never ; I think I have heard him say that the size of it is more congenial to his wish. 2419. How many persons does the theatre hold? — About 1,600 or 1,700. 2420. What sum of money does it take ? - 320 /. when it is full. 242 1 . What salary do you give Mr. Kean ? — 30/. a night ; I had given him 50/. the year before last. 2422. Did you engage him last year? — \ es. 2423. At the same salary ? — Last year he got 3;^ /. 6 s. 8 rf. a night. 2424. Then it appears that Mr. Kean varies his terms? — He has varied them for the last three years ; at first they were 50/., afterwards they were '^^l. o s. 8 d., and the present year 30/. 2425. The Committee understand from Mr. Kean that his terms were always the same ? — I believe that he has taken less at other theatres. 2426. Do you complain at all of other minor theatres for acting the drama ? — I feel the effect of the regular drama being played at those minor theatres most severely, in the fall of the receipts. 2427. As you have the law upon your side of the question, why do not you appeal to the law for the purpose of putting them down ? — It has been in contemplation to do so, but the process is so expensive and so tedious before you get redress, that we are deterred from doing it. 2428. Then is the expense of the process of law as great as the loss you suffer from the theatres ? — It is only very recently that we have felt it so severely, since the Strand theatre in particular, and the Queen's theatre, which have been very recently established. 2429. Would you, then, like to see the law altered? — I should. 2430. Do you consider that you would suffer more if the performance of the legi- timate drama in minor theatres was lawful instead of illegal? — I should suffer still more by it. 2431. Do you suppose that the drama would then be better performed at the minor theatres, and that it would therefore draw more persons from your theatre ? —Yes. 2432. Do you consider that you would be entitled to any compensation, supposing the minor theatres were suffered to perform the legitimate drama ? — I think that if the theatres were to be increased, and regular dramas were to be played at all of them, it would so much injure the Haymarket, that unless a proper compensation was made, it would ruin the establishment. 2433. In what manner could compensation be made to you ? — I see no other way than by government. 2434. Supposing you were to put up your theatre to lottery, would that satisfy the proprietors ? — It depends upon what scheme. Very recently, a gentleman of the name of Jerrold sent a play to the Haymarket, which I did not think it eligible to accept ; it was taken away afterwards, I understood to the Strand theatre. A regular comedy is advertised to be represented at the Strand theatre, I think it is called the Golden Calf, that was the name of the play that was sent to me ; I understand that that play is to be played as a regular comedy, by regular perfinmers ; and in addition to the Strand company, Mr. Abbott is, I understand, engaged, and Mr. Keeley and Mrs. Keeley, to play this piece at the Strand theatre, which has not even a justice's license. 2435. Is it not a fortunate thing for Mr. Jerrold to be able to take this play to the Strand theatre, and to have it performed there? — If he chooses to incur the penalty that he may be liable to : whether it may be fortunate for him eventually may depend upon circumstances. 2436. Was not it fortunate for Mr. Sheridan Knowles to know that he could 079. s take 138 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. D. E. Morris. ^^^^ ^^ Hunchback from the Drury Lane theatre to another ? — Yes ; but that ' was a regular patent theatre. 27 June 1832. 2437. Supposing it had also been rejected at Covent Garden, would not it have been desirable for the public and for Mr. Knowles to have been able to take that play to another theatre ? — It would have been a pity that such a play as that should be lost. 2438. Did your negotiation with Mr. Jerrold go off on account of terms? — No ; terms were never in question. 2439. ^^^ y^^ thought the piece would not attract?^ No. 2440. Then why should it attract anywhere else ? — As a regular comedy, people would go to it sooner than a melo-drama. 2441. What minor theatre do you consider most prejudicial to your interests at this moment, as acting the legitimate drama? — It is impossible to say which affects the receipts most, they all of them play the legitimate drama. 2442. Are not the audiences at your theatre composed of a different set of persons, and people who reside at a different part of the town, from the audiences that attend the Coburg theatre ? — I cannot exactly answer that question ; our theatre is well situated ; but there are persons of good condition visiting those minor theatres. 2443. Is the audience as respectable at the Coburg theatre as it is at yours? — Sometimes it may be, and at other times perhaps not. 2444. You say you did not proceed against the minor theatres on account of the expense ? — It is on account of the difficulty in obtaining the object : I have myself once proceeded by information. Before Mr. Laporte had a licence for the French plays, they were played at the Tottenham theatre, and the company was very strong, and the effect upon the Haymarket was so great, that I was advised to lay an information, upon which the magistrates convicted them. It had the effect for a time of stopping them ; but when we went for the penalty the person fled to Paris, and I was thrown with all the losses of the law expenses upon me. 2445. Cannot you, at a very trifling expense, go to one of the magistrates and obtain redress there ?— I never appealed to any magistrate, except in the instance I have mentioned. 2446. You say that your patent has expired ; have you now any patent ? —I have no patent ; I am acting under a royal licence. 2447. Is that from year to year ? — It is. 2448. Does it specify what you may act? — It specifies that I may act all such dramas and entertainments as have been acted at the Haymarket theatre, where always the regular drama has been acted. 2449. May you act melo-dramas and pantomimes? — Every species of dramatic entertainment : the licence specifies all such dramas as have been permitted to be acted at the Haymarket before. 2450. What do you understand to be the regular drama ? — All the plays of Shakspeare, and all other classical authors ; all plays that are licensed by the Lord Chamberlain. 245 1 . Do you call the Maid and the Magpie a regular drama ? — No. 2452. Then you would have no objection to have the minor theatres act the Maid and the Magpie ? — No ; I think that is their proper branch. 2453. What would you say to Victorine r — I do not consider that of the same character as the Maid and the Magpie. 2454. By the regular drama, you mean comedy and tragedy in five acts? -Yes. 2455. Is not the Fatal Curiosity in three acts ? — Yes. 2456. Would you have any objection to that being acted at the Adelphi ? — Yes, I should ; it is not necessary that it should be in five acts to be a regular drama; you may have a regular drama in three acts. There has been some com- ])laint that tragedies have not been acted so frequently at the Haymarket ; but upon looking at the books, I find that the elder Colman was acting George Barnwell and Fatal Curiosity in the dog-days, because he found tragedies at that time more attractive than comedies. 2457. Then the number of the acts is not to be the test of the legitimacy of the drama ? — I think not. 2458. Then what is the proper test? — The character of the piece, where you require scenic effect and music. 2459. Is there a song, for instance, in it ? — That is not enough to establish it a musical piece. -' 24(10. How ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. ,39 2460. How many songs would you require ? — I am not able to answer that ; but Mr. D. & Morris. I believe that Mr. Colman, the licencer, has established what is to constitute bur- letta; it is, I believe, five or six songs. Among managers, we regard Midas as 27 June 1832. a burletta ; we regard the Golden Pippen as a burletta ; we regard Poor Vulcan as a burletta. 246 1 . Would you consider Tom Thumb a legitimate drama ? — Yes ; because it was written by a classical author, and produced at a regular theatre. 2462. How many months in the year does your licence enable you to act ? — The original patent granted to Foote was from the 15th of May to the 15th of Sei)tem- ber ; that arrangement went on to the year 1810, when the Lord Dartmouth, the then Lord Chamberlain, increased the period to five months, making It to the * 15th of October, nstead of the 15th of September ; afterwards, in consequence of Covent Garden and Drury Lane invading the Haymarket season, the Marquis of Hertford gave Mr. Colman and myself a licence to play seven months, and the theatre was in possession of a seven months' licence till the year 1820, when the Crown leases expired, and the theatre was pulled down. I then built up the Hay- market theatre upon the faith of that seven months' licence ; being in possession of it jointly with Mr. Colman for seven years. When the theatre was built, the Crown leases were all taken under the faith of this seven months' licence ; and there is a clause in the Crown lease, that it shall bo nothing but a playhouse ; it was a clause put in by the Commissioners of Lands and Woods to keep it as a playhouse, and the licence was seven months. As soon as the theatre was built, I went for the licence, and I played under it. In 1822, the proprietors of Covent Garden and Drury Lane made a representation to the Lord Chamberlain, the Duke of Montrose, that it was prejudicial to their interests. The Duke of Moi^trose then convened all the parties, and he said he should make an arrangement with us which he conceived would be better for the interests of all the parties concerned, and he then restricted me from playing the seven months to playing only four months in the year, giving an imderstanding, which was registered in the Lord Chamberlain's office, that three out of the four should be played without opposition, that the other , two theatres should be closed from the 30th of June to the 1 st of October. This arrangement lasted for two years. I protested against it, because I thought it was prejudicial to the interests of the theatre, having built up the theatre upon the faith of the seven months' licence. I was ordered to attend at the Lord Chamberlain's office ; the proprietors of Covent Garden and Drury Lane appeared, and Mr. Charles Kemble was the spokesman, and he said that the arrangement which had been entered into by the three theatres was prejudicial to their interests in whose favour it was done. The Duke of Montrose seemed surprised at this, as it was done with a view to their accommodation, but he said, if they did not like to abide by it, he had nothing further to say to them. He walked out of the room, and he immediately ordered a letter to be written to me, to say that I might immediately make my arrangements to collect my company, and play the whole of the seven months under the licence that I had built the theatre upon. I went on three years after the licence had been restored to me, till the year 1824, when, to my astonishment, I received an order from the Lord Chamberlain's office, that I was no longer to proceed under that licence, but that 1 must revert to the restricted licence, so that I have had the licence twice restricted, and no reason whatever assigned for it, and since that time I have been acting under the restricted licence. 2463. 1 hen it would appear that Covent Garden is infringing upon your rights ? —Covent Garden theatre is now going to do what they never did before, that is to open in the winter with a French company, and with increased attraction. 2464. Though it has not been their custom, do you dispute their power to do so ? — I think it can scarcely be supposed, when the patents were granted to Covent Garden and Drury Lane, that they were to act French plays. 246.5. If your licence permitted you to remain open the whole year, would you avail yourself of it? — Certainly ; it is the restriction I complain of. I think as I hold a lease of the Crown, and the licence of the Crown, they should be co-existent. 2466. Then suppose the monopoly were done away with, and all the minor theatres were permitted to play legitimate drama, would you consider it a compen- sation for any loss you might sustain, by being permitted to play all the year round ? — 1 think, if they were all allowed to play legitimate drama, it would be injurious to me. 2467. Would you not have all the year instead of seven months? — Part of the three months I have had have been unopposed ; tlie state of the drama has never 67);. s 2 been 140 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr.D. E. Morris, been such as it is at present. I have now an Italian licence, and a French licence, and a German licence, all playing opposite to me. 87 June 1832. 2468. Then you consider yourself very ill-used ?— I do. 246Q. When your patent expired had you any greater *claim to the renewal of that patent, or to a Royal licence, than any other individual in the community ? — • It was done by favour. An arrangement was made before the death of Foote; Foote was ill a year and a half before he died ; he treated with the elder Colman for the sale of his theatre ; Colman agreed to give him 1,500 /. or 1,600/. a year for his interest in it ; and I understood he obtained from His Majesty a( promise, not of the renewal of the patent, but that he should have the same powers under a Royal ' licence. Foote died the first half-year, and Colman got the Haymarket for 800 /. 2470. When a patent has expired, has the individual any claim more than any other individual for the renewal of that patent? — Unless he has a promise of renewal of the patent in another form, which 1 understood the elder Colman had from His Majesty. Instead of the patent, he gave him his Royal licence to continue all the powers of the patent, but that the form of it should not be a patent, but by a Royal licence, and from that time to the present it has been continued by an annual licence. 2471. Which it is in the power of the Crown to refuse you? — Yes; but there has been no disposition in the Crown to do that. 2472. Do you think you have any better claim than any other person to that pri- vilege ? — I do ; because I have embarked large sums of money upon the faith of that licence, and I think my claim to remuneration is as good as Coyent Garden or Drury Lane. 2473. Is not your case like that of a man whose lease is expired, and who con- siders himself entitled to a renewal from the landlord upon the ground of the money he has expended ? — It has been done precisely upon that ground ; the Crown lands have been continued to me, because I have been the previous holder. * 2474. Would you consider such a tenant to be greatly wronged if the landlord told him he would not renew, and that he had laid out the money upon his own hazard ? — Certainly I should. 2475 Have you ever had reason to complain of the two great theatres infringing upon your rights ? — It was in consequence of that that the Lord Chamberlain extended the licence. 2476. But since that period have you had cause to complain ? — At the time I mention they came up to the Lord Chamberlain, and got that arrangement made, to my great loss and inconvenience. 2477. Was not your licence granted in a certain degree subservient to the interests of the two great theatres ? — At the period the patent was granted, Covent Garden and Drury Lane chose to close at a very early period, and that, I conceive, was the reason of His Majesty granting a patent for the Haymarket in the summer ; those two theatres closed, one of them on the 1 9th of May and the other on the 21st, and then the King granted the patent to Foote for a summer theatre. 2478. Then yours is, in point of fact, a summer theatre ? — Yes. 2479. ^^ "^*' y^^ know that Mr. Jones, the patentee of the Dublin theatre, did 'not succeed in getting a renewal ? — I have heard of it. 2480. Did not the Crown give the patent to Mr. Harris? — Yes. 2481. Do you yourself decide whether a play, shall be acted or not ? — Yes. 2482. Do you consider the intrinsic merit of the play or the adaptation of the play to the state of your company at the time? — To the state of the company. 2483. Then do not you think it would be a hardship if there should be a work k j of considerable genius as a drama rejected upon the ground, not of its own intrinsic 4: imperfections, but of its want of aptitude to the company that happened to be playing at your theatre ? — ^It must be considered a hardship by the author. 2484. If you had written a play which was admitted to have merit, would not you think it a great hardship to have it rejected, because there was no company fit to act it in a particular theatre, and if that play could not be performed elsewhere ? — It would appear so. 2485. Do not you think that some means ought to be taken to prevent the recun-ence of such hardships to authors ; should not the interest of the authors be considered as well as the interests of the manager ? — Certainly. 2486. Is your theatre in debt to any amount ? — It is not ; there is a rentcharge upon it of 1,037 /. a year. 2487. How ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 141 2487. How much is the annual average expenditure of the theatre ? — £. 10,000. Mr. D. E. Morris. or 11,000/. a year. 2488. What amount does it bring you in a year? — It is impossible to say that. ^"^ ^""^ ^^S^- 2489. Should you say that in the last two or three years it has been pi-osperous, or the contrary? — It has been declining. 2490. To what cause do you attribute it ? — A grekt deal to the French company established in the summer, and the increased attractions at the Italian Opera- house. 2491. Do not you consider that the alterations of the hours of the fashionable world have a great deal to do with it ? — I think that has something to do with it. 2492. Do you ever complain of an empty house at the Haymarket? — The Hay- market, small as it is, has never been half filled with persons that pay, and latterly not above one-third. 2493. Then, if your house is not in general half filled, and latterly has been but one-third full, it is presumed that you cannot have anything much to admire in the present system? — No; I look with great dread and apprehension to the state of things at present. 2494. How do you pay authors in general for a piece ? — Sometimes a certain sum ; there are no such fixed rules at the Haymarket as there have been in other places. I make it a rule while I am in treaty for a piece, to ascertain what sum is expected for it, to prevent any misunderstandings after the thing is produced, and 1 have acted upon that system ; and whenever a piece has been particularly attrac- tive I have frequently given a considerable sum more than I had agreed for. 2495. You complained of one of the small theatres having got possession of the Golden Calf; have you any intention of acting the Hunchback ? — I have had some idea of doing so. 2496. Do you consider that that would be any sort of infringement upon the property of the theatre where it is now performed ? — No ; I do not consider it an infringement upon anybody's right ; it is generally considered that after a play is printed it is public property. 2497. But that it is in no case the property of the minor theatres ? — Certainly not. 2498. Since you are not satisfied with the present state of things, what course do you conceive ought to be pursued ? — That is too weighty a question for me to throw out any hints upon. 2499. Have you any suggestions to throw out ? — I have not. 2500. Supposing it were to be decided that the minor theatres should be allowed to perform the regular drama, do you think you should then be entitled to some compensation ? — I think that if any property is to be injured, the persons ought to be indemnified that have embarked such large sums. 2501. Although you hold only a yearly instrument which might at any time be recalled? — There has been no instance of a licence granted in this way being recalled. 2502. If you had a greater number of months allowed you, do you think you could adapt your hours to the hours of the fashionable world, so as to act a five-act play or two farces in the course of the night? — I think it would not answer, because we have two galleries and a pit ; and I think that although people might be induced to come at the late hours, it would be more injurious, in consequence of the loss -that would be sustained in the galleries. 2503. Do not you think, that by doing away with the galleries, and making more private boxes, and availing yourself of all those advantages that would suit the company that would come at the late hours, you might rather be a gainer ? — I think it would be a dangerous experiment to do away with the galleries in the Haymarket, and without that we could not begin later ; they already complain of late hours. ^79- S3 142 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Veneris, 29* die Junii, 1832. THOMAS SLINGSBY DUNCOMBE, ESQ., in the Chaik. Mr. Thomas Morton, called in ; and Examined. Mr. T. Morton. 2504. ARE you attached to any of the theatres in any way, by any engagement ? ■ — I am engaged as reader to Drury Lane theatre. ag June 183P. 2505. You are an author as well ? — I am. 2506. As respects the law of the drama generally, do you think it is as perfect as it can be at present, as respects authors and dramatic literature, and the drama in general ? — I think it is susceptible of improvement, particularly with respect to that of which I may be supposed to be rather a better judge, as to the rights of authors. 2507. How would you propose to improve it? — I have not considered it suffi- ciently to venture an opinion. 2508. Of what do you complain? — Of the theatres acting plays without the authority of the authors of those plays. 2509. That is after publication ? — -Both before and after ; there is no respect paid, I believe, now, to either manuscript or printed copies. 2510. There is a power of obtaining an injunction against the representation of a play that is not printed ? — I really am very ignorant of the law upon the subject. 2511. Do you propose, after you have parted with a play that you have written, to a theatre, that you should still retain a power over it ?— I think so. 2512. To the author? — To the author, unless the author disposes of his copy- right to a management, or any other person ; to an author or his assigns. 2513. Do you think it would be sufficient if the same powers were given to dra- matic authors, as were given to writers of books by the Statute of Anne ? — I think not ; because the profit to the author is the representation. 2514. But what remedy would you give an author, suppo.sing a theatre acts a piece of his without his consent? — I really have not considered this subject suffi- ciently ; but I think if an Act was passed to prevent any theatre from acting my play without my consent, that would be sufficient security. 2515. You must have some remedy ? — That I beg leave to decline entering into. 2516. Did you ever happen to see a Bill brought into Parliament on this subject, two sessions ago ? — No. 2517. Do you think authors would receive a higher price by competition, if they had that power over the theatres? — Undoubtedly, 2518. You think you would?— Yes, certainly. 2519. Do you think Mr. Sheridan Knowles would have received more for his Hunchback, suppose it had not become public property as soon as it was repre- sented ? — Undoubtedly ; it is so popular that it would be acted I suppose in every theatre in the kingdom. 2.520. Do you think the managers of Drury Lane theatre would have paid him the same sum under those restrictions ? — I think it would have made no difference quoad his remuneration at the theatres royal. 2521. Because no other theatre has a right to act it till it is published? — I really do not know exactly j I believe the law is exceedingly loose upon that subject. 2522. But you, as an author, ought to know whether any of your plays can be acted till they are published? — Indeed, 1 do not know ; I never attempted to pro- secute any one for acting them. 2523. Do you consider the country managers would be able to aflfbrd any remu- neration to the author for a play that had been acted in London ? — I should think they would ; they ought ; and I should think they would. 2524. Even in their present state of depression ? — That I cannot tell. 2525. What description of theatre do you prefer writing for, the large stages or the minor ; I mean for your own reputation ? — I prefer certainly, for remuneration, the large theatres. 2526. But ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 143 2526. But do you think those pieces which you have written are exhibited and M"". T. Morton. do you as much credit on a large stage, or do they do you more credit on a large stage tlian on a small stage ? — Perhaps Drury Lane and Covent Garden are rather ^^J ^"'•'^ ' ^■^''• too large for comedy, I think. 2527. Your writings are chiefly comedies, I believe? — Yes. 2528. And you think that the smaller stage is the best adapted for the legitimate comedy? — I think the large theatres are rather too large, particularly Covent Garden. 2,529. For both seeing and hearing ? — For hearing, particularly. Yes, for seeing and hearing, I may say. 2530. But do you not think that tragedies appear to greater advantage on a large stage ? — Yes, I do. 2531. Shakspeare's plays, for instance? — Particularly. 2532. Does not the question, whether a play goes off better at a larger or a smaller theatre, depend very much on the power or force of the actors ? — Cer- tainly. 2533. A large theatre, I suppose, is rather too much for the power of a feeble actor ? — Certainly. 2,534. But no doubt you have known many actors, Kemble and Mrs. Siddons, for instance, appear to more advantage in a large theatre than in a small one ? — I think so, in acting those heroic plays. 2535. How are copies of manuscript plays obtained without any connivance with the authors? — I believe, by the copyist. 2536. By feeing the copyist ?- — By feeing the copyist. 2537. They can be obtained by the audience; some one of the audience taking them down ? — Certainly, very easily ; there was a case, I think, where Mr. Colman, senior, brought an action against some one for acting one of O'Keefe's pieces at Richmond, the Son-in-Law, I believe. It came to a hearing, and I think Lord Kenyon, but I dare not speak positively to it, I think Lord Kenyon held that a per- formance was publication. 2538. That was an unprinted play, of which the proprietors of the Haymarket had bought the copyright entirely? — Yes, of O'Keefe, and it was said that it would be necessary for Mr. Colman to prove special damage before a jury ; as well as my memory serves me, however, Mr. Colman failed in obtaining what he con- sidered justice. 2539. According to your experience, what is the average remuneration obtained for a successful tragedy or comedy ?^In my experience it has varied exceedingly ; it is now much less than it was formerly, when the theatres were better attended, when they had not so many rivals to contend against. 2540. Do you attribute this deterioration in the value of dramatic productions to the number of theatres ? — Greatly, certainly ; I consider that there is but a cer- tain sum of money that is devoted in this town to public amusements, and if there are 20 houses open to receive it, none can be very full. 2541. Do you not attribute the want of remuneration that is complained of by dramatic authors to a deterioration of the audience in point of numbers ? — Yes ; they cannot afford from the receipts to give the remuneration they formerly did. 2542. Do the profits obtained by dramatic authors at all bear any proportion to the profits obtained by the writers of successful novels, or any other species of writing? — Indeed, I do not know that; but certainly one of the causes of the,^ deterioration of the drama, I should attribute to the fine talents of the country being employed in periodical literature and in novel writing. 2543. Is it not from a want of suflScient inducement to cultivate the drama? — It may be so ; I cannot tell ; perhaps it is the easier mode, and certainly a safer mode of obtaining literary fame. 2544. Do you not think a dramatic author, in consideration of the ordeal he has to go through, ought to be paid more than a man who publishes a book? — I find it a difficult thing to write a book ; and Voltaire, I think, said, he found nothing in literature difficult but the writing of plays. 254.5. When you first began to write plays, was it the practice to remunerate authors by the third night? — By the third, sixth, ninth and twentieth nights ; that was the case with the first play I ventured on the stage. 2546. For what reason was that mode of remunerating authors given up? — It was given up because afterwards successful authors obtained more than that remuneration j they obtained a greater remuneration than that. 670. s 4 2547. They 144 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. T. Morton. 2547. They obtained more by making tbeir own bargains? — The usual thing — for them was to have the receipts of these nights after the expenses, so that they 29 June 1832, stood the risk or had the benefit ; formerly, it was put up on the third night, " For the benefit of the Author." 2548. But then the expenses of the house were first paid ? — They deducted the expenses of the house ; when I wrote the first play, the expenses were a hundred guineas, and then I had the receipts after the payment of that hundred guineas. 2549. Did it not often happen that, from causes totally independent of the merits of the play, a very stormy night, or an illumination, or something of that sort, for instance, the receipts of the house were very small ? — Oh, yes, I have often Watched the clouds ; very often. 25.50. So that also was a reason for authors being dissatisfied with that mode of payment ? — Certainly. 255 1 . I believe the arrangement that was made, when that was given up, was made by Mr. Cumberland, was it not ? — I do not recollect ; my bargains with Covent Garden theatre were very different. My object was to share in their prosperity, or to take my share in their adversity, as well as I could ; my bargains were made on that principle. 2552. When you gave up that mode of remuneration, what was the bargain that you made? — The bargains were, when I ceased to take nights, I had equivalents for those nights ; when I ceased to take the results of the third, sixth and ninth nights, I had, as an equivalent for those nights, a certain sum given. 25.53. For each night ? — For each of those nights. 2554. For the third, sixth, ninth and twentieth nights, supposing the play to be acted so long ? — Yes, I have had remuneration for the fortieth night. 2555. Is there not some old arrangement considered to exist where no particular bargain is made between the authors and managers ? — I believe there is now ; I think it was established first at Drury Lane ; I think so ; I believe, under the committee, that there should be 33/. 6s. 8d. given each night; that would be 300/. for nine nights. 2556. For a first piece ? — Yes. 2557. And 100/. more on the twentieth night? — I do not know; I never wrote at that time for Drury Lane. 2558. Do you consider that that arrangement only existed at Drury Lane and not at Covent Garden ? — I do not know ; I had never a play brought out in which that arrangement was attended to. 2559. With regard to an afterpiece, what was the remuneration for that ? — I really do not know ; I have had 200/. for the farces I have written. When the Children in the Wood was produced, I had the receipts of the six nights, amounting to that sum, but then Mr. Colman gave me 50/. for the copyright ; and ailso when I produced a farce last summer, or two years ago, at Mr. Morris's theatre, I had 150/. for it, I mean Separation and Reparation, and reserving, what happened to be of no value, the copyright, to himself; but with regard to A Roland for an Oliver, and the Invincibles, I have had 200 1, for them. 2560. How often was it acted? — They have been acted many times. 2561. More than the twentieth night? — A great many more. 2562. So that 400/. was generally the remuneration to an author for a successful first piece under 20 nights ? — That was it, if there be a general rule. 2563. At what theatre was that ? — At Covent Garden. 2564. Have you ever written for any minor theatre ? — Never. 2565. What was the general price you got for a play for publication ; for a suc- cessful comedy?— The lowest price I got was, I think, 100/. or 90/., and the highest 300/. 2566. From the publisher ?— No, I had it from the theatre ; Mr. Harris, senior, thought it to his interest to buy the copyright from the author, and then to hold it back and not publish it for a given time, thinking, probably, that the reading would prevent people from coming to see it. 2567. Then Mr. Harris got it from the publisher ?— He bought of the author, and then he sold it to the publisher, Longman's, giving them an allowance for the delay ; he thought it to his interest to keep it back. For instance. Speed the Plough was not published till more than a year after it was performed. 2568. Was that represented at any other theatre ; was it pirated in any way ? — Oh, yes, in the country. 2j69. You ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 145 2,569. You think that ought to be restricted ? — -I think so. iVfr. T. Morton. 2570. Do you consider that if a play was pirated and acted in the country, it wouhl be worth the author's while to bring an action against the manager ? — It *9 J"n« 183a. would not. 2571. Do you consider it possible to give any summary remedy before a jus- tice of the peace, to enable an author to recover ? — Upon my word, I had rather not say anything about that. 2572. Did you ever happen to sell a piece out and out before it was represented at all ? — Oh, yes, frequently ; at least in more than one instance. 2573- What was the general sum for that? — That entirely depended on the situation of the theatre ; if the prospects cif the theatre were very brilliant a larger sum was given ; but if they were in a state of depression, a reasonable allowance was made for that. 2574. That depended also on the merits of the piece ?- That the manager judged of, I suppose. 2575. You have seen some of your successful comedies that have been acted at Covent Garden or at Drury Lane, acted at the Haymarket, have you not? — I have a particular feeling about that ; I do not like to see my own plays acted. ' 2576. Do you mean to say you never see them ? — I mean to say I never do. 2577. But suppose you were obliged to go and see them, on what stage should you prefer seeing them acted by the same company, Drury Lane or Covent Garden, or the Haymarket ; I mean with regard to the size of the stage? — I think that Covent Garden, particularly, is too large, as I said before ; I think it is larger than Drury Lane ; at least you are farther removed from the front of the stage, which is a disadvantage ; but 1 think the Haymarket theatre perhaps is rather too small. I think in a theatre a size beyond that of the Haymarket theatre you would hear and see perfectly well, and not have the disadvantages which you have in a small theati'e. I think you are too near in the Haymarket theatre. 2578. Your compositions, of course, have been submitted to the licenser, Mr. Larpent ? — Yes. 2579. Has the power or duty of examiner of plays, in your opinion, been exer- cised capriciously at all ? — Not at all. 25S0. Never ? — There have been slight objections made to expressions, but they were of no value. 2581. Do you think those objections were valid or frivolous? — Mr. Colman always explained to me, " I have taken out this ; I have taken an oath that I will do so." 2582. The licenser takes an oath, does he ? — Yes, I believe he does, for the due administration of his office of licenser ; and the Act, I believe, compels him ; or at all events he takes a general oath to fulfil his office. 2583. And were those corrections which he made followed by the performers? — Yes, I think so. 2584. Do you recollect any of the phrases that were erased ? — Any oath, or any very strong political allusion. 2585. Can you recollect any that were erased from your plays? — No, I cannot. I remember Mr. Larpent objecting to the word gammon being put into a play of mine. 2586. On what ground ? — He said there was a gentleman in Hampshire who had been very much hurt by a play of O'Keefe's ; I think it is in Wild Oats ; " What is your name?" — " Gammon." "Then you are the Hampshire hog.'? This rather hurt his feelings ; and if it offended an individual's feelings, there was of course no harm in removing the word. 2587. Mr. Gammon happened to be acquainted with Mr. Larpent? — I suppose he represented it was disagreeable to him. I never had a very important altera- tion made. 2588. Do you think generally the censorship of the licenser is any obstacle to the well-being of the stage? — I think it is highly essential to the well-being of the stage thai such an officer should be appointed. 2589. I think you said you considered the competition of the minor theatres had been injurious to the profits of the patent theatres ? — I think so. 2590. Do you not suppose that is only one out of many causes, for instance, the alteration in our hours ? — Oh, yes, certainly. 2591. And the attendance on the Court ?— Certainly. 679. T , 2.592. And 146 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. T. Morton. 2592. And the strong religious feeling must also be considered ? — Yes, certainly; no doubt about it. 9 June 1832. 2^g3 And when you say only a certain sum of money is expended in amuse- ments, should you not be of opinion that that sum of money would increase with the population of the capital ? — ^Yes, with the population of the capital doubtless. I do not mean to say a specific sum is devoted ; I mean an annual specific sum ac- cording to the happiness of the country, and its peace and comfort, and its attention to dramatic literature. 2594. But as the population is considerably increased, probably that sum is con- siderably larger than it was some years ago ? — I should think it would increase in ratio to the population. 2595. Have you anything else to suggest or to say to the Committee ?— Not a word. Mr. Thomas Potter Cooke, called in ; and Examined. Mr. T. P. Cooke. 2596. ARE you the proprietor of any theatre ? — No. 2597. You are a performer at the Coburg? — I have been recently at the Coburg theatre, for the last fortnight. 2598. You have played at most of the theatres? — Most of the London theatres. 2599. What sized stage do you prefer for your powers of acting? — I should prefer a medium sized stage certainly, not too small ; I think it depends entirely on what you are acting, as to the size of the theatre. 2G00. You have played at the Adelphi, I think ? — I have, a great deal. 2601. You found that theatre too small ? — For serious acting, I should say, it was too small, for effect in spectacle and melo- dramatic acting ; but certainly not for recitative. 2602. Is the Coburg as large as Drury Lane or Covent Garden ? — It is a very large stage, but as to the actual dimensions, I cannot say ; but it approaches very nearly to Drury Lane and Covent Garden as to the width of the proscenium. • 2603. You are aware of the law as respects the drama at present, that these minor theatres are not allowed legitimately or legally to play the legitimate drama ? -^Certainly. 2604. What would be the effect upon those great theatres, or upon the drama^ if all the minor theatres were legally allowed to play the drama ? — Why, I could scarcely venture an opinion what would be the effect on the larger theatres j but I should think it would be most desirable that the smaller houses should be gua- ranteed in what they are now doing, that is to say, in melo-dramatic acting. 2605. But supposing the minor theatres had a licence to act what they may think fit, do you think they would act the regular drama, such as tragedies and comedies, in preference to the melo-dramatic performances which they are now acting? — Certainly, I should think not as matter of private speculation. 2606. How many of those persons do you think, who attend the Coburg theatre, would go to the large theatres ; suppose the large theatres were open, do you sup- pose many of the persons who form the audience of the Coburg theatre would attend the great theatres ? — I think it very possible that many of the audience of the gal- lery might be thrown on the gallery of the other theatres ; but with respect to the Coburg audience, I think it is almost restricted to that theatre. . 2607. Filled by those who live in the neighbourhood ? — Yes ; speaking as I feel of the character of the audience of the Coburg, which is within so short a distance of the Surrey ; in the Coburg, you find the character of the audience essentially different. 2608. Then you are of opinion that the theatres on that side of the water do not materially injure the receipts of the great theatres? — I should certainly think not ; I should think they are in a great measure supported by the surrounding neigh- bourhood. ; 2609. Are the boxes also filled by the neighbourhood, or only the gallery ? — We have generally found the receipts in the boxes very slight indeed, compared with the pit and gallery. 26 1 o. What does the Coburg theatre hold ? — I should imagine, at the time that Mr. Glossop had it, nearly 250/. 261 1 . You think the theatre would hold that if it was quite full ? — Yes, probably approaching to 300 /. ; I cannot speak as to figures, but I think I have had 250 /. at a benefit there, or nearly so. 2612. In ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE- 147 ■ 2612. In acting at the large and small theatres, do you find much difference Mr. T. P. Coo^e. in the necessity of exercising your voice? — No, I can speak practically as to that ; I was playing a little while ago at the Pavilion theatre, at Whitechapel, and on the 29 June 1832. same evening I played at Covent Garden. 2613. And did Covent Garden require more voice? — No; I was quite asto- nished ; 1 found I was almost speaking too loud at Covent Garden theatre. 2614. What size is the Pavilion theatre ? — It is approaching very closely to the size of the Haymarket theatre. That may be from the peculiar structure of Covent Garden theatre. 2615. Did you ever find any difficulty or want of liberality on the part of the great theatres in giving engagements to yourself? — I have no reason to complain, but on the contrary ; I have received a larger salary at Covent Garden than 1 ever received in my life ; I received 60 /. a week there. 2616. Suppose you were not engaged at a minor theatre, you would not be excluded from the great theatres ? — That is quite a matter of question ; my talent might not be in requisition. It is quite a question with me whether they would engage me for a permanency, my talent not being of that description which can be made generally available. 2617. Then you of course not being engaged by them, would feel it a great hardship not to have the field open to you with regard to minor theatres ? — Most unquestionably I should. a6i8. What do you think would be the effect of a greater number of theatres upon the profession of an actor ; do you think it would be beneficial to his profits, and to the respectability of the profession generally ? — Judging from the present moment, I never knew a time when so many tlieatres were open in London as at pre- sent ; and I never knew a period in which the profession perhaps was at so low an ebb. I mean to say, when so many professional persons were out of employ. 2619. How do you account for that? — I think it may be accounted for in some measure by the number of theatres that have opened recently ; for example, there are two theatres now at Paddington, and they will get a feature, what is termed a starring feature, and all the other subordinate parts are filled up by persons who never put their foot on a stage before, and persons who have a great desire for the stage, shopmen and others, that they get almost for nothing ; the consequence is, that in progress of time these persons evince some degree of talent to fill up the subordinate walks, and so place others out of employment. 2G20. You suppose multiplying the number of theatres would greatly tend to lower the salaries and profits of actors ? — I think it would tend to degrade the dig- nity of the drama, if I may so express it. I think it exceedingly desirable that the number of those theatres which have been established, perhaps should be established by law. 2621. I suppose you consider the profession to stand as well before the public in point of respectability as it ever did, at this moment ?— Yes, I have no question about it, at least in my recollection. 2622. What size are those Paddington theatres? — I never visited them; but I think they are exceedingly small ; I saw the exterior of one of them, it seems to be built of weather boards, a trumpery building ; it is up a gateway. 2623. Those are theatres which are not very likely then to interfere with eminent performers like yourself; you would not condescend to play in them if they were to offer you ? — I have been offered an engagement, and have declined. 2624. And therefore they have some difficulty in getting stars, I suppose? — I suppose they have. 2625. Then I cannot see how they can interfere much with other theatres? — No ; they can do very little injury to the larger theatres, decidedly not ; for I think there is a neighbourhood round there, that in time a theatre would almost be want- ing there; in Paddington and the western part of the metropolis there is an immense neighbourhood. 2626. Do you know anything of the Finsbury district ? — Very little ; I have played at the City Theatre. 2627. What sort of an audience have they there? As to number? — I have played there once or twice. I have only played on benefit nights, therefore it is scarcely fair to calculate from that. 2628. Have you played there to respectable audiences ? — It is impossible on the stage to judge j they seemed exceedingly kind and well-disposed, a gallery kind of audience. . ...„;, .t,^^ ^.^- \_. . . . 679. T 2 2629. Then 148 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. T. P. Cooke. 2629. Then there is a plentiful supply of young actors always ready to come forward ?■ — -From that school ; but I should think the school is a very bad one. ag June 1832. 2630. From what source generally have the actors in the large theatres been supplied ; from the minor theatres in the metropolis, or from country theatres, or where from ? — Latterly many of the actors have been supplied from minor theatres, certainly a great many have been ; I could enumerate some ; Mr. Keeley, Mrs. Fitz- william, who has been at Drury Lane, and Mr. Power is another instance. 2631. Has it not generally been the case that the best provincial theatres have been considered as the best schools for actors? — Yes, in the early part of my pro- fessional life, because the minor theatres in London were so restricted, that you could not open your mouth in them, except in recitative. 2632. But the most eminent performers have come from provincial theatres ; Mr. Kean, for instance ? — Yes, he was from a provincial theatre. 2633. Is it not more probable, considering the provincial theatres have the power of acting the legitimate drama, and do act it, that that should be a better school than a minor theatre with their present performances? — Some of the leading provincial theatres are considered so ; but from their having adopted lately the most attractive pieces, the melo-dramatic pieces of London, the school there is broken up in a great measure for what is deemed the legitimate drama, tragedy and comedy. 2634. Then the result is, that the legitimate drama, consisting of tragedy and comedy, is not so attractive as melo-dramas and spectacles ? — I believe not, 1 have been told so. 2635. I believe formerly strolling was considered a good beginning?— Yes ; you can scarcely name any actor who has not been a strolling player. 2636. Perhaps you may not know that strolling companies are pretty nearly abolished all over the kingdom ? — There are very few, I believe, who do not obtain regular licences for acting in their respective towns. 2637. Those that were licensed by the magistrates for 40 days? — I believe that is only abolished ; indeed, those that have regular licences have not been very successful lately. 2638. Under what authority do those travelling theatres at fairs, Richardson's and others, perform ; what licence have they ? — 1 hat I am not acquainted with ; they have merely the licence that is given to all the booths of the fair, for the three days, I believe. 2639. They come generally under the regulations of the fair? — Under the regu- lations of the fair. 2640. Do you not think that the minor theatres in London would be a better school than the provincial theatres ; that the test of the metropolis would be much better for rating, if you consider it rating, to be engaged at patent theatres ? — Actors prefer, generally speaking, coming through the provinces, because a minor theatre is not so good a stepping-stone as being perfectly unknown to the metropolis before you arrive. I question whether Mr. Kean would have made so great a sen- sation in London if he had gradually risen in a minor theatre. 2641. I believe Mrs. Siddons first acted in a strolling company? — Yes. 2642. Miss Farren? — Yes. 2643. And Miss Mellon also? — So I have heard. 2644. The York theatre has been a great nursery?— A very great one, and the Bath theatre recently, and the Dublin theatre ; Miss O'Neil and Mr. Conway. 2645. And Liverpool ? — And Liverpool. 2646. Have you witnessed the performance of Mr. Kean on both stages ? — I have. 2647. On which stage do you think he appears to the greatest advantage, the stage of a patent theatre or of a minor ? — If I speak from my own feelings, I like him best on a large stage. I judge of him from acting by him, close to him. 2648. Is the Haymarket large enough for him ? — I have been recently told that his powers are somewhat diminished in voice. 2649. From what you have seen of him, you think him quite as effective on a large stage ? — I should think the style of serious acting required to be looked at at a distance rather than close, for I think when you look at it close there is a species of exaggeration about it. 2650. Do you think the Adelphi theatre too small for such melo-dramatic pieces as Luke the Labourer ?— That is a domestic piece. We have played exceedingly easy pieces, such as the Pilot ; indeed, they have aimed more at expense and show, but I should not say it is calculated for it. 2631. Do ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. H^ 2651. Do you not think that the Pilot would have appeared to greater advantage Mr. T. P. Cooke. if it had appeared at Drury Lane or Covent Garden ? — It was afterwards at Covent Garden, and I can scarcely judge the effect of it ; we can judge the effect of it at 29 June 1832. the Adelphi ; the run was prodigiously great. 2652. It rather failed at Covent Garden? — No, it did not fail, it was turned into an afterpiece. 2653. Where do you think Black Eyed Susan had most effect ? — I think at the Surrey theatre, which I think is admirable as to its size. 2654. How much smaller is the Surrey than Covent Garden ? — I can scarcely say what the span of the stage is ; I should say about one-third smaller. 2655. Can you tell what is the average price paid at these small theatres for a melo-dramatic piece ? — I can scarcely tell } they have been paid, I have heard, so variably ; sometimes pieces have been purchased, at another time the author has been under a regular salary for the theatre, and written what pieces were wanted. 2656. So that you can state no average ? — No. 2657. Have you no general suggestions that you wish to make to the Com- mittee ? — Nothing ; only, mixed up as I have been in the early part of my pro- fession, and attached to the minor theatres, I am, as every one else is, most anxious that they should be guaranteed the right of acting melo-dramatic entertainments ; at all events, my general feeling is, that it would be better if a certain number of theatres were licensed for that description of entertainment. 2658. You would have them classed ? — That is my feeling. > 2659. And you do not think it would be to the advantage of the drama to throw everything open, and to let every theatre act what they choose? — Judging from what I see at present, there is no restriction ; but if any of the minor proprie- tors felt it would be more advantageous to them to play the regular drama, they would do it. 2660. Would it be advantageous to the drama, do you think, to let everybody act as they pleased ? — No, I think not ; and it would be most destructive to any property that was embarked in it. 2661. You are aware, I suppose, that any one night that you have been playing at the Coburg, you are liable to a penalty of 50 /. ? — I have always felt that. 2662. It never has been enforced against you? — It never has been enforced against me. 2663. You feel that you are liable to it? — J. have always felt it. 2664. Then you consider it would be no great advantage to minor theatres to allow them to act Shakspeare ? — I cannot say; but judging from what I feel at present, I think not ; I know we have frequently acted them, but have not found them the most productive species of performance ; they have not been so productive by any means as melo-dramatic pieces. 2665. You said you would rather have a licence for the whole ; I suppose you mean you would like to have as large a licence as you could ? — Yes, I should like to have as large a licence as I could. 2666. But you have not found that description of performance so productive as melo-dramatic pieces ? — Certainly not ; the regular tragedy and comedy has not been nearly so productive as melo-dramatic entertainments. 2667. If there is novelty ?— Yes. Mr. David Edward Morris, called in ; and further Examined. 2668. I THINK you said you had it in contemplation to play the Hunchback? Mr D £ Morrit —Yes. ■— 1 • 2669. Do you consider it would be any violation of good faith between your theatre and Covent Garden? — I should conceive that I have a perfect right to play it, the play having been published. 2670. You think, then, you have a right to play it on account of the publication ? — Yes, that after the publication it becomes common property to those theatres who have a right to play the regular drama. 2671. Was not there a general sort of understanding between those patent theatres, that one of them should not act a play which had been brought out at the other of those theatres for a season or two ? — I am not aware of it. 2672. You obtained an injunction against C'ovent Garden once to restrain them from playing X. Y. Z., which was brought out at your theatre ? — Yes, an in- junction was obtained by me against the Covent Garden proprietors for playing that 679. T 3 piece, 150 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mt.D. E. Morris, piece, because it was written by Mr. Colman, and paid for by the Hayraarket proprietors, and an injunction was prayed for it on the night they announced to 29 June 1832. play it. 2673. Had it not been published ? — No, it never was represented ; it was sold ; the money was received ; it was sold to the Haymarket theatre, and money was paid on account of it. 2674. But it never had been represented ? — No ; the real fact was, that Mr. Colman had received certain sums on account of this play, of the Haymarket proprietors, and he afterwards sold it to the Covent Garden proprietors ; and I pro- ceeded against the Covent Garden proprietors to restrain their acting it, and an in- junction was obtained against them j and it was only suffered to be played on the very night on which the injunction was obtained, on condition that they should be liable to me for the receipts, for any profits that might arise from it. 2675. Did you not make another application once, for another play of Mr. Col- man's, that Covent Garden was anxious to represent, and also obtained another injunction ; was it Paul Pry ? — There never has been any legal proceeding on the subject of Paul Pry, in any case ; it is a very recent production. 2676. It never has been played at Covent Garden? — Not at Covent Garden ; it has at Diury Lane, by permission. 2677. The play is not published r — No, it is a manuscript belonging to the Hay- market theatre ; it was played, I believe, at Drury Lane theatre for half a dozen nights, by permission. 2678. It is played in the Opera? — Yes. 2679. Is that by permission ? — -No ; they have not a right to play it. 2680. I believe it has been the practice of the Haymarket theatre to buy the copyright of plays ? — Several plays ; it has been the practice. 2681. Can you mention some instances? — Particularly O'Keefe's works: the Son-in-law, the Agreeable Surprise, Peeping Tom, the Young Quaker, and several other plays that belonged to the Haymarket theatre. 2682. Those are four of O'Keefe's that are not published with his works ? — Yes. 2683. On an average, how many plays are offered to you for performance in the course of a season? — Perhaps 100 or 150 plays and farces ; one and two and three act pieces. 2684. How many do you in general bring out in the course of a season? — Per- haps five or six only. 2685. You once, I believe, had an action brought against you for losing a play belonging to some author ? — Never ; I never had a play, that I recollect, lost at the Haymarket ; 1 am particularly careful. 2686. Could you suggest any plan by which authors could be better remunerated for their productions, without injury to the theatres ? — I cannot ; I think that authors are better remunerated now than they formerly were ; they are a great deal better remunerated now than they were 20 or 30 years ago ; they are more sure of the profit ; they go on safer grounds. ' 2687. But are their profits larger ? — Certainly, as far as my experience would give me to understand. I have referred to the old books of the Haymarket theatre, which are in my possession, since the days of Foote down to the present time, and I find that the sums given to some of the most successful authors of those days, O'Keefe, for instance, and others, are by far less, perhaps one-third less, than the sums given to an author now. 2688. What was the sum given for those four pieces that were bought out and out, and not published ? — The farce of the Son-in-Law, written by O'Keefe, the sum paid for that was 40 guineas ; it was produced in 1779, and the sum paid was 40 guineas ; it is a manuscript, now belonging to the Haymarket theatre. 2689. I believe that piece had a very great run ? — Immense at the time. 2690. And was nothing paid further than that ? — Nothing was paid further than that. Another piece, a play called the Summer Amusement, written by Mr. Andrews ; this was a regular full play ; and in the year 1 780 he received 64 /. 10 s. for it. 2691. I believe that play was not acted many nights? — Yes, it was acted for several seasons ; the sura paid for that was 64/. \os. Then in 1781, the following year, another successful farce of Mr. O'Keefe's was played, called Dead Alive, in which Edwin, the celebrated Mr. Edwin, was particularly eminent ; and the sum for ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 151 for that was 40 guineas : then in the following year comes the still more celebrated Mr. D. E. Morris. and successful piece, called the Agreeable Surprise, which is still a Haymarket manuscript ; the sum paid for that was 40 guineas ; so that here are three farces of 29 June 1832. O'Keefe's, which were all most successful, and they all appear to be remunerated at the same rate. 2692. Those sums were paid by agreement, not according to the receipts of the house ? — I cannot tell precisely ; but these were the sums absolutely paid for them. I conceive at the period these sums were paid the authors had no certainty of receiving anything at all, but they went upon their chance of the profit on the sixth night of representation. At this period (I am now speaking of the farce), the remuneration to an author, or rather his chance of remuneration, was whether there was a profit on the sixth night ; for that night was called the author's night of the farce. 2693. Not the third night ? — No, it was on the sixth night ; he had no profit till it had been played six nights ; if it run six nights, then he received whatever sum there was, after deducting the expenses of the house ; the receipts of the house at that period were 60 /. At that time, the highest salary given to the most eminent performer was 10/. or 12I. a week. I remember John Kemble when he came out, at a much later period than I am now instancing, when he came out in Octavian, in Colman's play of the Mountaineers, his salary was 12/. a week, and no more. 2694. What were the prices then ? — The prices were the same as they are at present ; we have never varied them since the days of Foote. 2695. Was the theatre much smaller than it is now? — The difference was somewhere about 40/. j the old theatre held 280/., and we have had 320/. in this. 2696. Has not Mr. Colman received a large sum for some of his plays ; has he not received 1,000/.? — I believe something very near that for the Africans ; but the Covent Garden people have set the example of giving Mr. Colman an unpre- cedented sum, which he never received before, which was 1,000/. for John Bull ; but then it must be added, that no play ever succeeded to the extent that John Bull did ; I understood that they cleared 16,000/. the season Mr. Colman brought out John Bull. 2697. Was that 1,000/. paid in consequence of an agreement made before it or not ? — It was in consequence of the success, I believe ; in consequence of the great success. 2698. Do you know how many nights it was played ? — I do not : I made no memorandum. 2699. Had Mr. O'Keefe any permanent engagement for the Haymarket theatre ? — None whatever ; I have some memorandums of other pieces, if you wish me to state them. 2700. If you please. — No\v we come to a regular comedy written by O'Keefe, the Young Quaker, which is a five-act regular comedy, a full play, and he received for that 102/. 12*. Then I conceive that for this regular play he must have stood on the then understanding, that for a five-act comedy he should have the profits of three nights, the third, the sixth, and the ninth. I see by the sum running up to an odd sum, 100/. and a fraction, that must have been the amount of his profits for three nights ; and the understanding at that time was, that he was to have the suiplus of the profits for three nights, after deducting the expenses of the house. 2701. Have you any other memorandums? — Then came another piece of O'Keefe's, Peeping Tom, for which I see 50/. was paid ; then here is another piece by the same author, in which Edwin was very successful, a piece called the Beggar on Horseback, he only received 30 guineas for that ; it was not so successful as the rest, and he only received 30 guineas for it. 2702. When was that? — That was in 1785. Then here is the Children in the Wood ; I believe that came out in 1 794, and the sum standing in the Haymarket books that he received was 6 1 /, 8*. 2703. Have the kindness to state what you paid to Mr. Poole for Paul Pry? — These contracts are generally matters of honour between the managers au4 authors, and they may not feel disposed to have them published exactly. 2704. The author giving you his consent, you will have no objection to mention k? — Certainly not. 679. T 4 2705. Any 152 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr- D. E. Morns. 2705. Any questions that have been put to Covent Garden or to Drury Lane have been answered, I must say, most explicitly by them, without the slightest, ag June 1832. reserve, both with regard to authors and their receipts, and therefore we are only asking you the same questions as we put to them, but you decline informing the Committee ? — I think it was 400/. 2706. Was that by a nightly payment or by agreement? — The real fact is, I purchased the copyright ; I purchased the piece out and out, taking my chance of it ; it was a hit-or-miss piece. 2707. Was 400 /. paid for it at once, or was it paid in consequence of the success of it? — It was paid in different sums, fifties and hundreds; but the actual sum that, I bought the piece for, taking it on myself whether it succeeded or not, taking it as you would buy a lottery ticket, whether it turns out a blank or a prize, I gave him ] 50 /., which was the sura he asked ; the remaining sums were paid by me on account of its great success, as the Covent Garden people paid Mr. Colman on account of the success of his John Bull ; but the property of it was in the Haymarket theatre for that sum, if I had pleased to go no further. 2708. Sweethearts and Wives? — I think a similar sum was paid for that. 2709. And those authors were highly satisfied? — I have every reason to suppose they are ; and I believe that is as much as Covent Garden has given to Mr. Knowles for his Hunchback. 2710. Upon the whole, do you conceive an increased remuneration which is now given to authors is sufficient for the labour and talent they exert, and the severe ordeal they have to go through, compared with the general rise of prices since the time of O'Keefe ? — Indeed, at the Haymarket we have not been able to establish so regular a scale of remuneration as they appear to have done at Covent Garden and l)rury Lane. In the first place, the season is very restricted ; in the next place, the house holds only half as much ; and we do not, speaking generally, though I have given two instances where we have given as much in cases of great success as at the winter theatres, but generally speaking, I do not think the Haymarket has been able to give so much as Covent Garden or Drury Lane ; but still it is my rule, before I produce a piece, to come to an understanding with an author as to what remuneration he expects, and the thing is settled before the piece comes out. 2711. Are you aware of the prices paid for works to be published, novels and and such things? — I have had very little experience in those matters. 2712. You cannot tell whether you think the remuneration paid to dramatic authors is sufficient to invite ample talent to engage in it when there is a field of publication otherwise open to them ? — I am not competent to say ; I do not know the sums that are given. ,.2713. Do you suppose if the managers of all country theatres were obliged to agree with an author before they were allowed to represent a play of his which had been acted in one of the London theatres, his profits would be materially increased? — No; I should think the scanty and uncertain audiences of provincial theatres would enable them to pay scarcely anything ; if anything, it would be a very incon- siderable sum, and when it was offered, it would be hardly worth a gentleman's consideration. I should conceive also they would have the greatest difficulty in getting the money from a provincial manager, and from the uncertainty and thin- ness of their audiences, they could not afford it. At all events, they could not afford to give any considerable sura ; it must be the sraallest sura, and obtained with the greatest difficulty. . 2714. Do you consider any material profit would be obtained from other Loudon theatres, if they were obliged to pay an author for the representation of a successful piece ; suppose a piece were brought out at your theatre, and Drury Lane or Covent Garden, before they acted it, were obliged to treat with the author, Jo you conceive any material profit would accrue to the author from that circumstance ? — I should think not. 2715. It would not be their wish to do it perhaps ? — I think not. 2716. In the case of a successful piece, it would not be worth a provincial manager's while to pay lo /. or 20/. for the liberty of acting it? — Perhaps in some of the principal provincial theatres, such as Bath, Norwich, Liverpool, Edinburgh and Dublin, or other theatres that have a patent, I should think it would. 2717. If you were about to produce the Hunchback, would" it not be worth your while to pay a sum of money for it?— I do not know that it would, having been so frequently acted, and so recently acted. I have not at all ra. u 2 156 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. Douglas Jerrold, called in ; and Examined. Mr.D. Jerrold. 2769. I BELIEVE you are an author? — Yes. 2770. What plays have you written ? — The last play was the Rent-day, at Drury 29 June 1832 Lane. 2771. That was a very successful piece? — It was successful ; it ran upwards of 40 nights. 2772. Did not it come out at the Adelphi first ? — No ; it was first presented to the Adelphi, but I withdrew it from that theatre, because I would not submit to the alterations that were suggested by Mr. Yates. 2773. Where did you present it after that ? — To Drury Lane. 2774. It was accepted there ? — Yes. 2775. How could you withdraw it from the Adelphi ; had they not paid you for it ? — No, certainly not. I could very well withdraw it, for it was not acted. 2776. Was not something similar to it represented at the Adelphi under another name? — No; there was a piece which had some of the features of it. It was pirated, and played at Sadler's Wells. 2777. What other theatres have you written for? — I wrote Black Eyed Susan, and several other pieces, for the Surrey. 2778. Have you not submitted a piece lately to Mr. Morris for representation at the Haymarket ? — I have. 2779. Which he has refused ? — Yes. 2780. Was that in consequence of the terms you required ? — No, it was not ; he said he did not think it would suit his company. 2781. Have you given it to any other theatre ? — The Strand theatre. 2782. Who is the proprietor of that theatre ; who is the ostensible person ? — I do not know who is the ostensible person ; it is taken in the name of Mrs. Way- lett. I believe Mr. Lee is the acting manager. 2783. Has it been acted yet ? — No, it is played to-morrow night. 2784. That theatre is acting in defiance of the law at present ? — I believe it is playing at bo-peep with the law ; I believe it is quibbling with the law. 2785. Is it not under prosecution.^ — I am not aware of that. 2786. Have you any suggestions to offer to the Committee with reference to the copyrights of authors. Do you think any improvements could be made in the law as respects authors ? — I think certainly there ought to be some penalty inflicted upon any manager who represents any drama without the author's consent. 2787. How would you have that penalty to be recovered ? — I am not sufficiently versed in forms of law to state that, but 1 should imagine before a magistrate. 2788. Would not it be a difficult question to put to a magistrate, whether the pieces were the same, as in the case of translations, where two authors have translated the same French drama, how could a magistrate be enabled to decide upon the identity ? — I do not think you would have so many translations then. 2789. Why do you think not so many ? — Because it would be worth the while of men of original talent to devote their energies to the theatres. 2790. Do you think you should obtain much remuneration from the provincial theatres, or from the other theatres in the metropolis, in that case ? — I think in the aggregate, I might obtain a great deal by receiving a small sum from each theatre. I will instance Black Eyed Susan, which was played 400 nights in the course of the first year after its production. 2791. In different theatres ? — Yes, 150 nights at the Surrey, I think; perhaps 1 00 nights at Sadler's Wells, 1 00 nights at the Pavillion, 30 nights at Covent Garden theatre, and at other houses, as the West London and the Olympic, a few nights. For that piece I received altogether as much as Mr. T. P. Cooke has informed the Committee he received for six nights' acting at Covent Garden theatre. 2792. Sixty pounds ? — Yes. 2793. That was from the first theatre? — Yes. 2794. Do you suppose if the other theatres had had to remunerate you, they would have acted it? — Certainly. It would have amounted to a great sum to me if it had been paid even on the humble terms of 5*. a night throughout the country. 2795. Was it published ? — It was. 2796. Then the Surrey theatre has lost all control over it? — Yes, but I could have had no control over it, if it had not been published. © 2797. Did ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 157 2797. Did you receive anything from the publisher? — I received 10/. for the Mr.D.JerrvU. copyright, which, with 50/. I received from the theatre, make the 60/. I only received 60/. altogether. If it had not been published I should not have received 99 June 1832. more money, as in the instance of the Rent-day. That piece was played in the country a fortnight after it was produced at Drury-Lane, and I have a letter in my pocket in which the manager said he would very willingly have given me 5 /. for a copy of the piece, had he not before paid 2 /. for it to some stranger. 2798. Some stranger? — Yes, I have no doubt where he got it from. There is an agency office where they are obtained. 2799. What agency office? — Mr. Kenneth, at the comer of Bow-street, will supply any gentleman with any manuscript on the lowest terms. 2800. How does he procure them ; is it by a short-hand writer in the theatre ? — He steals them somehow ; he has no right to them. 2801. This is previous to publication? — Previous to publication. 2802. It must be done by a short-hand writer 1 — I do not know how it is done. I offered to sell correct copies of the Rent-day for 5 /., because an author receives a double injury : in the first place, they are not paid for their pieces, and in the next place, they are represented by the skeletons of their dramas ; so that, as it was emphatically said by a sufferer, the author was not only robbed but murdered. 2803. You could have procured an injunction? — If I had gone into Chancery. 2804. You consulted no lawyer? — No; I understood generally that was the only means of obtaining redress. 2805. Do you consider the remuneration to dramatic authors is not sufficient to attract first-rate talent to that branch of composition ? — Certainly not, when periodi- cal writing and novels are so highly paid for. A gentleman will get 1,000/. for a novel, and Mr. Sheridan Knowles only got 400/. for the Hunchback. 2806. Did you apply to Covent Garden for additional remuneration for Black Eyed Susan ? — I did ; and I received a letter from Mr. Bartley, the manager, in which he expressed something more than surprise at the request, and said the representation of that piece at Covent Garden theatre had done me a great deal of good. I have not yet discovered that. 2807. In point of reputation, he meant? — The reputation I acquired did not give me sufficient influence to get a piece brought out the next season at Covent Garden. 2808. But certainly the reputation of being the author of a piece which had been played so many nights would do you good ? — Not at Covent Garden. It was played 30 nights there, and Mr. Cooke left Covent Garden to play at the Surrey. , 2809. On what stage did it appear to the most advantage ? — On the Surrey, certainly ; in fact, it was infinitely better played at the Surrey than Covent-garden. 2810. What did you receive for the Rent-day at Drury Lane ? — £. 1.50. 281 1. How many nights has it been acted ? — I am not certain, for I was out of town towards the close ; I believe either 43 or 44. 2812. Did you receive the 150/. at the close? — On the twenty-fifth night. 2813. Have you considered at all what legislative provision could be made which would benefit authors in that respect ? — I think a very heavy penalty upon any manager who should represent a piece without the author's consent. 2814. That penalty to be obtained by summary proceedings before a magistrate? —Yes. 2815. Would it not be difficult to prove the identity of a piece, in consequence of alterations ? — Of course it must be considered according to the spirit, and not to the letter of the piece. ' 2816. Would it not puzzle some country magistrates to decide whether it was from a plagiary or not? — Some country magistrates might; but I think in large towns it could be done very well. I do not think the author could be enabled to get any money for the copy of the piece if it was acted at the greatest room in the town, by people who may be there one night and gone another ; but in circuits, like the Liverpool, Norwich and York cii'cuits, he would ; also at the Dublin theatre, and in Scotland. 2817. Are not all those provincial theatres, Manchester and York, depressed at present ? — I believe they are, from political excitement and the general depi'ession of the times ; I believe they are worse in the manufacturing districts. 2818. Do you mean that depression has only originated since the late political excitement ? — I think since the peace every thing has been depressed to some extent. 679. u 3 2819. Do 158 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. D. Jerrold. 2819. Do you think it has arisen from any religious scruples or dislike to thea- trical performances ? — Yes ; I think sectarianism has done much towards it. sg June 1834. 2820. Are Strolling players quite extinct now? — No, they are not. 2821. Are there as many of them as there used to be ? — I do not think there are so many as when Mr. Munden played in a barn. 2822. Do you think strolling pays them ; do you think they make any money? — I believe they are a very temperate race, and do with a little. 2823. Do you think they are enabled ever to lay by any money ? — No, I do not think they are, they may be ultimately. It is only when they come here they are enabled to lay by. 2824. Not in the country? — No, I think not. 282,5. You would have a new play, or anything that was written, put upon the same footing as a novel or any other composition ? — Precisely. 2826. The author of a novel has only a right of action, which would be worth nothing to you? — That would be something. 2827. You would have it regularly entered at Stationers' Hall? — Yes, that would be something ; because there is no doubt authors would make common cause with one another to preserve their copyrights ; it would be worth their while. 2828. I believe in France the copyright remains in the heirs of the author ? — ■ I believe it does. 2829. Do you think that would be advisable ? — I would have it for a certain time, say 2 8 years, so that if a man wrote plays he should vest his capital in his works, and leave them to his children. 2830. The copyright of any work is only for 28 years? — 'Yes. 2831. You think that would be something? — Yes, I think that would be a great deal ; and by those means you would induce men of original talent to write for the stage ; at present the intellect of the country is almost excluded from the stage. 2832. What is the general price of the copyright of a play for publication? — Since translation, the price has gone down to nothing. I believe Mr. Holcroft got 300 /. or 400/. ; I may be in error, but it was a great sum, 300/. I believe, for the copyright of the Road to Ruin ; and I know Mr. Sheridan Knowles was able to get scarcely anything for the Hunchback. 2833. There surely must be a considerable sale of a successful play in the lobbies of the theatres ? — No, there is not since translation. The public have ceased to look upon plays as part of the literature of the country. 2834. You think that authors have had recourse to translation in consequence of the inadequacy of the remuneration, that it is insufficient for the toil of original composition? — Something of that ; but I think many men have written plays who, if there had been no translations, would never have been heard of at all. 2%^'t. Perhaps in that respect it is an advantage ? — No, I think not. 2836. Are there many English plays translated into French? — We do not give them a chance ; we have very few original plays ; we take all from them. 2837. Are those which are original ever translated ? — Some are. 2838. Is the same price paid by managers for a translation as for an original piece ? —Yes ; and there is the mischief. There is no premium held out for originality. 2839. Do you think the number of authors would increase if the legitimate drama were thrown open to the minor theatres ? — Yes, I do ; I argue as Mr. Morton does : I speak of what would be from what has been. Fifteen or twenty years ago I saw pieces represented and tolerated at the minor theatres which would have disgraced Bartholomew Fair, and now they produce pieces which not only please the people who go to the minor theatres, but are taken to the large houses as a principal means of attraction. 2X40. Was not that always the case? — I do not recollect. 284'.. Was not Midas first produced at the Royalty theaej ? — Mr. Garrick was produced there, and played the legitimate drama. 2842. Do you call Midas the legitimate drama? — No. 2843. How do you describe the legitimate drama? — I describe the legitimate drama to be where the interest of the piece is mental ; where the situation of the piece is rather mental than physical. A melo-drama is apiece with what are called a great many telling situations. I would call that a melo-drama, I would not call a piece like the Hunchback a melo-drama, because the interest of the piece is of a mental order. 2844. A piece rather addressed to the ear than to the eye.'^ — Certainly. 2S45. Is ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 159 2845. Is Tom Thumb a legitimate drama ? — Tom Thumb is a burlesque. Mr. I). Jcrrold. 2846. That goes under the head of the legitimate drama now ? — Yes, and so does the Lions of Mysore. a^ June 1832. 2847. With reference to the size of the theatres, which size do you prefer writing for as an author ; which would tend most to your reputation ? — I prefer a small theatre, the size of the Surrey, or the late English Opera-house. 2848. For every sort of composition ? — Perhaps heroic compositions appear to more advantage at Covent Garden or Drury Lane. 2849. Now, the Rent-day you call a legitimate drama?— I call it a drama. 28.50. Do you think your reputation would have been increased if that had come out first at the Adelphi ? — ^It was certainly better played at Drury Lane than it could have been played at the Adelphi. 2851. Suppose the same Company had played it at the Adelphi? — I think the effect would have been stronger. 2852. Have you any general observations to make with regard to the stage ? — I think that actors and authors ought to have the selfsame privileges which are enjoyed by the professors of any other art, and which at present they have not. If a painter produce a picture, and from intrigue or, misjudgment, or to take a more liberal illustration, if there be not room enough to hang that picture in an exhibi- tion-room, the painter is not compelled to roll his picture up and take it home, but he may exhibit it in Bond-street, or any other part of the metropolis ; but an author or an actor cannot do that, or if they do, they are told they do it in defiance of the law. 2853. The field is not large enough ? — No. 2854. According to law ? — No, I think it is monstrous a manager should say to an author or an actor, you shall not write or speak within 20 miles of London, for that is the sovereignty which is contended for by the pi-oprietors of Covent Garden, so that he must go beyond the 20-mile stone before he can open his mouth. 2855. Do you think there has been any systematic combination by the patent theatres against authors and actors, to curtail their powers ? — Against the minor theatres there has been, I think. I conceive by their own acts they have shown a combination. It was stated, I believe by Mr. Macready, that he thought the drama would be considerably deteriorated if small theatres were allowed, as you could not possibly represent a perfect play. I do not think so. Mr. Cooke has instanced the case of a theatre at Paddington, where he was asked to play ; he would not go, nor do I think any actor of high standing would attempt to dignify the theatre by acting with a body of men quite unacquainted with their art. 1 think they would find their level. There is a theatre of the same sort at Chelsea, and I have no doubt the persons who attend those performances are snatched from the tap-rooms and skittle-grounds. 2S56. You think they are not persons likely to rise in their profession .^ — I think they may be as good as Mr. Munden or Mrs. Jordan, for they played at theatres not of greater dignity than are now open in the suburbs of the town. 2857. Which do you think the best school of acting, the minor theatres or the provincial theatres ? — The provincial theatres, as the law now stands, for the minor theatres are not allowed to play the legitimate drama. 2858. But the minor theatres do at present ? — At present they do, but not much ; the Coburg theatre seldom plays it. 2859. Was Black Eyed Susan licensed? — No j it was sent to the licenser from Covent Garden. 2860. Was any alteration made in it? — Yes, some passages were ordered to be omitted. 2861. Will you state what they were? — The boatswain has to say, in speaking of William, " He plays the fiddle like an angel." He struck that out. 2862. Does the actor leave out that passage always in Covent Garden — I be- lieve not. 2863. You think the actor uses the expression although it is struck out ? — I never saw it but once at Covent Garden, and 1 think he used that expression. 2864. Do you think the Drama ought to be put under the censorship of the Lord Chamberlain? — No ; I think you might as well have a censorship of the press. 286,5. Will you state your objection to the control of an examiner? — 1 think it is apt to be exercised very capriciously. 679. u 4 2866. Do i6o MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE yir. D. JerrM. 2866. Do you know of any instance ? — Yes, one at Drury Lane. I had a piece ■ called the Bride of Ludgate, in which Charles the Second figured as the hero, and 29 June 1832. he was disguised as a priest, come to marry a young couple. Mr. Colman said he thought, in the present situation of the bishops, he ought not to come as a priest, but I must make him a proctor. I sacrificed the worth of something, which was perhaps very worthless, but I was obliged to submit to that alteration, which I thought very capricious and absurd. 2867. Has it been represented in the country ? — Yes. 2868. Is it represented there as a proctor or as a priest? — It is represented, I suppose, as it is printed, which is as it was altered. 2869. How did the piece act? — It played very well ; it was a piece which would have succeeded better at the Haymarket than Drury Lane. 2870. Do you think it would have been more attractive if the character had been a priest? — I do not know that it would have made a great alteration as to the receipts, but it would have done more for me, or I should have been more satisfied with it ; it would have been a more perfect drama ; at present that alteration makes it somewhat loose and disjointed. 2871. Do you not suppose if there was no censorship there might be political allusions introduced into plays, which might create an excitement which it is not desirable to create in dramatic representations ? — I think managers would study their own interests, as they would know they would be proceeded against if they were to overstep any bounds of decorum ; I think their own sense would guide them. 2872. Then the managers would become the censors ? — Certainly, as they are at present, as to the fitness of the piece. 2873. It would be only changing hands ? — They are as it is. 2874. This new piece you have given to the Strand theatre, that will not be submitted to the licenser at all ? — i\o, none of the pieces there are submitted to the licenser, nor at the Coburg, nor at the Surrey, nor Sadler's Wells, nor the Queen's, nor the Pavilion, nor the Garrick theatre, when it was open. 2875. But they are actionable, are they not?— I believe not j they act under magistrates' licences ; they are actionable for speaking at all. 2876. But for performing plays not licensed ? — Certainly not. 2877. The magistrates have nothing to do with that ? — No. 2878. The magistrates' power only extends to authorizing them to act licensed plays ? — -Yes, they are not under the control of the Lord Chamberlain ; they are not licensed by him. 2879. The Lord Chamberlain's licence is as to the theatre, but the licence as to plays is a different thing ? — I am not aware of any penalty they may incur. 2880. Do you think those persons who fill the minor theatres of an evening would go to the great theatres ? — Some of them would, for the minor theatres beget a dramatic taste. 2881. Do you think the minor theatres can do damage to the amount of 40,000 /. annually to the two great theatres? — No, certainly not. 2882. Have you ever made any calculation of what you think would be about the injury ? — No ; but 1 do not think the minor theatres did any injury to Covent Garden while they played the Hunchback. 2883. Then it is the defect in the entertainments of the patent theatres that makes them not so attractive ? — I think it is in a great measure. 2884. Do you think if the legitimate drama were performed at all the theatres, they would all succeed, or the proprietors would have sufficient to remunerate them ? — No doubt there would be many mistakes, but I think they would ultimately clas- sify themselves. 2885. What do you mean by mistakes, acts of bankruptcy? — No, in the way of imprudent speculation ; the same as when the Beer Bill was passed, every shop was a beer-shop, but they did not last above a quarter. 2886. What class of performances do you think would be acted at the minor theatres, if they might act anything they chose ; do you think they would play Shakspeare? — Sometimes ; but I think they would gradually get a very good drama of their own, as they have been getting for some years ; so good, that it is worthy of being transplanted to Drury Lane. 2887. Such things as the Wreck Ashore? — Yes; domestic dramas, I take it, would be pretty well the staple commodity. ^ 2888. Do ON DHAMATIC LITERATURE. 'i6i 2888. Do you think there are too many theatres at present in existence ? — No, Mr. D.Jerrold. I do not. 288y. Not taking them altogether ?— No. 29 June 1832- 2890. Do you not think it would be better if they were more dispersed ; some of these Westminster theatres ? — The theatres have flourished very close to one another; Drury Lane, Covent Garden, the Olympic and the Adelphi, are all close. 2891. The overflowings of one will go to another? — Yes, it is frequently reckoned upon that the overflowings of one go to another. 2892. Have you ever known the overflowings of the English Opera-house go to Drury Lane or Covent Garden?— I have not known that, certainly, but I think it is very likely ; people come out determined to go to the theatre, and if they are disappointed at one place they go to another. 2893. Do you think the patent theatres have any title to compensation in the event of the legitimate drama being played at the minor theatres ? — Why, every improvement in science may be called an injustice upon some vested interest. ^Vhen the railroad was invented, or rather when the York coach was invented, it did an injury to those who had property vested in the York waggon ; I look upon it as exactly the same thing. I think the public would gain by the theatres being thrown open. 2894. Those persons who set up the York waggon did not suppose that they were possessed of any exclusive privileges, which the patent theatres conceive they possess, but the proprietors of the York waggon took the field with all the chances against them ; therefore I do not think your illustration exactly applies ? — I am arguing as to the reason of the question ; but as to what they might conceive, that argument might be held invalid as applied to royal authority. 2895. Do you think those persons who built Drury Lane and Covent Garden theatres would ever have built those great houses, and employed their property in them, unless they conceived they had justly exclusive privileges ? — Perhaps not. 2896. That being the case, do you not think they are entitled to some indemni- fication r — I should be very glad if they could be indemnified ; I am not prepared to say how. 2897. Suppose they were indemnified by being empowered to dispose of the theatre by lottery, do you think the public would be eager to take shares in that lottery ?- -Yes, I think they would ; 1 think there is such a dramatic taste abroad, and such a desire to speculate in shares, that 1 think it is very likely. 2898. You think the shares would be taken ? — I think it is very likely. 2899. Do you think if the legitimate drama could be acted at the minor theatres, it would in some degree tend to fill the large houses by increasing the love of the drama, and the desire in the public to go to the theatres generally? — No, I think not. 2900. You think it would not serve to fill the large houses ? — No. 2901. Do you think it would draw audiences from the large houses ? — Yes. 2902. Then in that way it would prejudice the large houses? — Yes, I think it would. 2903. Do you give that opinion in consequence of the size of the patent theatres? - — Yes, in a great degree ; 1 think it would prejudice the large theatres with their present companies ; it would not if they had, as they have at the other houses, what are termed working companies. At the Adelphi, for instance, you will see the whole of the company in one night ; at Drury Lane or Covent Garden not one- third of the company are acting ; the rest are unemployed. With their present expenses they would suffer injury, but not if they were properly cut down. 2904. Are actors paid whether they play or not ? — Yes, except nightly actors ; there are some few exceptions. 2905. When the agreement is that he shall act on such nights? — I believe engagements have been made that an actor shall have so much a night guaranteed to play so many nights a week. 2906. In that case he is paid whether he acts or not ? —Yes. 2907. Is there any class of actors paid by annual salaries, so much a season ? - I believe not. 2908. What is the engagement ? — By the week. 2909. Then if that is the case, why is it necessary for the large theatres to engage so many more actors than they use ?— I do not think it is necessary. They split upon that very rock. C79. X 2910. That i62 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COiMMITTEE Mr D. Jerrold. 2qio. That they have engaged two-thirds more than they want? — Yes. I think the theatres will not answer till they classify themselves. 39 June 1839. 2gi 1. At the minor theatres they employ the whole of the company they have? —Yes. •2912. Do you think the minor theatres corrupt or improve the morals of the town? — I certainly think improve. 2913. Do you think these minor theatres improve the morals as well as the great theatres ? — Yes, I think that is shown by the march they have made for some years past. They have improved themselves, and must necessarily have improved those who have gone to them. Mr. Edmund Lenthall Swijle, called in ; and Examined. Mr. E. L. Swifte. 2914. ARE you in any way connected with the theatres ?— Not in the least. 2915. But you have turned your mind to the consideration of the subject r — Very much, within the last few months. 2916. Not till within the last few months? — Not until the question came to be agitated, and then I turned my mind very attentively to it. 2917. What directed you to give it your consideration r — The interest I felt, if I may presume to call myself so, as a man of literary habits, and my instinctive sense of justice. 2918. Where do you find injustice in the state of the law as respects the drama? — In the monopoly that it creates; in confining the representation of the regular drama to two theatres in London. 2919. Do you think the public are an.\ious the regular drama should be played at all the minor theatres ? — From all I can see or hear, I think they are anxious for it. 2920. You think there are not a sufficient number of theatres at present legally entitled to play the legitimate drama ?— I think not, with reference to the size of the metropolis, and the buildings which have connected its adjacent villages, and which have created so large a population within the compass of what we now call the metropolis. 2921. But if population is the cause of more theatres being required, ought not those theatres to be filled which now exist where that population has increased ? — Yes, I think any new theatre the law would permit for the representation of the legitimate drama would be filled in those districts where it shall appear by the rea- sonably expressed desire of the respectable inhabitants a theatre is wanted. 2922. What part of the town, in your opinion, most requires an additional theatre ? — I should think an additional theatre is not wanted near the Surrey, or near the Coburg, perhaps not immediately at Sadler's Wells, though it is very little I have seen of them ; but I scarcely look upon the very suiall theatres as places for the performance of the legitimate drama, the very small theatres, such as the Pavi- lion and others. 2923. Are you a dramatic author; have you ever written any plays ? —Yes ; I wrote an opera, which was performed about 1 1 years ago at the English Opera- house. 2924. What was the title of it? — Woman's Will. 2925. For an opera, do you conceive a minor theatre is preferable to a larger stage ?^ — 1 should think for an opera of domestic interest, not requiring any great or extensive decoration, a theatre of moderate size would be better adapted than a very large one. 2926. If you wished to witness the representation of Hamlet, had you not rather go to Covent Garden or Drury Lane than a minor theatre ? — 'If I could get within a reasonable distance of the stage, but not to be placed at the back of the shilling gallery, or in the front of the two shilling gallery. I am tolerably far sighted, but I should hardly calculate upon seeing the play of the countenance, or hearing the voice, to such great advantage ; certainly I could not see the fine play of the coun- tenance at so great a distance. 2927. Do you mean to say you think that sort of play should be represented on a stage of that size ; that is, your observation applies rather to the size of the stage than the size of the theatre ? — I should desire a larger stage, but a moderate auditory. I am no architect, and perhaps speak unskilfully ; but I mean that the audience part of the theatre should be constructed pretty much as it is at the Surrey and the Coburg, where I have great satisfaction when the regular drama is performed, because ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 163 because there is a large stage, and you may see and hear in almost all parts of the Mr. E. L. Swifte. theatre, 2928. Then you think in the Coburg you are not so near as to destroy the 29 June 1832. illusion ? — No ; I never saw Mr. Kean to so much advantage to my own feelings as when I saw him in Othello at the Coburg, and I sat in that part of the pit which they would call in France the parterre. I have seen him several times nt Drury Lane, from the front of the dress circle, but I never saw him with so much satisfaction as when I saw him from that situation in the Coburg. 2929. In the event of the minor theatres being permitted to play the legitimate drama, do you conceive Drury Lane or Covent Garden would be entitled to any compensation ; have you ever studied their patent rights ?— I have considered it with reference to an alteration in the law ; and I should presume to say that the great theatres are not entitled to call for any compensation for an alteration in the law, whatever they may be entitled to call for upon the cancellation or modification of their patents. 2930. If a lottery were proposed, do you conceive the public would subscribe to take shares ? —Yes. 2931. An alteration of the law would modify their patents? — With great sub- mission, I mean to say, that if the statute of George the Second, which passed in the year 1 735, were repealed, it would leave the patents in the same situation as they were before its enactment. 2932. But not in the same situation as they are now? — No, not in the same situation that they are now ; but I conceive the public and all the realm might be altered without in any way afif'ecting the patents as intended to be granted by the Charles's. 2933. Do you not suppose they would be placed in a different situation from that in which they were when persons adventured their money on the faith of those patents? — Certainly; but if the money was ventured on the faith of the patents, and the patent rights are abrogated, no injury can be done ; for if the money was ventured on the faith of a public Act of Parliament, it was ventured on legislation, which everybody knows is subject to constant repeal. 2934. A patent is no more security than an Act of Parliament? — No. 2935. The King may alter it as he pleases ; is one a better security than the other for a creditor to lend money upon? — No; but the Legislature may more regularly deal with its own enactments than the patents of the Sovereign. 2936. But the King may alter a patent ? — Yes. 2937. The fact is, it is a more capricious title than an Act of Parliament ; but had you embarked your fortune in Covent Garden theatre, should not you think it hard that the monopoly should be thrown open? — I think if I had embarked my - money in the large theatres, 1 should feel as I now feel, that the opening of com- petition, under certain regulations, would do no injury to the large theatres, but would rather serve them. 2938. You heard the opinion Mr. Jerrold gave upon that point ? — I did. 2939. You do not think with him, that the minor theatres would injure thera, inasmuch as they would draw audiences from the great houses ? — I cannot imagine that with reference to the immense population of the metropolis, which we may fairly reckon at 2,000,000 ; not the metropolis technically speaking, but the circle 20 miles round it. 2940. Do you think the play-going population is anything like two millions? — • No, I calculate the whole population, and upon that I calculate the play-going population. 2941. Do you consider it as one-fifth? — No, one-tenth. A play-going popula- tion of 200,000 to be dispersed amongst a given number, any one theatre cannot be said to injure any two. 2942. But, in point of fact, is there anything like 200,000 people in London and its vicinity who go to the theatres ? — I think not, because they have not the opportunity to go to the theatre ; they have not the legitimate drama performed in the manner it ought to be ; for if I may be permitted to make an observation, I have observed lately when I have gone to the minor theatres, where certainly the audience is composed of what I should call (if I may say so without offence) the lower part of the middle classes, I have observed that every exhibition of the regular drama, or any exhibition at all approaching to the performance of tiie regu- lar drama, has been more felt and more liked by the audience than any mere spec- tacle or buffoonery has been, and from thence I infer that there is among us 679, X 2 a great i64 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. E. L. Su'ifte. a great regard for the national drama, and that regard would be manifested by a constant attendance upon it, if enabled by its legalization. 39 June 1832 2943. Then what description of piece do you think would be performed at the minor theatres if they had the power of performing anything they chose? — I should think in all the minor theatres of a proper size for it, (and I conceive that should be one of the conditions of the licence for their erection,) that every species of the regular drama would be performed. 2944. Would Shakspeare's plays draw audiences at small theatres ? — Wherever the stage had the capacity of exhibiting pieces that have great decorations incidental to them, such as Julius Caesar, the Tempest, aud others ; I think wherever they could be performed by the capacity of the stage, they would be attended to by the people, at least if not immediately, at no very gi-eat length of time, so as I already see from the tendency of the public towards the regular drama, to lead them perhaps exclusively to it. 2945. Such a play as Hamlet perhaps would not draw? — I cannot conceive why it should not. 2946. If it did, it would be only for the merits of the play, where there was no spectacle ? — I never saw Hamlet performed but it was not felt ; whether performed well or ill, Hamlet has been felt by every person in the house. I have always seen a deep and great feeling attending it in town and country. 2947. Do you mean to say the theatres open at present are filled, or anything like it ? — No, I think they are not ; and it is partly by the insufficiency of the per- formances as to the regular drama, and next by the peculiar circumstances of the times. I can offer the Committee one inference as to the diminution of attendance upon theatres, because I hold the custody of the Crown Jewels at the Tower, which I open to the public, and I have opportunities of hearing facts concerning the other parts of the curiosities of the Tower. I happened, without any reference to this subject, to converse with a friend on the 28th of May last ; and talking of tlie great diminution of visitors to the Tower, I took up my books for the last few years and looked to every 28th of May (when it happened on a Sunday I took the day preceding, the 27th May), and in taking the last 10 years, the first seven of those 1 years averaged 50 persons a day, and the last three years of those 1 o averaged only 1 6 persons a day. 2948. That is the last three years ? — Yes ; and I attribute that to the depression of the times and public agitation, and the greater competition of one thing or another. 1 know, in 1830, there were 6,000 persons visited the Tower less than in the year before, and 1 dare say 10,000 last year would be under the mark. 2949. Do you consider that the power to act the regular drama would assist in a great measure in filling the minor theatres ? — I think' it would elevate the public taste ; and considering that the public admiration of virtue and abhorrence of vice should be strongly excited, I think when the legitimate drama is performed, the stage would be an admirable school for morals for the people ; and when that was regularly per- formed, it would be a much better amusement than passing their evenings in the alehouse or places of that description. 2950. Do you think a play which was properly called the regular drama would be more attractive at the minor theatres than such a piece as Victorine? — No; I conceive Victorine is a species of the regular drama. 2951. Do you conceive the public would have any objection to the theatres remaining open on the Wednesdays and Fridays during Lent ? — I am sure I should not myself ; I hardly think others would : provided Sunday be kept sacred, I can hardly conceive any man would object to the theatres being open on Wednesdays and Fridays. 2952. The Martyrdom of King Charles ; you never felt any objection to the theatres being open that night ? — No, I never heard any one think about it. 2953. They are always shut on the Wednesdays and Fridays during Lent, and on King Charles's Martyrdom ? — Yes. 2954. When you said if you had money ventured in the patent theatres, you would not think it hard if the monopoly were thrown open, I think you meant to say, you would not think it hard, because you would be no loser ? — Upon that ground. 2955. If you were a loser you would think it hard ? — If I were a loser, I should certainly think it hard. I believe every man who is a loser thinks it hard ,• it would uot be easy to separate his feelings upon it. 2956. Do ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 165 29.56. Do you not think the decrease of visitors to see the Crown jewels is to be Mr. E. L. Suifle. attributed to other attractions that exist ? — Very much, I think, to the greater attraction ; but for the last three years it has been generally so to the Tower ; and ^^ "'""^ ^^■^'*- I understand it has been so in all places, unless there has been some immediate novelty. 2957. You think all public exhibitions have suffered ? — Yes. 2958. Are you aware the number of visitors to the Zoological Gardens has increased ? — Yes, as a novelty. 2959. That has increased every year ? — Yes. 2960. Have you anything further to state ^ — I do not know how far I am enti- tled to make observations, except where questions are put to me, but my own idea of it is, that with reference to the old statute of George the Second, which was passed 95 years ago, a great difference is to be made between the state of London then and the state of London at present ; that what might have been perfectly just and right then, I consider might be perfectly unreasonable and worse than useless now ; and that the circle of 20 miles round London would create altogether a cir- cumference of nearly 140 miles ; and considering the very dense population in that, I think it would be a very great hardship to say the regular drama is not to be per- formed except at one spot. 2961. It is performed at Richmond now? — If it is performed within 20 miles, unless at a royal residence, I conceive it is not legally performed ; I know it is now • performed at the minor theatres. 2962. But it is by licence at Richmond ? — That is a royal residence. I wish to be understood not by any means as advocating the erection of very small theatres, because I conceive that all theatres should be subject to a requisition, that is, not licensed without the requisition of a certain number of respectable inhabitants ; that they should be subject to the magistrates for their proper and due conduct, and also subject to the certificate of a proper inspector that they are safe, and that they are of a certain size. 2963. What is your opinion upon the subject of licensing ; do you think plays might be under the control of a licenser or not ? — Why, as I consider that the principle of altering the present law should be on the basis of a perfect equality, not imagining that the minor theatres ought to be put in a better situation than the majors, I cannot conceive why the minors should be exempted from the licence of the Lord Chamberlain. 2964. Do you conceive it advisable there should be no licenser of any theatre ? — I said, the licence, I conceive, should be given as a matter of right, a licence to erect a theatre. 2965. At this moment a play cannot be performed until it has been submitted to the Lord Chamberlain or the Examiner, and approved ; do you conceive that is a useful or a prejudicial institution ? — I consider if it is exercised with proper dis- cretion and liberality, it is useful, and I cannot conceive why the power of the Lord Chamberlain should be abridged ; and to bring the majors under it, and liberate tlie minors, would be departing from that principle of equality which I never recommended. 2966. I never presumed it was to be taken from one and given to another, but I asked whether there should be a licence at all ? — Yes, I should be sorry to see that abolished. 2967. It is a species of publication which ought to be under control ? — Cer- tainly, because the mischief is done in one night ; i should be sorry to see it put an end to. 2968. It is done under circumstances which make the publication more mischiev- ous than reading a newspaper or pamphlet ? — 'Yes. 2969. Because it is addressed to the passions of the audience, who are excited at the moment? — Yes, I think it would be a dangerous experiment. I was asked about the question of a lottery. I wish to say upon that, if a lottery were to be granted for it, and if that lottery were granted on considering the value of the great theatres, that is, their claims under the Legislature and under the patents, in that case it would put the fortunate owner of the prize in the same situation that the two houses at present are, which would not mend the matter. 2970. If you put a clause in the Lottery Act which would inform the public the legitimate drama should be played at all the other theatres, they would gain this prize of the theatre with their eyes open as to throwing open the monopoly? • - i'hen the price of the chance must be lessened by that deteriorated value, and 675. X 3 consequently i66 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. E. L. Swifte. consequently there would be no fund adequate to compensate to the full expec- tations of the proprietors. 39 June 1832. 2971. Then you think the public would not subscribe to a lottery, unless the theatre had exclusive privileges ? — Not if the proprietors were to be responsible to the subscribers ; and perhaps in that (.ase the fortunate holder of the ticket would expect to have the theatre as they held it. 2972. Not at all, if he subscribed under a different understanding? — Then I conceive he would subscribe for a deteriorated value, and there would be a smaller fund to pay them. 2973. The price of the ticket would be lessened ? — Yes. 2974. Then you consider the large theatres are worth more now with the mono- poly than if dramatic entertainments were thrown open ? — I believe the public in , general so consider them ; and also the proprietors of the theatres. For myself, I do not ; for I think they would be benefited by the competition they would be compelled to adopt. Luna, 2° die Julii, 1832. EDWARD LYTTON BULWER, ESQ., in the Chair. Mr. Charles Mathews, called in ; and Examined. Mr. C. Mathews. '■^975« HAVE you a share in any theatre now ? — I am half proprietor of the Adelphi. a July 1832. 2976. Have you ever been a proprietor of any of the large theatres ? — Never. 2977. How many years have you been on the stage ? — Thirty-seven ; 28 on the London stage. 2978. From your experience, what do you consider would be the consequence to the drama generally if the legitimate drama were allowed to be performed at other theatres besides the two patent theatres and the Haymarket ? — I think it would, in the course of a very short time, brutalize the regular drama ; I think it would be a very great injury to the drama. 2979-80. Why do you think so ? — Because the actors at the minor theatres, generally speaking, are inferior, talent being better paid at the larger theatres, and therefore if the regular drama were open to the public, and if you were to see the plays of Shakspeare very badly acted, in time that would bring disrepute on the stage generally. 2981. Your objection seems to refer to the plays of Shakspeare? — Not at all ex- clusively to the plays of Shakspeare, but to the drama generally. Every man speaks according to his own interest of course ; but I should say, for God's sake protect me from the regular drama, do not compel us to let the public expect the regular drama. 2982. Do you not call Victorine the regular drama ? — That comes, perhaps, nearer to it : but if the Lord Chamberlain chooses to allow us to play a piece in- fringing on the regular drama, we do not object of course ; but I should say, protect us from the regular drama. We act nothing but what is licensed from the Lord Chamberlain, and I should be sorry if we had an opportunity of acting the Heir- ^t-Law. 2983. How would you define the regular drama ?— Decidedly the works of our greatest dramatists or poets, Shakspeare, Otway, Howe, and in modern times in comedies, Sheridan, Colman and others. 2984. That is an illustration ; I do not consider an illustration a definition. How do you define the regular drama ; what is it ? Does it consist of throe, four, or five acts, or what does it consist of ? — It does not consist of any number of acts ; it is the legitimate tragedy, comedy and farce. I should illustrate it by the Theatre Franf ois ; there they act the legitimate drama, they act the plays of Racine, Moliere, and so on, and a very few modern pieces at all, and by having one theatre allowed to perform, and confined in its performances to the legitimate drama, it was a standard for language and taste. 2985. Is not the regular drama a term of criticism ? — No, I should think pot; I should say that the Theatre Francois never had acted anything equal to our (Jhristmas pantomimes. 2986. Do ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 167 2986. Do you consider tragedy and comedy legitimate drama? — That was at one jur. C. Mathews. time tlie legitimate property of the patent theatres, and I think it ought always to _! have remained so. 2 juiy 1832. 2987. You think that many of the plays of Shakspeare are the regular drama ? — It is not for me to say what I think, but I am speaking of what is termed the regular drama. 2988. You refer to old plays, and you say very few new plays are acted at the French theatre ; do you think it to the advantage of national theatres that very few new plays should be acted ? — I think it would be a great advantage to have new plays, if we had talent to supply us ; and I recollect the time when we w^re regu- larly supplied ; about 25 or 30 years ago, Covent Garden and Drury Lane were almost regularly supplied every season with two or three comedies, and sometimes tragedies, and a great number of legitimate farces. 2989. You consider that the legitimate drama has declined since that time ; from what causes do you think ? — I think one of the causes is the great number of theatres that are open. 2990. Do you know how many theatres were open in Shakspeare's time ? — I should think altogether not more than seven ; there were at times seven open, not more than seven ever. 2991. Do you not consider there were then too many theatres for the population ? — They might be exceedingly small ; the Globe theatre would not hold anything like any minor theatre holds now. 2992. By referring to that time, it would appear that a good many theatres which were small, were as productive of good dramas as the two large theatres which are now open, with several small ones ? — I should say, as far as my reading bears me out, they were, for the population, better supported. 2993. There being seven small theatres ? — Yes, for the population, I should say so. 2994. I think you admit that you violate at your theatre the Lord Chamberlain's licence ? — No, we do not, because we send a piece for his approval, and he approves of the piece, and writes his permission, which is in this term, '* I hereby permit you to play the piece that you have sent to me, under the title of Victorine," or whatever it may be. 2995. Then the Lord Chamberlain violates his own licence, does he not? — His licence is to Charles Mathews, to perform burlettas, music and dancing, with spec- tacle and pantomime. ' 2995*. Victorine does not come under either of those denominations? — No, it does not. 2996. Then it is not you who violate your licence, but it is the Lord Chamberlain who violates his own licence ? — I purchased into the theatre under the faith of the licence, for which I consider I paid a very large sum, and before I came into it, pieces of that description had been licensed by the Lord Chamberlain, and they have been licensed since by three several Lords Chamberlain. 2997. You admit your licence does not permit you to play those pieces ; they are not burlettas ? — ^It does not express what is or what is not a burletta. It is a difficult thing to define ; it is much more difficult than the legitimate drama. 2998. You think it is more difficult to define than the legitimate drama? — ■ Much more so. 2999. Would you call Victorine a burletta? — We call any pieces burletta with a certain number of pieces of music, which constitute, in the opinion of the Lords Chamberlain, for the last twenty or thirty years, a burletta. 3000. How many pieces of music are there in Victorine ? — I should say seven. 3001. Is there any dancing? — Yes ; there are always songs or duets, or some- thing to constitute the number of pieces of music, and without that they would not be licensed. 3002. And they are performed, are they ? — Yes. 3003. In Victorine? — Yes. 3004. What injury do you conceive your theatre does to the annual receipts of the patent theatres ? — I cannot undertake to say : I think there are a great number of visitors to small theatres in consequence of their being at a smaller price. I think there are a great number of persons who will pay four shillings, but who would not pay seven shillings. 3005. Would you put it at 4,000/. a year ? — Decidedly not. 3006. Would you put the injury you do to the annual receipts of the two great theatres at 3,000/. ? — No, I would not admit the injury ; for, in the first place, C79. X4 I do i68 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. c Muthenii. I do not know how it is to be proved ; in the next place, I disbelieve it. It is almost impossible to ascertain what is the Adelphi audience. There are certain 12 July i83ii. followers of these theatres who do not go to the larger theatres, perhaps on account of the price. 3007. Do you think you do them injury to the amount of 1,000/. a year? — It is impossible to say. I should be very sorry to do any injury to them. 3008. It has been stated to the Committee, that the Adelphi alone does an injury to the amount of 4,000/. a year to the receipts of Covent Garden and Drury Lane? — We only perform for six months, and 4,000/. is a very large sum to take. 3009. Do you consider that the Coburg theatre does any injury to you? — I cannot ascertain ; but I should say, no. I am quite certain the Strand Theatre has done an injury to us ; for 1 have been four seasons there, and we have had an evident falling off of half-price at the Adelphi theatre from the time the Strand theatre has opened ; " and though they do no good to themselves, they do much harm unto us, Hal." 3010. Therefore you would like the Strand theatre to be shut up ? — Very much indeed. 3011. By exactly the same rule, the Haymarket theatre would like you to be shut up? — I dare say they would ; but I should say, I would have the same feeling towards the large theatres as I should wish, if this were to be settled by law, they should have towards us. I should wish to see them established in their own legiti- mate rights, and the minor theatres only allowed to act certain pieces belonging to themselves. But I am in the same situation as Covent Garden and Drury Lane. If I do not say I wish their rights to be protected, how can I ask for mine to be protected ? 3012. Then you consider, that if the legitimate drama were allowed at minor theatres, it would be against your own interest? — I think it would injure the drama altogether and the love of it. 3013. Do you consider it to be the legitimate right of the great theatres to play French plays ? — Entirely in the French language ? 3014. Yes. — I should say not. 3015. You consider that the drama would be brutalized in consequence of the bad representation of great plays at minor theatres, if they were allowed to be acted there : has Shakspeare been very often acted at the great theatres, do you know, of late years ? — I should say it has. 3016. In proportion to other performances of the illegitimate drama? — I am quite convinced that the disposition of the proprietors of both theatres is to play Shakspeare, and all the classical authors, if the public would follow them. 3017. Do you happen to know how many plays of Shakspeare were acted at Drury Lane during Kean's time ? — I do not know how many ; but there was a disposition to perform them always, only the public neglected them. 3018. I understand you, then, that the public have neglected Shakspeare's plays when they have been performed at the large theatres ? — Unquestionably. - 3019. Have you ever performed at the great theatres ? — I was at all the theatres. I went to the Haymarket, I went to Drury Lane, and then to Covent Garden, where I remained till my accident drove me from it. 3020. Do you consider that you play as efiectively at the large theatres, at Drury Lane or Covent Garden, as at a minor theatre? — I cannot say so effectively; but when I returned to Drury Lane, after having been used to small theatres for many years, I cannot say I felt any inconvenience in acting there ; I played Sir Fretful Plagiary and other parts, but I could not say, " I am neither seen nor heard here." 3021. You did not act less effectively, but rather more so, on a small stage? — There is certainly one convenience about a small stage, that it shows the features better than a large one. 3022. And it allows the voice to be better heard ?— I recollect when Colman wa^ proprietor of the Haymarket, that we played alternately there and at the Opera- house ; and it was much easier to speak in the old Opera-house than in the Haymarket. And with respect to the size of the theatres, if I may be allowed to quote an opinion, I will state the opinion of John Kemble, which I think I can do in his own words : I never can repeat a conversation without I do it in the tone of the person who gave it. " It is a common complaint to speak about the size of the theatres ; ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 169 theatres ; the public will tell you they like small theatres ; Sir, they lie ; they like Mr. C. Methewt. large theatres. They go to the Opera because it is a large theatre ; and when my sister and myself and Mr. Cooke acted in Henry the Eighth," (and we all remember how 2 July 1832. the play was done,) " when we acted at the King's theatre we played to 600/. ; and when we went over to the theatre opposite, we never got 200L to the same play." 3023. How do you attribute the failure which at present exists, or the ruin which has occurred to the great theatres, if the public are so much more attached to the great theatres than they are to the minors ? — It is not my opinion that they are attached ; I am only giving you the opinion of a proprietor of a theatre at the time. 3024. Then you do not concur with Mr. Kemble ? — I am only stating what his opinion was. 3025. Do you coincide with that opinion? — Yes, I do. 3026. Then how do you account for the ruin which has occurred to the great thea- tres? — From a certain fortune ; I cannot tell exactly why, but I think the Italian Opera has done more mischief to the drama than any falling off of the taste for it. I do not think that the feeling is dead at all ; it is only scotched, not killed, as is shown in the case of the Hunchback. Nothing could be more simple or legitimate than the means by which that play has been produced, or by which the public have been pleased with it. They see no objection to the theatre when it is the fashion to go there ; but I look upon the encouragement of the Italian Opera and French acting, which is now given, to be one of the greatest causes of the decline of the drama. 3027. You think a good play has a power of reviving, as it were, the taste for the drama ? — No doubt of it. 3028. Do you conceive that the licencer's licence of a particular play does more than state that there is nothing immoral or improper to be acted in it ; do you think the licencer's licence is at all granted with reference to the licence under which you act ; suppose you were to produce a play, which exceeded the terms of your annual licence from the Lord Chamberlain; do you think that proof of the play having been licensed by the censor would defend you against any action or information for ft penalty in having exceeded the terms of your annual licence? — Certainly I do. 3029. My opinion is, that the censor's licence only extends to the immorality of the piece ; and he says, there is nothing improper in it with reference to the provi- sions of the licence under which it is to be acted ? — I conceive the licencer's leave to act the pieces we send him is perfectly legal, and warrants us in acting that piece in every po.ssible way. 3030. And it would be a defence to you for acting a tragedy or any other piece not included in your patent? — I have always considered that was his power. 3031. Have you ever acted anything which had not been submitted to the licencer? — Certainly not; I speak of since the time I have been in the Adelphi myself, and I can say, certainly not in one single instance, unquestionably. 3032. Have you had pieces refused by the licencer? — I do not recollect one. 3033. Have you any general suggestions to throw out to the Committee?— No, I do not know that I have. I should certainly very much like to have the minor theatres restricted to their own performances, and that property should be protected. That is what I think would be an advantage to large theatres ; that minor theatres should not be allowed to do what they now do, which is literally to steal the pieces belonging to the great theatres ; for when they are performed, they send short- hand writers to take them down, and they then act them without any ceremony. That, of course, is very hard upon the managers of the theatres where those pieces are produced, who pay authors for original pieces, and pay them for their copy- right, which is sometimes a very serious sum. 3034. That is the charge you make against the minor theatres ? — Yes. 303,5. Did not the large theatres once take Black Eyed Susan from a minor theatre? — I do not recollect an instance of their doing so ; it did not belong to us. I do not think they have ever done that without permission, or without it has been published. 3036. Do you think the superintendence of the theatre can be better placed than, in the hands of the Lord Chamberlain ? — The minor theatres? 3037. Yes, and those under his licence. — I should say not, if his power were defined, but if, as in the case of the Strand, which is an outrage on all former usage, they are allowed to act without any licence, it is rendering his power null, and void. 679- Y 3038. Why a- July 1832. 170 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. C. Mathews. 3038- Why have you not laid an information against the Strand theatre ? — That is a question every one asks another. I recollect hearing of a mad bull getting abroad, and 3,000 or 4,000 people cried out, " Turn him round ," but everybody said, " Who is to do it r" To lay an information is an unpopular act- I have been inquiring every day why they have not been stopped. 3039. Do you consider the magistrates have the power of stopping them, if you lay an information against them ? — I have been told not. 3040. Do you conceive that the present law, giving a penalty for performing without a licence, can be made effectual ? — There is not a question that it could ; but it would be a very unpopular act for the proprietor of one minor theatre to attack another. I have given 10,000/. for the licence of the Adelphi theatre; I look upon that as a part of the purchase-money, it being granted on the faith of the Chamberlain having the power of giving us a licence, which he would not deprive us of without we were guilty of some outrage ; yet I find they are keeping that theatre open in the very same street with myself. 3041. Did you ever take any proceedings against them for the recovery of the penalty ? — No. 3042. Are you at all aware of the difficulty of proof there is ? — Yes, I have heard of the difficulty of proof. 3043-44. You object to minor theatres acting the regular drama. You know, if any law were to be passed, it would be necessary to define what is the regular drama. You might say Shakspeare's and Otway's plays were the regular drama. Would you object to the proprietors of minor theatres purchasing tragedies or comedies from any new author ; would you allow them to do that ? — My own favourite plan always has been that the London theatres should be on the same plan as the Parisian. There should be the regular drama allowed at the two great theatres, as at the Theatre Francois ; it might be divided between Drury Lane and Covent Garden, and all the other theatres might play vaudevilles or varietes. 3045. Did you ever consider whether any plan could be adopted to give authors more remuneration, without injuring the managers of theatres, by taking away the right of acting plays without the consent of the author? — I think the rights of authors ought to be protected ; and it would be one of the best sources of reviving a taste for the drama, for more pains would be taken by authors whose property was protected ; and they ought not to be allowed to play them in a country theatre without a small remuneration, as in the French theatres, where every author receives something. A very considerable sum is paid to an author, 2,000/., 3,000/. or 4,000/. for writing a play ; that ought to be protected. For instance, I have paid, in conjunction with my partner, a certain sum for a piece called the Wreck Ashore, and I saw it advertised to be acted at the Queen's theatre, sans ccrhnonie. It is true, I sent a remonstrance to them by a lawyer, and that particular piece was stopped, but that very night a piece of ours was played, called the Bold Dragoons, which was acted under the title of the Dragoons of Normandy. They send short- hand writers into the pit of the theatres now, and instead of the prompter getting that which was formerly considered his perquisite, they steal it without any ceremony at all, and it has become a kind of property among booksellers and adventurers. 3046. Do you conceive that giving dramatic authors a right of action would be a sufficient protection ?— I think it would. 3047. Do you think they would be able to recover from other managers much recompense ? — There are some, of course, who are more come-at-able than others j I should say such places as Bath, Edinburgh and Liverpool, and so on. 3048. I believe, in the French theatre, an author is entitled to so much of the receipts every night a play is acted ? — Yes ; we have no protection whatever now, for there are four instances before the town of pieces that I have purchased the copyright of, that are acted at Sadler's Wells and the Queen's theatre. 3049. How many months is your theatre open ? — Six months j from the 1st of October to the night before Passion Week. 3050. Do you not open at other times for some other entertainments of your own ? — It is open now with entertainments of my own. 3051. Under what authority? — Under the authority of the Lord Chamberlain's licence. 3052. But you are only licensed for six months.'' — I have a special licence for these performance, and a magistrate's licence also. The performance I am doing now does not come within any possible Act. 3053- Is ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 171 3053. It is not burletta ? — No, it is an entertainment of the stage, and could not Mr. C.Mathewi. be stopped by any process on earth. 3054. But you have applied to the Lord Chamberlain for his licence as for an ^ July 1832. entertainment of the stage ? — That has been only within these two or three years. 3055. Why do you do that ? — Because the Duke of Montrose particularly requested I would send a copy of it. 3056. Do you apply to Mr. Colman for the licence ? — Yes, I do. 3057. Does he examine it ? — Yes, he does ; but he did not till within the last four or five years. 305 S. But you are not compelled by law to do it? — It was not a vexatious thing at all on the part of the Duke of Montrose, but he requested that I would send a copy of it ; I had never been subjected to it before, but he said his reason was, that there were a number of small theatres, and by and by, if I was going on with my performance without his licence, there might be indecency and political allusions. He only made it a sort of request that I would comply with it. 3059. That looks as if he thought it was within his power? — No; everything was done by Drury Lane to try and stop it if they could. 3060. Do you play during Lent? — I did not perform ; the theatre was open in Lent, not on Wednesdays and Fridays. 3061. Did you not attempt to open it? — Yes, Yates opened it. 3062. Was it not stopped? — Yes, Mr. Mash said, by order of His Majesty; it was in Passion Week, and Mr. Mash came and saw the bills up, and said, " You must take down those bills, you are not allowed to perform to-morrow." Mr. Yates said, " Why, I have the express licence of the Duke of Devonshire to allow these per- formances during Lent, and the four nights in Passion Week are expressly men- tioned." Mr. Mash said, " I have nothing to do with the Duke of Devonshire, but it is the express command of His Majesty that you close this theatre to- night." 3063. Did he produce a written order? — No-, he came to the box-office, and said, " Take down these bills." Mr. Yates said, *' This is a very extraordinary- proceeding, for I have a special licence to perform ;" on which Mr. Mash said, " Never mind that licence ; I have the express command of His Majesty him- self" 3064. Did not Mr. Dibdin carry on entertainments something shniiar to yours ? — Yes, for many years. 3065. Without any licence ? — Yes ; but if I may be allowed to speak on that subject, I mean to say, when I was considered a rebel originally at the English Opera-house, the committee came to ascertain whether I had changed a scene or not, and proceedings were instituted against Arnold and myself for keeping open this theatre on a magistrate's licence only ; and the present Lord Hertford endeavoured to prove dialogues, inasmuch as I spoke to myself in one voice and answered myself in another ; but they could not go on with the proceedings. I was once refused permission by the mayor of a town, but by legal advice I put his authority at defiance, and he found he could not stop me. It does not come within any descrip- tion whatever of that sort. 3066. You said Mr. Kemble had told you he and Mrs. Siddons attracted less at a small theatre than at a large one ; do you not consider that actors of such extra- ordinary powers as they were appear to more advantage at a large theatre than at a small one ? — I should say the magnificence of the style of the late John Kemble and his sister were seen to as great effect in a large theatre as in a small one ; but there are a great number of persons whose countenance alone carries them to small theatres, for they cannot be seen to the same advantage in a large theatre as in a small one. But I never heard that objection stated during a fashion to run after every thing attractive ; I never heard any people say they could not see Miss O'Neil ; she was a beautiful actress, and everybody admired her. They did not say the theatres were too large then ; but when they do not go to the theatres, they say they are too large. I find all the people who go in with orders say the theatres are too large ; but those who pay for their admission are good-tempered. 3067. There are some great actors who play equally well in spite of the size of the theatre, but it is not a general rule ? — No, those very actors who prefer a large theatre to a small one ; I am not speaking for myself, for I cannot be said to be interested, but I never heard any objection formerly to the size of the theatres, and I did not feel any objection to it myself. When I played originally Sir Fretful Plagiary, I thought it depended on the expression of the face ; but I did not find 679. Y 2 ; it 172 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr'. CMathetui. it was at all less at Drury Lane ; I played it for 25 nights, and I never heard any- body say they could not enjoy the performance because the theatre was too large. a July 1832. 3068. Have you studied the patents of the great theatres? — No. 3069. Do you not consider the representation of Shakspeare's plays is generally better at large theatres? — I should say, Coriolanus and those classical plays are seen to greater advantage at large theatres, and I do not think there ever was an objection to the size of the theatre when there was a great attraction. 3070. Do you think morning concerts and evening parties injure the theatres much ? — I think morning concerts have done more injury to the theatres than any- thing you can mention. 3071. Taking place at theati'es ? — Sometimes at theatres, and sometimes in rooms ; and people who go there are so fatigued that they will not go to the theatres afterwards. 3072. Do you think minor theatres, generally, have been useful in the metro- polis as a school for actors at the larger theatres ? — Yes; there is not a question of it. That could be illustrated by many instances. 3073. Do you think they are such good schools as the provincial theatres used to be ? — Decidedly, I do. 3074. Do you not think there would be a better chance of good pieces i)eing brought out at regular theatres when they were allowed at minor theatres also ? — If the rights of authors were quite sufficiently protected ; but that is a sine qua non. I should say, they must be protected. 3075. But if they were protected, then you think the theatres of the metropolis would have the effect of producing a greater number of good pieces ? — Yes. 3076. If you had a licence to act anything you liked, should you act regular tragedy and comedy in preference to tlie representations which you now act ? — Decidedly not. Before I came here, I was not aware of the nature of the proceed- ing, for I was not aware that it was open to the public ; I was not aware what I should have to say; I thought I was only to answer questions ; but I said, all my creed is this, protect the legitimate drama, and protect me from being compelled to act it. It is all wrapped up in that. I should say, protect the property of authors ; and when I pay an author for a piece, do not let it be stolen by others ; let the legitimate drama be confined to the two theatres, but do not give me permission to act it. 3077. So far as you know, is that the opinion of the proprietors of minor theatres generally ? — I really do not know the proprietor of another minor theatre, to speak to. 3078. Is that Mr. Yates's opinion ? — I do not think Mr. Yates, if I maybe allowed to speak for my partner, has so strong an attachment to the drama as I have. I am a sincere admirer of it, and as long as I had a leg to stand on, I supported it. I only left it because I became a lame actor. 3079. If the minor theatres acted the legitimate drama, would there not be more encouragement to authors ? — If minor theatres were confined to certain pieces of their own, to vaudevilles, operettas, and things of that sort, it would afford equal encouragement to the persons who supplied Drury Lane and Covent Garden with regular comedies. There would be no objection to their supplying the Theatre des Variet^s with minor pieces, such as they were authorized to act. 3080. Still the superior regular drama would go to the larger theatres, if the permission to act it was thrown open ; is that your opinion ? — I think the public would benefit by each theatre being confined to its own particular class of pieces. 3081. You would give greater encouragement, then, to authors to produce small than great pieces ; you would give the option of performing small pieces to a great number of minor theatres, and you would confine the larger and more regular drama to the two patent theatres? — No ; because minor theatres could not afford to give a man more than loo/., whereas a comedy has produced 800/. or 1,000/. at Covent Garden or Drury Lane. 3082. Suppose the minor theatres could represent them, they could afford to pay actors and authors ? — To a certain extent ; a few of them could ; but they are much exaggerated as to their receipts and profits, for the Adelphi theatre will not hold one-fifth the audience that Covent Garden or Drury Lane will ; therefore they cannot pay for talent in that way. 3083. But the expenses of scenery, and so on, would not be so great in a small theatre; they might pay a few actors just as well, but they would not employ so many actors, and it would not be necessary to have such expensive scenery. They G might ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. ^73 might 2 July 183s. Still be able to afford to pay well a few actors, and still to pay well the Mr. C. MatketM, authors for a popular piece for a few nights, or for a whole season ? — Certainly. 3084. Can you name any performer who has played at a minor theatre who has afterwards been engaged at a patent theatre ? — Mr. Keeley is one instance. He is now a great favourite with the public ; he is at Covent Garden. He was known only through the medium of the Adelphi. Mr. Reeve was another, and though accidental circumstances have removed Mr. Reeve once more to the Adelphi, still they were accidental circumstances ; and under more auspicious circumstances he might have been a flourishing actor at Covent Garden. He also was only known to the great theatres through the Adelphi. 3085. Are there many other instances? — Many others. 3086. Do you consider that if the minor theatres were allowed to play the legitimate drama (if it was badly acted it is an evil that would cure itself), that when they saw they could not perform the legitimate drama, they would fall again into those vaudevilles, without any law to compel them to do so ? — That is a very extensive question, and not a very easy one to answer ; but I should say there are very few readers of Shakspeare ; they know him only through the medium of the drama, and it is quite possible a person might go there and see one of Shakspeare's plays for the first time at a minor theatre ; and it would damp his desire for the drama, if he saw it badly acted. 3087. My question is, suppose a small theatre was allowed to play Shakspeare ; suppose you found you could not get up Shakspeare so well as you could get up your little pieces, do you not think you would adhere to those small pieces which you had found more attractive to the public? — VVe should adhere to those which were most attractive. 3088. Consequently, if you found small pieces were most attractive, you would act them in preference to Shakspeare ; and he would not suflPer that degradation which he would suffer if his plays were badly acted at a minor theatre? — I think there are a large class of persons who frequent the Adelphi the.itre in particular, who perhaps would never follow the regular drama anywhere, but would prefer those kinds of pieces which come more within their understandings. And those persons who have no taste for the regular drama have recourse to excuses. Those who do not go will tell you they dine too late, or the theatre is too large, or what you please ; but they are all excuses. 3089. Does it not a good deal more depend on fashion whether people go to the theatre or not ? — No ; 1 think a fashion very often is created where there is really a good piece, as in the case of the Hunchback. I believe fashion is most fatal to the drama. I meet young gentlemen now, who formerly used to think it almost a crime not to go to the theatre ; but they now ask, " Whereabouts is Covent Garden theatre ?" although the same people would faint away if you thought they had not been to the Italian Opera. If they are asked whether they have seen Kean or not lately, they will say, " Kean ? Kean ? No ; where does he act ? I have not been there these three years." Formerly it was the fashion to go to the theatre, but now a lady cannot show her face at table next day, and say she has been at the theatre. If they are asked whether they have been at Covent Garden or Drury Lane, they say, " Oh dear, no 1 I never go there, it is too low I" 3090. When was it not the fashion to go to the theatre ? — I think it has in- creased very much. I think I can remember when it was not the fashion to the extent it is now. I remember the time, when it was no shame to go to see the legitimate drama; but it is now. 309 1 . Do you not think that may be the result of the acting not being suffi- ciently good ? — I want to know when the actors have not been sufficiently good for them. There is no demand for a time, and then it becomes the fashion again. It was the fashion to go and see Miss O'Neil for a season, and Mr Kean for a sea- son ; if they were real and sincere admirers of those actors, they would follow them, but we find theatres at which they act drop down from 600 /. to 1 00 /. 3092. Have you ever seen any indifference on the part of people of fashion to go to Covent Garden or Drury Lane, when the performances were good, such as the Hunchback ? — No ; I have been contending for that. I made use of the ex- pression, " it is scotched, but not killed." I do not believe the taste is at all extinct. I believe it is to be revived ; but it would have a much better chance if it were not thrown open, in my opinion. 3093. Do you not think that fashion has not induced people to go to Covent Garden and Drury Lane, because the legitimate drama has not been played, but 679. Y 3 because 174 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. C. Mathews, because those pageants and beasts have been substituted for the legitimate drama r That makes me wish they should be confined ; they should not act pantomime at 2 July 1832. Drury Lane or Covent Garden. I think only one theatre in London should be allowed to act pantomime. 3094. Then you think, in point of fact, the public taste has not made any great mistake in not attending Drury Lane this year ? — I cannot go so far as that quite, seeing so many of them here ; and seeing that my observations are put down, I am afraid I shall be unpopular with some parties, but I speak from what I think ; I cannot take upon me to say anybody is right in not going to the theatre. 3095. You would not go to Drury Lane only for the purpose of seeing the lions? — If they had played there for 40 years, I would not have entered the building where such a perfoimance was produced. 3096. You never would go if the character of the pieces was such as have been latterly given ? — I will not say, as have been latterly given, without I had the bills to refer to. I am speaking of such pieces as the Lions. I say that is infra, di": completely. I would not sanction by my presence such a performance. 3097. But do you not think it would be more i?ifra. dig. for Mr. Yates or Mr. Reeve to personate these very lions ? — I am not afraid to say that was done without my consent ; I was not present ; I was making a tour in the country, and was not properly attending to my own business, but it should not have been done if I had been present j it was not done by my sanction. Mr. Eugene M'-Carthy, called in ; and Examined. Mr. E. McCarthy. 3098. HAVE you not some share in the Dublin Theatre ? — I was lessee of three provincial theatres in Ireland ; I was lessee of a minor theatre in Dublin, not the Theatre Royal. 3099. Was that theatre licensed ? — No. 3100. Then it was acting against the law? — It was completely illegal, as far as the law stands at present. 310a. What did you perform ? — The regular drama. 3102. Was it a small theatre? — About the size of the Adelphi, I should take it. 3103. What theatre was that ?— The Fish-shamble-street Theatre. 3104. You performed the legitimate drama, and what besides? — Merely dramatic performances. 3105. Did you find the legitimate drama attractive ? — Yes, in that theatre. 3106. Therefore, as you acted both the legitimate drama and. melo-dramatic performances against the law, you could have acted whichever you chose? — Certainly. 3107. And you preferred the melo-dramatic performances as being generally more attractive ? — I did. 3108. Are you now a proprietor of any theatre? — No; I have been stage- manager of two minor theatres in London. 3109. Are you now? — Not at present ; I have been. 3110. Are you acting now? — No. 3111. You have, I believe, paid a good deal of attention to the subject of the drama? — I have recently devoted my attention a good deal to it. 3112. What do you consider would be the consequence of suffering the legiti- mate drama to be performed at minor theatres ? — I am an advocate for the free trade principle in every respect ; I conceive it would be of infinite service to the public at large, a service to dramatic writers, and consequently a service to the members of the theatrical profession. 3113. In what respect do you consider it would be to the advantage of authors ? — Because there would be a wider field for the exertion of their talents, and conse- quently those talents would be better rewarded. 3114. Do you consider, from your experience, that a minor theatre manager could afford to give sufficient remuneration to an author ? — I should conceive so. 3115. From your experience, as far as you have seen.'' — Yes, from my experience. 3116. And to actors the same ? — The same. 3117. As far as your experience has gone, suppose there was no law to prevent the performance of the legitimate drama at minor theatres ; suppose a proprietor of a minor theatre were allowed to perform whatever he pleased, would he not so far consult ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. >75 consult his own interest as not to act the legitimate drama, if he found he could Mr. E. M'Carthy. not attract the public? — I conceive everything of that kind would find its level. Mr. tVUliam Thomas Moncrieff, called in ; and Examined. a July 1833. 3118. YOU are the writer of a great variety of pieces for theatres 1 — Nearly 200, Mr. X believe. W. T. Moncrieff. 3119. Of what description ? — Various kinds of dramatic pieces. 31 20. Have you written any that have been acted at the large theatres ? — Several pieces. 3121. What pieces have you written for the large theatres ? — Monsieur Tonson was one ; the Spectre Bridegroom was another ; the Cataract of the Ganges, and several other pieces. 3122. Which was most successful? — The Cataract of the Ganges had the longest run. 3123. How many nights was that piece performed? — Very nearly 100. 3124. What was the remuneration you received for it? — At that time I was regu- larly engaged at the theatre as a sort of hack author ; I had so much a week expressly to furnish pieces at a very short notice ; whenever the theatre was in want of a piece, I had about 24 hours* notice to write it. 3125. Was that frequently the case at large theatres? — Yes. 31 26. Twenty-four hours notice for a piece ? — Yes, I had, for a farce. 3127. At what theatre?— Drury Lane. 3128. How long ago ? — I should think about seven or eight years ago. 3129. What were you then allowed a week for your services? — 1 had 10/. a week. 3130. On an average, how many pieces do you think you produced ni the course of one season? — About four, from four to six. 3131. Were any of those successful pieces taken from minor theatres? — One of my pieces was, very much against my inclination, taken from a minor theatre, and played at Drury Lane in defiance of me ; that was a piece called Giovanni in London. I objected to it greatly, for I did not consider it a species of piece to be introduced on the legitimate boards ; they persisted, however, in playing it in spite of me, and told me I might apply for an injunction against them. I applied to a lawyer, and he said he should want 80/., therefore, as I had not 80 /. to dispose of, I had no means of preventing their performing it. 3132. What did you receive for it? — I was cheated of it altogether ; I never got but 10/. for it. It was brought out by Mr. Elliston at Drury Lane. 3133. Was it published ? — Not till two booksellers applied tome, each to pro- tect himself against the other, neither of them having any right to publish it at all. 3134. Did Drury Lane give you anything for it? — No, they did not give me anything. Mr. Elliston said, " No, I will engage you on the stock, we shall want some things in the course of the season," and would give me an engagement, which I had for nearly three years, till I quarrelled and went away. 3 1 •^^. You had 1 o /. a week, and produced four pieces in the season ; how many weeks did you receive 10/.? — During the whole season. 3136. What was the total amount of the salary you received in that season? — I forget the number of weeks, it was a season, and the season consisted of 200 nights. 3137. Was it for the whole 40 weeks? — Yes, I had lo/. a week. 3138. You considered yourself sufficiently paid ? — Very well paid. 3139. But it was at Drury Lane where your piece was thus pirated, and your lawyer, in consequence of your not having the money to go to law with, still assured you you had the law on your side ? — He told me he could procure me an injunction, but it would cost me 80/. 3140. But Mr. Elliston played the piece in defiance of you? — Yes. 3141. And made money by it ? — A great deal of money by it ; he brought out Madame Vestris in it. 3142. Did you not write Black Eyed Susan ? — No, Mr. Jerrold. 3143. What successful pieces have you brought out at minor theatres? — Tom and Jerry. 3144. Were you paid for that?— Yes, I got very well paid for that. 3145. What minor theatre was that? — The Adelphi; it had a most extraor- dinary run. 3146. How many nights was it performed? — I should think nearly 300. Y 4 3147. How 176 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. 3147- How were you remunerated there? — I think I had about 200/. for it ; it ff^. T.Monerief. yyas a bad engagement for me, for I left my engagement at Drury Lane on some promises that were not fulfilled, so that I consider I lost money by Tom and Jerry a Jul, 1832. upon the whole. 3148. Do you consider that the principle of fair remuneration to authors is not strictly preserved in this country ? — I am certainly not much acquainted with the French stage, but I know their mode of remuneration, and I think nothing better could be done than to adopt the same system in this country. As the drama is at present constituted, it is impossible for any man, whose misfortunes may oblige him to resort to that species of writing, to obtain a fair remuneration for his labour and talent ; the laxity that has crept into the different theatres in London renders it impossible, except by mere accident. A man may write a good piece and get well paid for it, but he must wait a long time. 3149. Suppose the same system were to be adopted here as in France, that no work of an author could be performed at any theatre, whether metropolitan or pro- vincial, without his consent ; what would be the consequence suppose one small provincial theatre were to act a play without his consent ; do you suppose he could not recover from that provincial theatre? — I have been ever of opinion that if I could have gone down to Norwich, suppose I had brought out a piece at Drury Lane or Covent Garden, Mr. Kenneth, or some other dramatic agent, would pro- cure a copy of it, and the moment he does so he retails it out to various country theatres, at about 2 1, or 3/. a copy, by doing which he makes a very considerable profit, often much more than the author of the piece himself; but I think if the author could go down to one of those theatres ; if I could have gone down and seen my piece played there, I could have taken a person into the house, counted the house, and seen what was there, and could have had a copy of the piece with me to prove it was my piece ; I think I could have brought an action to recover the profits of that audience. 31 50. Under the present state of the law ? — Yes. 3151. Not if you had published the play? — No; but if the piece was unpublished, such might be the case ; it might be a risk and require money. 3152. You conceive a very successful author could not fail to be remunerated if the French law were adopted, which does not allow pieces to be performed at any theatre without the consent of the author, under the penalty of forfeiting the whole profits ; you think if this law was adopted, an author would be remunerated in pro- portion to his success and popularity ? —If the law were in existence, that half-a- crown an act should be paid as it is in France, instead of being one of the poorest men, I should be one of the richest. 3153. You suppose that if it were a lucrative profession, many persons who culti- rate literature would be induced to exercise their talents in this branch of it ; you suppose their talents would be directed to dramatic writing in preference to any other ? — I have no doubt about it. 3154. Do you conceive that would be increased by allowing the legitimate drama to be played at minor theatres ? — No, I think not ; I think it would have a very bad effect, for the major part of managers are money-making men, they have no regai-d for the drama further than as a means of profit to themselves, as you have seen lately since they have been playing it ; they have no sort of discretion ; 1 have seen them play A New Way to Pay Old Debts, as a first piece, and then Othello as a farce, and both these pieces have been represented in a most disgraceful manner. 3155. If it were lawful to act the legitimate drama, would not persons of greater character and respectability take minor theatres and perform in them with greater advantage of taste and capital than they now command? — I scarcely conceive so. 3156. What do you mean by the legitimate drama? — It is rather an indefinite thing, certainly ; I consider it to be a drama that represents fairly the manners of the time and the minds of men, divested entirely of all that melo-dramatic nonsense which we see. 3157. How could you define that bylaw? — That would require a more able legislator than myself. 3158 Tom and Jerry, now what do you say to that? — That was anything but a legitimate drama. 3159. Hut it exhibited the manners of the times ? — Yes, it did that in some mea- sure, but it was mixed up with all sorts of trash to draw an audience. I conceive that if the minor theatres were classed, it would have a most beneficial effect j and they ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 177 they would then become nurseries for dramatic talent, which they are not at present, M?. for such is the spirit of parsimony among the managers, that sooner than pay an ff^- T. Moncrieff. author for a piece, they will act Hamlet, and call it by some other name. — — ^~~— 3 1 60. If you had the privilege of copyright, it would leave a manager at the mercy - "^"'y ^^3^* of an author more than he is now ? — Yes, more ; but I think it would have a beneficial effect. 3161. Suppose, instead of writing these little pieces, your talent had happened to lie in the higher and more legitimate walks of the drama ; suppose you had not that versa- tality you have now, but could only write tragedies and comedies, and suppose they were rejected at the two great houses ? — I say, let the great houses have the privilege of representing Shakspeare and Massinger, and the plays of all the great authors who have appeared down to the present time ; but let the minor theatres play any piece they can get written for them ; if they can start a Shakspeare, in Heaven's name let them do it ; but do not let them meddle with the present settled drama of the country. 3162. Is that no contradiction to what you stated before, that they ought not to play the legitimate drama? You stated just now that they ought not to play the legi- timate drama ; you wish to correct that now, by stating that you confine that opinion to such plays as are at present written, and that they should have the privilege of acting any plays they can get written for them ? — Yes, I think it is for the benefit of the drama that the theatres royal should have the exclusive privilege of playing pieces that have descended down to this period ; after that, if the minor theatres can get the legitimate drama written, and they find it worth their while, I should say it would be better to allow them to perform it. 3163. VVhat you mean is, that minor theatres should have the power of acting any drama they can get written for them ? — Yes, anything new that they can, by their liberality, get written for them ; it would be a great encouragement to dramatic literature, and most beneficial to the drama in general. 3164. Then suppose you left Shakspeare and the old writers, that is to say, all the writers the great theatres have now the fair privilege of acting, by leaving them the exclusive monopoly would be giving a great advantage to the great theatres, almost in the light of a compensation ? — Yes ; but at the same time I give them the exclusive privilege of playing those pieces, I would restrict them from perform- ing those monstrosities they have been playing ; that would be fair play. Do not you trespass on our bounds, and we will not ti'espass on yours. From my long experience, and I have had long experience both in management and in various departments of the drama, I have ever seen those theatres which confined themselves to the peculiar class of pieces which seemed to be natural to their house, have always made money : for instance, the Adelphi plays a certain class of pieces, and if they were to go out of that class they would lose money, but by confining themselves to it, they get a great deal of money ; the Olympic and Astley's the same ; and the Coburg would be the same, but it has gone out of its way ; if they had confined themselves to the pieces they had originally set out with, spectacles, such as the North Pole, and other things they set out with, they would have made as much money lately as they made before. 3165. Do you not think that things would find their level, and that managers would act those pieces they find most to their interest? — I have seen them do such very strange things that I really do not know what to say. - 3166. You do not think they are so sensible as the rest of mankind? — Upon my word, I do not know ; they are very mad at times. 3167. What are the pieces that have failed at the Coburg? — When I tell you that they have brought out in the last five years perhaps three or four hundred pieces, it is impossible for me to I'ecollect among such an immense number. 3168. When did they make more money than they are now making? — When the theatre was originally opened by Mr. Glossop. 3169. For what? — For a sort of dramatic dramas and spectacles, and broad bur- lettas. I was originally engaged to manage that theatre, but it did not open at the period that was intended. 3170. But have they not gained money by Mr. Kean? — No, Mr. Davidge has lost money ; the people would not go to see him, and Mr. Dowton played to nearly empty benches. The engagement of all these stars has been unproductive to any of these theatres. 3171. In short, the star itself has not been productive? — It has been the ruin of the theatres, and the ruin of the drama. 679. z 3172. Were 178 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE fF. T. Moncrief. 3 1 72. Were all the pieces that you have had performed at the large theatres sab- mitted to the licencer ? — Yes. 2 July 1832. 3173- Every one? — Every one. 3174. And have you had many pieces refused? — I never had one. 3175. Tom and Jerry was not submitted to the licencer? — Yes, it was. 3176. To Mr. Colman? — Yes, the Duke of Montrose came to see it; there was a great outciy made against it, and the Duke of Montrose came to see it. I beg to correct myself, Mr. Larpent was the licencer, and not Mr. Colman, at that time. 3177. And Giovanni in London, was that submitted to the licencer? — That was submitted to the licencer, and I was astonished at it. 3178. You were astonished at his licensing it? — Certainly I was; I do not con- sider that piece ought to have been licensed. 3179. Have you ever considered the subject of licensing, whether it would be better to entrust it to one, two, or three persons, or to a committee ? — I think it would be better, perhaps, to entrust it to two or three persons ; I think there ought to be a sort of board. 3180. That is the case in France, is it not? — Yes; I think the drama cannot possibly be placed in better liands than under a general licensing board. I should certainly advocate that ; I think it would prevent a great many disgraceful pieces from being brought out which tend to disgrace the drama. 3181. Did you ever attend to the history of the drama ? — Y''es. 3182. Do you ever recollect, that in Elizabeth's time the Master of the Rolls had two assistants? — I am aware of that ; I believe he had. 3183. Do you think that might be revived with advantage ? — I think so. 3 1 84. One was a deputy from the Privy Council, and the other was from the Lord Mayor, I believe ? — I think that was the case. 3185. Perhaps you might choose better than the Privy Council or the Lord Mayor? — Perhaps so. I conceive the audiences in Elizabeth's time were much better and much more refined than they are now. 3186. Yet Ben Jonson attacked them? — Yes, he was a very splenetic fellow; he was not like gentle William. 3187. Do you not recollect many passages in the plays of those days which the audiences would not permit now ? — I wish to believe those were interpolations by the actors. 3188. Do you find the licencer is much more severe on any political allusions than with respect to the morality of them ? — Certainly. 3189. And perhaps you think the public may be more safely intrusted with the inspection of pieces so far as their morality is concerned, than as to their political allusions? — Certainly. Mr. Colman has been rather particular; he would not let one mention the word " thighs," in the Bashful Man ; he said those were indecent ; and he would not let me insert " goblin damned," for he said it was blasphemy, and a number of things of that kind ; therefore he was very strict. 3190. Do you consider him rather a capricious licencer ? — Yes, very. 3191. You think it absolutely necessary to have a censorship? — I think it would be to the general advantage of the drama. 3192. Which piece do you say ought not to have been licensed? — Giovanni ia London ; it was written before I arrived at years of discretion, or probably I might not have written it. 3193. Was it not attractive? — Yes, immensely attractive ; and is to this day. They put a lady in it with a pair of pretty legs, and that will always draw 80/. at half-price. 3194. It is not the property of any particular theatre? — No, any theatre may play it that likes ; they are playing it now at the Strand theatre. 3195. What do you suppose you would have derived from that if the French system were adopted ? — 1 should have got quite enough to have kept me very com- fortably all my life, even from that piece alone. 3196. The inference from the success of that piece then is, that the public taste is not quite to be trusted ? — I conceive it is a great deal the fault of the managers ; I do not think the public are so much in fault, though it is the fashion to say they are. I think if the managers would give them more intellectual pieces, there would be no want of patronage on the part of the public. 3197. You said it ought not to have beea licensed, and yet it was attractive? — Many ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 179 Many persons went there because, as I have told you, there was a pair of pretty ^'■* legs belonging to a lady, which made it attractive ; and there is a great deal of Moncne ff. popular music ; it is a very amusing piece. j . . 31 g8. But it may be very amusing without at all improving the taste? — It cannot improve the taste. 3199. It triumphed, then, not on account of its excellence, but in spite of its badness ? — That was it. 3200. Have you any other general suggestions to make to the Committee? — Merely that I think the whole of the theatres ought to be classed, and put under gene- ral censorship, and that the minor theatres should have the liberty of playing such pieces as they could procure ; and I think the patent theatres ought to be protected, as far as the protection I have named, so far as having the exclusive right of repre- senting the standard plays of tliis country up to this period ; and I think also, the rights of authors should be protected, by affording that remuneration and that favour I have mentioned. 3201 . You say they ought to be protected ; do you think it would be a protection if the minor theatres were allowed to perform legitimate dramas, which they might purchase, or anything else ? — Yes ; if you go to see the Hunchback so beautifully and correctly represented, it is obvious no minor theatre could present it in that way. I am certain of this, that if it had been brought out at any minor theatre, it would have been put on the shelf in three nights, and the author would not have got one farthing for it. 3202. Suppose some minor theatre had engaged Mr. Knowles, Miss Kemble, and Charles Kemble to perform in it, then it must have told equally well at a minor as in a great theatre ? — No ; the piece was generally throughout played with so much perfection, that I think you could scarcely find any community that could . have played like it. 3203. Your opinion is, that the interest of the two great theatres would be pro- tected if the minor theatres were rendered lawful, and allowed to perform any legi- timate drama which authors might write for them ? — Certainly. 3204. Do you not think that many dramatic authors could be so altered as to make it difficult to distinguish an old play from a new one; could they not take the School for Scandal, and so alter it as to give a right to the minor theatres to act it under the name of a new play ? — No, I think the trouble of doing that would not repay them ; I do not think there is any fear of that. ^ 3205. Would it not be very easy to escape the law by such a process? — I do not think it would be worth their while at all. 3206. Do you not think it would be sufficient security to the major theatres if they were subject to the revision of licencers, who were to decide whether it was an old piece or a new piece ? — I think it would have a general beneficial effect to have a censorship. 3207. You said you thought it would be a sufficient security to an author for his copyright, if he could go to any theatre in the country where his play was being acted, go into the house and then claim the profits of the house that night ; in what way would you claim it ? — It strikes me an action at law might be brought, 3208. And summary proceedings before the magistrates ; do you mean by infor- mation ? — That would be much better, but I question as the law now stands whether such a thing is possible. 3209. Do you conceive it would be of any use to an author, unless he had a summary proceeding before magistrates by information ? — He must have a sum- mary proceeding, or else it would be of no use to him. The best way, 1 think, would be for the Legislature to enact some scale of remuneration for ourselves ; these managers would practise on the necessities of poor devils of authors, and they would get nothing at all. 3210. But that is not the plan in France ? — I think it is three francs an act that is paid. 321 1. The law states precisely that the proprietors cannot act any piece without the express and formal consent of the author in writing, therefore of course it remains with the author to make any bargain he pleases ; there may be a special custom introduced, but the law itself recognises no such custom ? — I was not aware of that ; I know the scale of remuneration is three francs an act. 3213. Almost any barn could spare that here? — I certainly think so. z 2 3213. You i8o MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE W.T.Moncrieff. 3213- You would consider that sum even an ample remuneration? — I think so, after an author has got his money for it at the London theatres. 2 July 1832, 32 14. That might amount to 1 00 /. a year from all the theatres ? — I know if such a scale of remuneration was adopted, I should consider myself a fortunate man, for I think I should have got 7 /. or 8 /. a night very often. 3215. How should you get it? — -There are dramatic agents; it might be done through the medium of those agents, 3216. Or you might compound with them for it ? — Yes. Mr. George Bartley, called in ; and Examined. Mr. G.BartUy. 321 7. HAVE you a share in one of the theatres? — No. 3218. What are you? — I am stage-manager of Covent Garden theatre, and a performer there. 3219. How long have you held that situation ? — ^Three years. 3220. What are the duties of stage-managers .? — Very extensive. 3221. Do they extend over all the new pieces that are produced? — Over the production of them all. 3222. Is it you who direct what pieces shall be performed? — No, they are given into my hands by the proprietors ; they have been, and I presume will in future, be given into my hands by Mr. Laporte, who is the lessee. 3223. Then you look at them, and see which of them you will recommend ? — No; they have been in the habit sometimes of asking my opinion whether such a piece should or should not be acted, but I do not know that they have ever gone on my individual opinion in any one instance. 3224. They have been given you to be cast? — No, the proprietors will always take a part in the casting of a piece, they generally cast it themselves ; Mr. Kemble was the person who generally cast the pieces ; my duty was to bring them on the stage, to bring them out ; and the general arrangement of what we technically call the business of the stage, is my department. 3225. It does not come under your province to send them to the licencer r — Yes, they are never sent to the licencer till they are given into my hands to produce, and that is the first step I have to take. 3226. How many years have you been there in that capacity? — Three years. 3227. During that time there has been no piece brought out that has not been submitted to the licencer ? — Certainly not. 3228. Has he rejected any pieces during that time ? — Never during that time. 3229. In short, he never does reject any pieces you think the public are likely to approve of? — He has never rejected any piece that has been sent for the last few years ; he generally sends them back with a few observations upon them, and sometimes there will be particular words in a sentence that will be marked, and at other times he would wish a whole sentence to be expunged. 3230. You do not invariably adhere to it? — Yes. The prompt copies are always marked according to the instructions of the licencer, but I will not say the actors always attend to them, it is rather difficult to do so ; for instance, we get a piece put into rehearsal at the time it is sent to the licencer, and he may take a week or a fort- night to look it over if he likes, though he is generally very kind in sending them speedily back ; but the piece has been studied in the meantime, and the actors are in the liabit of repeating those words. 3231. In short, in one way or other, the corrections of the licencer have been evaded ? — Never in any strong instance, never in a whole sentence, that has been particularly attended to. 3232. In trifles, then? — In the marking out of a particular word in a sentence, it has been done, certainly, for it is a difficult thing for an actor to bear it in his mind. 3233. One has very often heard expressions commonly called oaths, such as *' damn it ;" I suppose they were not sanctioned by the licencer? — Certainly not. 3234. Those words have been interpolated by the actors ? — Yes. 3235. What do you pay for the examination of each play? — Two guineas. 3236. Do you think the Chamberlain has the power of enforcing that by law? — I never went into the subject ; I know it has always been paid ; I do not know how it originated, but it has always been attended to. 3237. Do you think it necessary there should be a licencer? — Decidedly. 3238. And that it ought to be extended to all theatres ? — To all theatres. 3239. And ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 181 3239. And do you think it is better tliat the power should be intrusted to one Mr. G. Bartley* person ? — I should think it was better intrusted to one office most assuredly, and to an individual, if his powers were defined. 2 July 1832. 3240. Why do you think so ? — Because I think if it were intrusted to any body of men, it would take more time, in case of the law being infringed, to get a remedy ; a body of men would not be able so speedily to put an end to any improper conduct as an individual ; but I think it a very hard case indeed that a licencer, be he Lord Cham- berlain or whoever he may, should be allowed to exercise his own opinion on a sub- ject with respect to which another licencer might take a different view. 3241. You think there ought to be some appeal ; defining his powers would render it impossible for him to go beyond them without positive proof to back an appeal ? — There is a great deal more said about it than it deserves, 1 think. 3242. In short, your opinion is, that it has been fairly administered ? — Indeed, I think so : now and then vexatious passages have occurred, but it appeared to me that the licencer chose to put a mark on any word he thought might be applied objectionably ; for instance, there has been a great deal of discussion here about the word " angel," and so on. Mr. Colman invariably marks that as an objectionable word : that is a word among many others, but I should presume in some instances he would not have objected to its being used, but if he let it pass in one instance, it would be said he ought in another ; it might be very objectionable sometimes, and then they might say, you did not object to it in this play ; I have always thought that Mr. Colman, by liiarking particular words, reserved to himself discretionary power to bear him out, when he said such things shall not be said. 3243. You think his power has not been exercised capriciously? — I think not. 3244. You have never been able to get over the strong instance of Alasco ? — Yes ; that renders it so hard a case on the patent theatres, that while they conform to what they understand to be the laws of the country, and while they pay every attention to the dictation of the higher powers, a minor theatre will start up like the Coburg theatre, and get a licence ; and yet that theatre, on a play being pub- lished, can take that play and act it, in defiance of the patent theatres and the Lord Chamberlain and his licencer. 3245. Yes, because it is not within the province of the Lord Chamberlain? — Yes ; and that constitutes the hardship on the large theatres, of which I complain ; and for that reason, I think the theatres should be under one controlling power. 3246. That is not a hardship to the author of the play? — Decidedly. 3247. Suppose he wished to take it there, it would not be a hardship upon him ? — Suppose Mr. Shee had declared he wished to take it there ? 3248. Yes, that would not be a hardship upon him ? — Not perhaps in that instance. I take it, it was acted there, because Covent Garden could not receive it. 3249. But was it not considered an instance of very vexatious interference of the licencer with respect to that play? — lam not aware that it was vexatious; it is a great while since I read it, but there were some strong political allusions con- tained in it, and there were some political events then pending which that play bore upon, and when I read it, the impression upon my mind was, that I did not wonder the licence had been refused. 3250. Where do you say Alasco was acted? — I think it was acted at the Surrey theatre. 3251. Not at at the Coburg ? — Not at the Coburg. 3252. You have been many years at Covent Garden ? — Yes, ten. 3253. As stage-manager, have you examined the patent of the great theatres? — • Never. 3254. So, then, you are not aware what exclusive privileges you possess ? — I have been given to understand, when I have asked the question, that they had the power of acting any species of entertainment they liked. 3255. But you never looked into the law of the case? — Never. 3256. Are you of opinion that the minor theatres have been prejudicial to them? — Yes. 3257. State your reasons. — The minor theatres, since they have increased in number, have produced a great variety of minor pieces, minor in talent, a species of drama that you can best designate as melo-drama ; and some of these pieces have been written upon very interesting subjects, and have been for a time popular, and from the number of these theatres there has been always some popular minor piece to be produced, such as the Wreck Ashore. I do not mean to particularize any pieces when I mention that ; but Tom and Jerry and Black Eyed Susan, they have 679. z 3 been i82 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. G. Bartley. been played almost exclusively by provincial theatres for a great number of years past, and consequently the managers have given a taste to country towns, ^ 3 July 1832. or whether the public taste would only receive that species of entertain- ment, is not for me to say ; I only speak to the fact, that these pieces are almost the only ones now performed in provincial theatres, and they do not require the same talent to act them as the plays of Otway, Shakspeare, Rowe or Colman, or Sheridan, or our settled drama ; hence it comes that these persons in the country have no practice in what we call the regular drama. When 1 first came to London, 30 years ago, there were none of these theatres open, and the regular drama was the only thing that provincial managers could have recourse to. At that time, we heard of Mr. EUiston at Bath, Mr. Young at Liverpool, Mr. Mathews at York, Miss Duncan at Edinburgh, Mr. Richard Jones in Dublin, and I may venture to say, my wife in Bath, and a number of performers who came to London, tutored first- rate actors, and paid first-rate salaries ; they only waited for the retirement of some performers to take their place. It was as well known to the dramatic world as it was afterwards to the public, that these persons were to be found at these theatres, but now we do not hear of them. 3258. Did you ever inquire ? — Yes; at that time we always used to hear of these people, and know where they were, but we never hear of them now. 3259. How is that?— Because they never have the practice; they do not in general play those characters which are calculated to give them reputation. At the time I am speaking of, it would answer the managers purpose to let Mr. Elliston act Othello, or Felix, or Benedict, each season three or four times. Now, even in the Bath theatre, not any one of these plays is ever thought of being got up by the regular company ; they only play novelties, and therefore an actor, however great his talent may be, has no chance ; the manager cannot afford to let him act Hamlet three times in a season. 3260. I do not see how this applies to the minor theatres ? — Because it is giving such a quantity of these time-serving, popular dramas to those provincial managers to select from, that they make up their performances almost wholly of them. 3261. Have the large theatres as many melo-dramas and small pieces as the minors? — No, I should think not. 3262. Was not the first melo-drama produced at Covent Garden ? — Yes, I believe it was ; the Tale of Mystery was the first drama I remember to have been so called, and to have musical accompaniments. 3263. You seem to say that there is an injury done to the drama by the altera- tion of the practice in country theatres ? — I think at present there exists no pro- vincial school to rear good actors for the metropolis. 3264. I do not see how any regulation of minor metropolitan theatres would affect the country school of actors ? — No, that leads into another question ; I was asked whether 1 thought the present state of theatricals was advantageous for the growth of talent ; I should say, certainly not for first-rate talent. 326,5. Then the consequence, I understand, is, that you think there is a paucity of talent, because the legitimate drama is not played so much as formerly? — Yes. 3266. You do not think the legitimate drama has been preserved in the pro- vinces ? — No ; because it has been so much infringed upon by other things. 3267. Do you not think it would be greatly to the advantage of the drama generally if the legitimate drama were more performed at various theatres in England, because you would create a purer taste and procure a better school of actors ? — \ es, if they could get actors to act them, but it would be a work of very long time. I am thoroughly convinced they could not act what I mean by the legitimate drama of this country at a minor theatre in England ; they have not talent to do it. It is with the greatest difficulty you can get a piece thoroughly well cast and played at large theatres. 3268. You say this was the case once ; you state, at the time to which you refer, when the legitimate drama was played, the actors were better ; why would not that be revived ? — I do not mean to say it would not be revived, but it would be a work of time to accomplish it. 3269. It is not impracticable ? — Certainly no men but practised actors can act Hamlet or Macbeth ; no man, unless he was a practised actor, could do it unless he was a man of very great genius. 3270. And that shows a necessity for schools ? — Certainly. 3271. Have you studied the powers of the Lord Chamberlain, or what you consider to be his powers ? — No ; I have always taken it for granted to be © (as ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 183 (as we considered it to be) paramount, and we have obeyed every instruction we Mr. G. Bartky. received. 3272. Do you not think he is exceeding his power and doing great injury to 2 July 183-2. you by licensing these foreign repi-esentations at the Opera-house ? — O yes, certainly. 3273. Or anywhere else ? — Or anywhere else ; there is no licence required at Covent Garden. 3274. Do you not think the public taste has rather taken to the foreign repre- sentations ? — Yes, with foreign music ; we have thought it to our interest to intro- duce foreign music in our performances, with English words. 3275. You say it is in consequence of the performance of these small pieces that t'he taste for the drama deteriorates ; it would therefore be exceedingly bad if you were to open a great number of small theatres, and confine them to the performance of these small pieces that you think would deteriorate the drama ? — God forbid there should be any more theatres in or round London ! 3276. Suppose the law were settled that these theatres should be allowed to act, would it not be much better that they should act the legitimate drama, which you consider to be the best school, than those small pieces which you think deteriorate the taste for the drama ? — No, I do not think so. 3277. Is not that a necessary deduction? — Noj I think the talent of actors ia and abou London is not sufficient to sustain those plays with respectability. 3278. But they would rear talent? — Yes; but I heard a gentleman say here the other day, " Do not let us legislate for our grandchildren ;" and I should say the same. 3279. But is it not rather unjust to assume that these small theatres injure the drama, when you consider they are not entitled to act the legitimate drama ? — I do not know they have a right to act anything at all in comparison with the rights of the patent theatres. A theatre was built in the Strand ; it was begun 30 years ago ; the proprietor built it purely upon speculation, to get any licence he could ; and there was a sort of inferior performance went on there a great number of years. At last the proprietors sold this propei'ty, and since that time that theatre has got into repute, and become positively a rival to the great theatres. I do not mean to say they have done so unjustly, or that they have infringed upon their rights at that particular theatre, but they have done a great injury to the receipts of the large theatres, and every theatre that is opened does the large theatres an injury. 3280. You say these theatres ought not to be allowed to act at all, and your reason is, the injury they would do to the two theatres ; that makes your principal objection ? — No ; I object to the principle upon which they have established them- selves. They have been allowed to go on, I do not know with what right, till they have become formidable opponents, and the proprietors of the large theatres have been much to blame ; they should have tried to have brought this question about many years ago. 3281. They have the law in their own hands, I suppose? — You cannot say they have the law in their own hands when there is such great difficulty in getting the law executed. 3282. Would there be great difficulty in getting the law executed by applying to a magistrate ? — They have found it difficult ; it has been thrown out. I know an attempt was made, and there was a meeting at Bow-street respecting it, and the thing was thrown out, and it was considered a total failure. 3283. Was not the magistrate to blame ? — I presume he was. 3284. Who was the magistrate? — Mr. Halls, I have heard, but I do not know. It would be very impertinent in me to say positively he was to blame, for 1 do not know the law. 3285. Was not that the opinion of the persons interested in applying to him? — Yes, it was. 3286. Why did not you take out ulterior proceedings to try whether he had the power or not ? — I think they went to the Court of King's Bench and recovered penalties there at a very large expense, and the man went away : that was the same case that was proceeded with before the magistrates. 3287. Did the Court of King's Bench attach any blame to him for not inter- fering? — That question did not come before the Court. 3288. You proceeded against the same party, and not against the magistrate ? —No. 3289. Why did not you proceed against the magistrate for not having executed 679. z 4 the ]84 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. G. BartUy. the law which you say exists ? —I rather think they took it into Court to establishs the right, and to see if they had the power. I believe the proprietors were so sick 2 Juljr 1832. q£ j.jjg j^^ jj^ every way, and paid so dearly for it, that they were glad not to pay any more for a thing than was gone by. 3290. But it would have been a much more summary way to compel the magis- trate to do his duty ? — I think it would. 3291. You have declined to pursue the privileges you possess? — They do not do it ; but that is a question rather for the proprietors than for me to answer. 3292. Why did not you apply to the magistrate again now that he has authority to act? — That is a question which should be asked of the proprietors, and not of me. 3293. Do you not think that they are to blame? — Yes, I should say they were to blame, except that these men have been wearied to death with law, and are sick of the name of it ; they have been trying for the last year or more perhaps to wind- up their affairs, and to bring them to such a point that they could let the theatre, and they were loth to involve themselves while they found it a losing concern. 3294. What plan have you to suggest that would relieve the broken fortunes of these two theatres ; what power could we give them to retrieve it ; is it beyond alL hope ? — I do not say so, but I would not speculate in either of the large theatres, or in any other theatre. 3295. Have you any plan to suggest that would improve their condition? — If there were fewer theatres open in London, that would improve their condition. 3296. In Westminster?— In and about London; I think there is uo difference whether the theatre is on one side of the water or the other. 3297. Mr. Mathews says there is an audience attached to the Adelphi theatre, and that he does not injure Drury Lane and Covent Garden so much as has been supposed ? — 'I think he is mistaken in that ; I think the minor theatres opened in the neighbourhood of these great theatres may detract from each, every night, something like 60/. or 80/., and the difference between that and what they receive is the difference between ruin and fortune. 3298. What are the receipts? — I do not know; I cannot answer these questions- without I have the documents before me, and I never looked into the books. 3299. Do you not think if there were no minor theatres the performers would be much at the mercy of the two great theatres as to their engagements ? — No, not at the mercy of the two proprietors; I think as far as the comfort and advan- tages of the performers were concerned, they were better off when there were fewer theatres than there are now. 3300. Are you not aware that agreements have been made between the two great theatres to limit and restrict the salaries of actors? — Yes, but not in an unjust, manner. 3301. But they have been always violated ? — Yes, even when these agreement* were made. 3302. What theatre has violated them first, Covent Garden or Drury Lane.^ — Of course Drury Lane violated them first. 3303. Do you not think it is a hardship upon the performers? — No ; for there- was a liberal allowance to the performers at that time. 3304. But if it was violated, the performers did not consider it liberal?— If the. performer is to have 20/. a week, or 20/. a night, he would prefer 20/. a night, of course. 3305. But it would be a great hardship upon the performer to have his salary reduced in this way ? — I think the hardship but small, when they were in the habit of having sums offered them which the greatest actors were offered formerly ; and when it brought the general expenditure of the large theatres to a limit there was. a hope of remuneration from. 3306. Surely the performer has a right to take his talent to the best market r — Undoubtedly. 3307. What is the difference in the receipts of Covent Garden theatre before, and after the minor theatres were opened, for there is a season when they are not opened ? — Not now ; in one way or the other, they are open all the year round. 330S. Do you think men of education and talent would have sufficient induce- ment, if the monopoly were thrown open ? — I do not think throwing open the monopoly would be of any general advantage to the drama. 3309. Do you think men of education and talent would have sufficient induce- ment to become actors ? — Not more than they have now. 3310. You ; ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 185, 3310. You think it would be the same thing with regard to them r — Yes. Mr. G. Bartley. 3311. They would be neither more nor less? — No, I do not think it would affect it at all. a Jul> 183a. 3312. You think the competition of the minor theatres has very much diminished the profits of the large theatres ? — I have no doubt of it. 3313. And you think the more their licence is extended the more injurious it would be ? — Yes, I consider the more theatres are open the more injurious it is. 33 14. And the more the privileges of those which already exist, the greater would be the injury r — I do, and I think it would be prejudicial to them too. I think it would be better to have the theatres as much as possible classified in the way the last witness suggested, and to bring them under one control, specifying the arrangements that were to be made for each theatre, and putting it under one control. 33 1 5. And that to be the Lord Chamberlain ? — Yes, I should think him to be as proper a person as any. 3316. Do you think if they were all under the control of the Lord Chamberlain it would be better than it is now r — I certainly do. 3317. Do you consider that the bread of yourselves and other actors would be in danger if the minor theatres had an extension of privilege ? — No, I do not know that that would be the case. I do not think we should be advantaged by it ; it would be more detrimental, I think, than serviceable. 3318. Can you name any eminent performer of the two great theatres who did not realize a fortune ? — O yes, I could name a great many, but I think they may have had it in their power not to realize good fortunes, but certainly independence, if they had been prudent. Those that are prudent can realize very well. 3319. Are you not of opinion that the great theatres fairly remunerate the talent of actors ? — Indeed I think they do, and they would willingly give more if they could. 3320. They necessarily must employ a smaller number of actors if there were more theatres employing actors? — Yes, a smaller number of persons would be employed. . 3321. But the individuals employed are better remunerated ? — Yes. 3322. Is not the expense of producing a drama in the m.agnificence of the two great theatres such as, however beneficial it may be to actors and authors, almost to- preclude any profit to the proprietors? — Yes, I should think it is ; in short, it is very difficult indeed to produce profit to the proprietors. 3323. Do they make a large profit by those spectacles, and things of that kind? > ■ — No, they have not made a large profit for many years, with the exception of one season, that I know of. 3324. I am speaking of particular occasions, when they make large profits by great spectacles, by those sorts of exhibitions which cost a great deal to get up? — No, I think they have lost money. 3325. Why do they produce them? — Because they are obliged to produce what they hope and fancy will please the taste of the public, and they find that efforts are made in other theatres, and they dread the appearance of want of activity and liber- ality upon their own part, and they are often led on to the production of pieces against their inclination. 3326. What sort of piece is most profitable ? — That which can be brought out with the least expense. In the present season, the Hunchback was the most profitable piece, and it cost less money in point yf getting up. 3327. Therefore small theatres would have been able to afford to get up that piece? — I do not think the small theatres could have afforded to pay Mr. Knowles 400/. for it. 3328. Does it not seem to be that the decline of the theatres is much owing to the decline of domestic literature, for whenever a good new play is produced the profit is immense ? — Not immense ; but when a good new play is produced and is successful, there will be profit. The Hunchback has been a profitable play, but very many worse plays than that have brought a great deal more money. 3329. Is the decline of the theatres owing to so many dramatic plays not being, written? — You cannot get them witten. 3330. But I ask whether, in your opinion, the decline of the theatres does or does not arise from the decline of dramatic literature ? — Partly, certainly ; if they could bring out more pieces of acknowledged talent than they do, I presume the theatres would be better attended ; but that does not argue there are more pieces of talent written. 679. A A 3331. I was i86 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. G.Bartley. 333^- I was merely asking as to the fact? — As to the fact, if you could get two or three such plays as the Hunchback every year ; but I do not recollect any period of 3 July 1832. history when such a thing occurred. 3332. Are you not aware there are not so many good plays as there were in former times ? — Certainly. 3333. You say you recollect no period of history when plays so good as the Hunchback were produced three or four at a time? — No, not since the time of the early dramatists. 3334. Are you aware that this Hunchback, which you so deservedly praise, was refused at one theatre, and that it could not be acted till it was taken from that theatre and subjected to another ? — I do not believe that it was positively refused at either theatre. 3335. Was it not refused ? — No ; I heard Mr. Knowles read a part of it before it was finished, and that was in the latter part of last spring, and he read in my pre- sence at Mr. Kemble's house detached scenes only of the Hunchback, objecting to read any part of the minor plot of the drama. He merely read a few of the prin- cipal serious scenes, and he then asked Mr. Kemble to give him then and there 500 /. for the play as it stood. Mr. Kemble said it was impossible for the proprie- tors of Covent Garden to give him any such sum for an unfinished play ; that Mr. Knowles read the play exceedingly well, and before he implicated his brother pro- prietors, he wished to be allowed to read the play himself, and Mr. Knowles refused, put it in his pocket and left the house, and said, " You will hear no more of this." Then he went with it to Drury Lane (but it was not two years ago, for I am speaking now to what happened, as well as my memory serves me, i .5 months ago). The play was completed, and taken to Drury Lane ; and all I know is, that Mr. Knowles returned to Covent Garden, and said he wished to act in it himself, and that it should be acted at Covent Garden. He said he found they were mad after opera at Drury Lane, and therefore, he said, he should take the play from them. I hap- pened to be in the room at the time, and I said, " Are you still resolved to have 500 /. for it, for the treasury of Covent Garden is not in a situation to pay you 500/. for a play that may not succeed r" He knew we all thought highly of it ; for after his reading it, I never saw him in the street or met him anywhere, but I asked him what had become of the Hunchback ? 3336. Was it refused solely upon account of his demanding 500 /. for it? — Yes, and it was not then finished, and he demanded that sum for an unfinished play ; that was at the latter end of last season, about 14 or 15 months ago. After that time it must have been finished, and he took it to Drury Lane, from whence he brought it in a little anger, and said to us, " When will you bring it out?" (Miss Fanny Kembles play was then in rehearsal) and we said, " It shall be the next play acted, unless any indisposition on the part of the performers should render it impossible." With that he was very well satisfied. 3337. Is there any agreement with reference to the two theatres? — Nones been acted upon, I believe, since I have been there. 1 only settled to be with Mr. Laporte after I left this committee-room last Monday. I have not seen him since that time, and I do not know what his arrangements are in any way. 3338. Do you mean to say these two great theatres have been losing concerns for the last few years?— Certainly; Drury Lane must have lost an immense sum of money this season. 3339. Have the salaries of the actors been reasonably paid notwithstanding ? — Yes, fully paid at both theatres. 3340. And could actors expect to get high salaries at the two great theatres if the drama were thrown open? — No ; I think our salaries have been for many years in a state of uncertainty, unless individuals should rent the theatres with large pro- perty, as in the case at Di-ury Lane at the present time. 3341 . Do you consider that the small theatres ought to be more restricted to their licence ? — Yes, I think so. 3342. Is there anything upon which we have not examined you, upon which you wish to say anything? — No, I do not know of anything particularly; I think you have asked me all the points to which I wish to speak. I think I have already said that all the theatres ought to be under restrictions, and that they should be classed. 3343. When you say they should be under restrictions, you mean that they should be classified, and restricted to act a particular thing ? — I think it would be the best plan, and most advantageous to all. ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 187 Martis, 5' die Julii, 1832. EDWARD LYTTON BULWER, ESQ., rx the Chair. George Rowland MinshuU, Esq., called in ; and Examined. 3344. YOU officiate as a magistrate at Bow-street ? — I am a magistrate at Bow- G. R. Minshutt, street. ^sq- 3345. Has it ever happened to you to be applied to on behalf of the proprietors * of either of the two theatres of Covent Garden or Drury Lane, in order to enforce 3 Ju'y 1832. the law upon the performers or the managers of the minor theatres ? — No, it has never happened to me individually, I was never the magistrate applied to ; it has happened, but not to me, nor have 1 been present when any examination of that sort has taken place. 3346. It happened to Mr. Halls, did it not? — I think it did. 3347. You probably have had conversation with Mr. Halls upon the subject r — Nothing that I can repeat, nothing important, certainly not so as to collect his opinions upon it, or even to complaints hardly. 334S. Are you aware of any reasons that were assigned by Mr. Halls for not complying with the request of the persons who applied to him upon the subject? — - No, I cannot answer that with any certainty. 3349. Supposing that you had been applied to to enforce the penalties which the law inflicts upon all persons performing the drama at the minor theatres, what would have been the course of conduct you would have pursued ? — I would have endeavoured to make myself perfectly master of the law upon the subject, and then I would have put that law into effect. 3350. What do you consider that law to be? — I have never directed my atten- tion to it with so much precision as to give an opinion to this Committee upon it. 3351. Then you are not at this moment competent to give an opinion as to the law, or as to the course which you would take to enforce the law, if applied to ? —No. 3352. It unfortunately happens that Mr. Halls is unwell ; to whom may the Committee apply to obtain that information ? — He is unwell, but I think he will be well enough next week to appear here, if it should be the desire of the Committee. 3353. How long have you been magistrate at Bow-street ? — I have been at the Police longer, but 1 have been at Bow-street 1 2 years. 3354. Are you not aware of the licensing law with regard to theatres? — Yes, I am aware of the general principle of it, but I am not prepared at all to speak with any certainty upon it. I should, as in any other subject, if my attention was called to it, make myself, as well as I could, master of the subject ; but I have never been called upon to put those laws into effect, and therefore I have never considered them, i know generally that it is thought unlawful for any one to perform the regular drama, or for any theatre to perform the regular drama, except at the two great licensed theatres. 3355. Under what authority do you conceive the theatres in Westminster per- form ?— It must be by virtue of their monopoly, if it may be called so, or by their licence from Government. 33,56. Are you not aware, as a magistrate, that the theatres in Westminster are opened under the licence of the Lord Chamberlain ? — Yes. 3357. Have you ever heard that there is a theatre opened for public entertain- ment within the city of Westminster not licensed by the Lord Chamberlain ? — Yes. 33.58. What theatre is that? — I very seldom myself go to theatres, I am rather too old ; but in the Strand there is one, I believe, that was Madame Vestris's theatre, which is in the Strand. 3359. You mean the Strand Theatre? — Yes; I never was there, therefore I cannot answer that with any degree of certainty whatever. 3360. The Olympic is licensed, you are perhaps aware, under the licence of the Lord Chamberlain ?— No, I was not aware of that. 3361. You are aware of an Act of Parliament passed in the reign of George the Second for the licensing of theatres, and that no theatre should be licensed but by the Lord Chamberlain, and, of course, the King, whom he represents ?— Yes. 679. A A 2 3362. You, i88 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE G. R. MinshuB, 3362. You, being aware of that Act of Parliament, still say that you are aware Esq. of another theatre being opened in contravention of that Act of Parliament, and that is the Strand Theatre r — I am not aware whether they have obtained a licence S July 1832. £j.pj^ ^Yie Lord Chamberlain or not to perform in that theatre ; I have never inquired into the fact. 3363. Did not you say that you thought there was a theatre opened which had not been licensed ? — There is one opened, and I never inquired whether they had a legal authority or not ; I did not consider it my duty to inquire into that, unless there was a complaint made to me against it. I should take it for granted that there was a licence or authority to do it, if no complaint was made. 3364. Supposing an information is laid before you in your magisterial capacity, that this theatre is acting without a licence, how should you act? — I should cer- tainly give summonses to the parties to appear before me, and then I should make myself master of the law, and inquire into the facts. 336.5. What evidence should you require? — I should require the evidence of those who had been to the theatre, and I should likewise ask the managers of that theatre under what authority they performed, and if they had a licence from the Lord Chamberlain, or from any other person, I should require them to produce that licence ; and if they did not produce their licence, I should see whether the Act of Parliament required a licence, and if it did not, I should dismiss the case, and if it did, I should inflict the penalties according to law. 3366. In the event of the proprietors of that theatre not being able to produce the licence, you would have no hesitation in inflicting the penalty ? — No, I should not, provided I thought I was authorized in doing so by the Act of Parliament. 336^. You would place the onus probandi on the informant with regard to the licence ? — Yes : I should tell them that the regular course was to give notice to the manager of the theatre to produce any licence under which they were acting, and if they did not produce such licence, to give evidence that they have acted with- out any. 3368. The House of Commons has ordered the Lord Chamberlain to lay before it all the licences that he has granted within the city of Westminster, and amongst those licences the Strand Theatre is not included ; should you not consider that sufficient evidence that that theatre was not legally licensed ? — I should think that quite suflicient, provided they did not produce other evidence to prove that they were entitled in some other way to perform. 3369. Are you aware of a decision that Lord Tenterden gave six weeks ago, in the Court of King's Bench, relating to theatres ? — I heard of it at the time, but I did not attend particularly to it. 3370. What description of evidence should you require from the parties who laid the infonnation, to prove that plays were represented at that theatre without a licence ? — I should expect the evidence of those who had been present at the place. 3371. Any spectator ? — Yes, any spectator. 3372. Have you ever, inyour capacity of magistrate, licensed any minor theatres? — No, they are licensed at the quarter sessions, and I very seldom attend the quar- ter sessions, being engaged at the office of Bow-street. I have never signed any that I recollect ; I have heard them applied for. 3373. Are you of opinion, with regard to the theatres of the metropolis, that they increase or promote the crime of the metropolis.? — I think whenever a great num- ber of persons assemble together there will be pickpockets, there will be quarrels, and, more or less, there will be crime. 3374. Do many charges come before you from the theatres, in your office, as magistrate ? — Not so many as might be expected ; we have certainly complaints ; pickpockets are taken there by officers appointed, but not so frequently as might be imagined. 3375. But do not you think that those persons who are at the theatre for an evening, if they are of bad character, might be worse employed than they are in the theatres ? — Yes, if they go to see the performances, they could not be better em- ployed, but if they go for the purpose of picking pockets, or of breaking the laws, they could not well be worse employed. 3376. Do the charges that come before you as a magistrate, from the theatres, proceed generally from the large theatres or from the minor theatres in West- minster ? — From the large theatres the most frequent charges come before us, but we are very near the large theatres, the office is between the two, and there are more charges from the large theatres ; we have had charges from the minor theatres, but © not ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 189 not so frequently ; but there is a much greater concourse of people at the large G. R. Minshull, theatres than at the minor theatres, and more opportunities of doing mischief. Esq. 3377. Supposing that a public-house were to be opened without a licence, should — ^ • you not feel it your duty to close it? — We licence public-houses in our own division 3 Jwly 1832. ourselves, and of course it would come within my knowledge if a public-house was opened, whether it was licensed or not, and if I should hear that any public-house was opened without licence, I should give directions for an information to be entered against it. 3378. Do not you conceive it equally your duty to put down unlicensed theatres, as to put down unlicensed public-houses ? — No, I have never conceived it my duty to do so, unless a complaint was laid before me. 3379. You would require a complaint to be made in regard to theatres, but not with regard to public-houses ? — Yes, I have stated the i-eason, because if a man had opened a public-house, for Instance, next door to the office of Bow-street, I should know that he had not obtained his licence, and order an information to be laid against him ; but if a theatre was to be opened in the street, or anywhere else, as I should not grant the licence or have had anything to do with it till I heard a complaint that it was not licensed, I should not take any notice of it whatever. 3380. Do not you think that the law as regards the licensing of theatres, is capa- ble of amendment, whether as respects the magistrates* power out of Westminster, or the Lord Chamberlain's power within ? — Yes. 3381. What amendments would you suggest? — Upon a subject of so much im- portance, I could not suggest anything very satisfactory, but I am very much in favour of letting all people get their livelihood in any way they best can, provided it should not be considered of any injury to the public ; 1 am not sure, but I am of that opinion, in some degree, respecting public-houses. 3382. You are in favour of free trade? — I am in favour certainly of people getting their livelihood in the best way they can, provided they do it honestly. 3383. Y"ou think that the monopoly of the great theatres is a hardship at present upon the public ?— I think that it is a hardship in some degree upon the public, and I likewise think that if it should be taken from them it would be a hardship to the great theatres, having expended large sums of money upon the assurance that they were to be protected ; if it were to be taken from them without remuneration. 3384. You, as a magistrate, are prepared to protect them as far as you can ? — We are prepared to put the laws into force, whatever those laws may be. 3385. You think if the legitimate drama was allowed to be played at all the smaller theatres, that all the larger ought to receive compensation? — That would be my private opinion, I do not speak so much as a magistrate. 3386. Do you think that the hours for opening and closing theatres ought to be altered with a view to the better order of the metropolis ? — -I do not know ; I consider that theatres are more out of fashion than they used to be, from the alteration of the hours of dining, and many other circumstances : when 1 was a young man the theatres used to be a very pleasant amusement, but now a man must, in some degree, give up his dinner for it, or dine at a very unusual hour. 3387. Do not you think that the middle classes are the persons who would be inclined to support the theatres, and that they do not dine late? — Yes, certainly. 3388. Do not you think it might be an improvement if they closed earlier than they do at present ? — It would be a great improvement to me individually, if I went there. 33Sp. If it would be an improvement to you, it would be necessarily to a large class of persons having necessary occupations, would it not ? — A man of my age cannot speak so much for other people ; most persons like a great deal for their money generally, and they are not satisfied unless they are worn out or fatigued. 3390. Supposing an information Is laid before you as a magistrate, for a theatre having opened without a licence, and the defending party not being able to prove that they possessed a licence, should you deem It to be your duty to convict those parties and enforce the penalty ? — Of course I should refer strictly to the law on the subject, and If I found that the law would bear me out, I should feel myself bound to convict upon the evidence I had received. 3391. You would not call upon the Informer to prove the licence? — No, I should call upon him to give notice to the parties to produce their licence, and then I should, having done that, consider, unless they produced their licence or authority, that they had none, if they had had notice from the informer to produce it, and at the hear- ing before the magistrate did not produce it, and determine accordingly. 670. A A 3 190 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. John Poole, called in ; and Examined. Mr. J. Pooie. 3392. ARE you the author of some very successful pieces? — I am. 3 July 1832. 3393' What is the most successful piece that you have brought before the public? — I believe with respect to the attraction and the money it has produced to the theatres, that Paul Pry is. 3394. That still retains its hold upon the stage ? — Yes. 3395. Is it acted also in the provinces? — A great deal, as far as I have under- stood. 3396. What is the remuneration that you have received for Paul Pry? — The total that I received from the Haymarket theatre was 400 /. 3397. Do you conceive that if you had proportionate profits from every repre- sentation that Paul Pry has undergone in the different theatres, you would have received a larger sum than you do at present?— I have no hesitation in saying, in such case, I should have received as many thousands as I have hundreds. 3398. Have you considered the manner in which, supposing such a law was passed, the money would be obtained from the provincial theatres, because formerly, when this law was in contemplation, the gentlemen who did contemplate it were given to understand that there would be very great difficulty in obtaining from the managers of the country theatres the sum due to the author ; do you conceive that that difficulty would exist ? — No ; I certainly think not with respect to the large ones. Z399- Do not you think if that law were to exist, there would be theatrical agents In all the towns who would be engaged in the business of collecting the sums due to the authors for them ? — I have no doubt there would be. 3400. It would appear easy to collect the money and to transmit it to the author ? — I think there would be no difficulty about that. 3401. Do not you think that it would be an advantage to the author to have more than two theatres where he can take his piece ? — We have three theatres royal, besides the English Opera-house. 3402. Three theatres for the purchase of the copyright of a five-act comedy exist at present ; do you think that there ought to be more ? — There would be more opportunities of selling a tive-act comedy ; but I question whether a legitimate comedy would be of any use to the minor theatres. 3403. Supposing you were an unknown author, and you were to write a comedy, and it was to be refused at the large theatres, do not you consider that it would be an advantage to you at all events to have the opportunity of offering it to a small theatre, because supposing the large theatres could give you nothing for it, you would have an opportunity of having it performed, and be pretty sure of earning the profits from its success, if it were successful, by the various sums given you for it? — If the piece were unsuccessful in town, it would not be performed at all in the country. 3404. Supposing it were successful, and a small theatre could afford to purchase it, coming on the stage coupled with the law, the author would still be able to obtain a sufficient remuneration for his piece ? — No, I do not think he would ; and I do think it would do a great mischief to the drama ; I would take it for granted that if a piece were rejected by both the theatres royal and the Haymarket, there could be no very considerable value in the piece. 3405. You think it would not be likely to be a valuable piece under such cir- cumstances? — I think so. 3406. You do not think that there are any instances, then, in which it is likely that the large theatres would be wrong in their judgment? — One theatre might be wrong in its judgment, but I question whether they all three could, because they are conducted by experienced persons. 3407. Would there not be instances in which they would desire the author to wait for a year? — I cannot say that; besides, it might be as advantageous to the author to wait till the theatre had an opportunity to play his piece, as it would for the theatre that he should. 3408. Supposing he were a poor man, would it be an advantage to him to wait? — No, certainly not. 3409. Do you consider, in general, that dramatic authors are rich men or poor men ? — I am not acquainted with any of 5,000/. a year; and I believe, u\ton the whole, that they cannot be considered rich men. 3410. If ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. igi 3410. If the generality of them cannot be considered rich men, it must be ob- Mr. J. Poole. viously for the advantage of the generality of them not to wait the pleasure of the managers to whom they shall produce their pieces? — Yes, certainly. 3, July 1832. 3411. In what respects do you consider that it would be disadvantageous to authors to have a variety of theatres to which they can take their pieces? — I ara persuaded that it would be of disadvantage to the drama. 3412. It would not be disadvantageous to the author? — No; it would not be disadvantageous to the author, because if he could not get anything for his bad piece at either of the three theatres, he might get something at one of the minor theatres ; but I do not conceive that the drama would gain anything. 341 3. If the piece was bad, would not the public disapprove of the piece ? — Yes, I have no doubt they would. 3414. Then the piece would be damned? — The piece would be damned, and there would be an end of it ; but I do not see what advantage the drama could pos- sibly obtain by giving the chance to bad pieces. 3415. Do you think that literature in general derives no advantage from having a large number of booksellers to whom an author can take his performance, more than it would if there were only two publishers to whom he could take it? — I think so ; but I cannot look upon that as a case in point. 3416. You do not think that there is any analogy between dramatic litera- ture and other branches of literature ? — No ; in other branches of literature the bookseller is the judge in the first instance, and he may purchase a manuscript which has been refused by a first or second bookseller; he takes it at his own risk; and I question very much indeed whether a bookseller, with the knowledge that Mr. Murray and Mr. Colburn had rejected a manuscript, would be very desirous to have it. 3417. But you are aware that many works have been refused by two or three publishers, and have been afterwards published, and proved very valuable additions to the works of science in the country : Dr. Arnot's work, for instance ? — Yes, certainly. 341 8. But you think that the managers of theatres are more likely to be infallible than booksellers, or persons to whom the booksellers intrust their works to be read.^ — I do think that experienced managers have a pretty good feeling as to what is likely to please the town. 3419. But it might so happen that an author might not take his composition to either of the two large theatres, but he might write it solely for the small theatres? — Yes, he might, if the small theatres were in existence. 3420. And such a production might be a valuable addition to literature? — I do not know ; but I think that an author, writing with any ambition at all, would go at once to the larger theatres. 3421. Do you think that he would do so if there were five or six theatres which were large enough to give effect to his piece ? — That would alter the case. 3422. Do not you think that the Coburg theatre is large enough to give effect to any comedy ? — I do not know it, I have not been in it for a great many years. 3423. The English Opera-house? — I should prefer one larger. I should prefer for a comedy somewhat between the size of the Haymarket and the great theatres. 3424. But you consider that the Haymarket would be large enough to give eflPect to Paul Pry ? — Yes. 342,5. Do you think it would be large enough to give effect to all your other pieces ?— Yes, to all. 3426. Would you rather see your pieces performed in the Haymarket, or in one of the larger theatres? — To me it is matter of indifference. I have seen some of my plays acted at the Haymarket theatre with great effect, which I have originally produced at the larger theatres ; and I have also seen plays which I have written for , the Haymarket theatre acted upon the larger stages, without any diminution of effect. 3427. But you consider that the effect is pretty equal ? — Yes, I do. I admit that there are places about Drury Lane and about Covent Garden theatres where you can neither see nor hear distinctly ; but in the good places of those two theatres you can hear distinctly. 3428. In the centre parts of the boxes ? — I have never found any inconvenience in that part myself 3429. Do you think that the people receive your pieces with as much pleasure in the large theatres as in the Haymarket ?— i do not think there is any material difference. 679- A A 4 3430. Do 19-! :minutes of evidence before select committee Mr. J.Poole. 3430. Do they hear so well ? — I should perhaps prefer the Haymarket rather than Covent Garden for any of my pieces. 3 July 1832. 3431. Have you written any of your pieces for any actor ? — Generally speaking, we write for a company ; we expect that we shall have available tools to work with when we come before the public. 3432. And have you also written for particular actors ? — I have in one or two instances. 3433. Have you ever suffered from that actor not performing that particular piece for whom you had written the piece ? — Yes, I have. 3434. Since you consider that it is common for a dramatic author to consult a particular company, might he not consult a particular company if he was in a small theatre, and produce an effect which he would not be able to produce at another theatre? — When I say that he would consult the company, I am speaking of a good company, and not an indifferent or a bad one : an author of good standing would not consult such a company as that. 3435. Your compositions are principally comic? — Yes. 3436. Do you consider that there is a strong force of comic actors at present in the country ? — Yes, I think there are sufficient, if they were not distributed about the country so much as they are. I think, if they were all in one theatre, we should have more than enough. 3437. Do you consider that there are any celebrated comic actors besides the following; Mr. Charles Kemble, Mr. Liston, Mr. Dowton, and Mr. Farren^^ — ■ Yes, I do. 3438. Name any others that you know of? — I must not name Mr. Bartley, because I believe he is present. 3439. Does he act now ? — Mr. Bartley acts. Mr. Keeley is a clever actor, and there are several of great importance ; there are none of the eminence certainly of those four persons mentioned. 3440. Is Mr. Keeve a very clever actor? — I believe he is a very clever actor. 3441. Of those four that have been mentioned, has Mr. Kemble any engage- ment on the stage, or is he leaving the country ? — I have understood that he is going to America. 3442. Has Mr. Dowton any engagement on the stage? — Not in the large theatres, I think. 3443. So that of the four, only Mr. Liston and Mr. Farren remain? — Mr. Liston does not remain at the large theatres, he acts at a small theatre. 3444. Only two, then, of those four remain in the theatres, Mr. Liston and Mr. Farren ?^ — Yes, of those that have been named. 3445. Does Mr. Liston prefer to act in a small theatre, or is it because he cannot have an equally advantageous engagement at a large one r — I really cannot speak as to Mr. Listen's motives, but I conceive that he goes to a small theatre because he receives a larger remuneration. 3446. Then it is to his interest to act in a smaller theatre?— If Mr. Liston has gone to a small theatre because he can get a larger remuneration there, it is to his interest ; but I say so merely in a pecuniary point of view. 3447. Do you know for what species of entertainment the Olympic is licensed? — I have understood for the performance of burletta. 3448. What is burletta?— It is a difficult thing to define; but the common understanding of burletta, is a short piece with songs and dances. 3449. Do you consider that burletta is altogether a satisfactory term, that it is one which cannot be easily misinterpreted or evaded? — It is a term that is very often evaded, but according to the common understanding, I believe, it cannot be , misinterpreted ; there are pieces which are perfectly well known and understood to be burletta ; Midas is burletta. 3450. Do you consider that it is possible to give any definition of the regular drama which shall be exactly binding in law ? — No, except by negative. I could tell you what the regular drama is not ; but it would be very difficult to define it positively. 3451. Did you ever see it defined? —I never did. 3452. It would be very difficult to give that definition to the regular drama which should be legally binding? — No, it would not be difficult if you were to take up the point now to say what should be legitimate drama, but it is a hard thing to say what is legitimate drama at present. 3453. How ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 193 3453. How would you define it ? — I would say that comedy and tragedy without Mr. J. Poole. any musical accompaniment would be regular drama. 3454. Then the sole distinction that you would make would be that of music ; if 3 July 1832. there was music in your comedy, it would cease to be regular drama ? — If music is introduced, as it is introduced into melo-drama, I think it would j but it is hard to fix a satisfactory definition at a moment's notice. 3455. A comedy interspersed with songs, do you consider that legitimate drama ? — I think that if nature were not outraged in any way whatever in the piece, that would be legitimate drama. 3456. Who should say whether nature was outraged ? — That would become a matter of taste, as it must be ; I do not consider the Lions of Mysore and pieces of that description as legitimate drama. 3457. It would not depend altogether upon the number of acts? — By no means ; I think you might have as good comedy in one act as in five. Mr. Richard B. Peake, called in ; and Examined. 3458. YOU are the author of several pieces ? — Of many. Mr. R. B. Peake. 3459. What has been your most successful piece ? — The piece entitled Before ~~~" Breakfast, performed at the English Opera-house. 3460. Does that retain its hold upon the stage ? — It was written for one per- former, Mr. Mathews, who has not been in the company since. 3461. Is that a common thing among dramatic writers to write their pieces for one performer? — It occurred with so peculiar a talent as that of Mr. Mathews, when he has been engaged in the theatre. 3462. How many nights has that been acted in the theatre? — It was played 30 nights in the first season. 3463. How many pieces have you written altogether ? — I think I have written 40. 3464. Do you consider that you have been fairly remunerated for the time and trouble you have bestowed upon those pieces ? — Upon the average, I may say yes, that I am. 346.5. Do you consider that it would be an advantage to actors and dramatic authors to institute a law similar to that which prevails in France with respect to the minor theatres ? — I think it would. 3466. Do you consider that it would be advantageous for authors to have more theatres than Covent Garden, Drury Lane and the Haymarket, to take their pieces to ? — I should conceive it would. 3467. What do you consider would be the effect upon the drama generally if more theatres were allowed where the legitimate drama could be performed ? — I have a difficulty in answering the question. 3468. Do you think it would be likely to degrade the drama ? — No ; I think not. 3469. You think, at all events, it would be beneficial to authors ? — Yes ; I should think the larger the field the better it would be for the author. 3470. Do you think that any piece that is rejected by the managers of the two great theatres is likely to be a bad piece, and unfit for the stage? — I have never had a piece rejected, and therefore I cannot say. 3471. Would not that depend upon the reasons given for its rejection ? — I should conceive it would. 3472. The terms which the author might require would also be a cause of ita rejection, would they not ? — There are generally understood terms for a certain species of production. 3473. Do not they vary very much ? — I have not found them so. 3474. What is the last successful piece that you have written ? — The Evil Eye. 347.5. Where is that performed? — At the English Opera-house, Mr. Arnold's theatre. 3476. It is now coming out, is it not ? — It was performed last night. 3477. Have you written much of the regular drama? — No, I have made but one attempt. 3478. Was it unsuccessful ? — It was successful. 3479. Why have you not attempted the regular drama more? — From the great difficulty. 3480. What is the difficulty that you refer to? — I think the making a five act comedy a very difficult achievement. . - r^-" 3481. You mean as regards yourself as au author ? — Yes. 679. B B 3482. You; 194 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. R. B. Peake. 3482. You do not find it is very difficult as far as actors are concerned? — No. 3483. Do you mean that the difficulty arises from your writing it, or from your 3 July 1832. getting it on the stage ? — I think from my writing it. 3484. Had you ever any difficulty in getting good playing upon the stage ? — I have never noticed it. 3485. You have never attempted tragedy ? — Never. 3486. Have you conceived that there are any means by which dramatic authors may be better remunerated without being heavier burdens upon the theatres ? — No, I have not. 3487. You have never considered the question of giving them a better copyright for their writings ? — I have often considered that it would be a beneficial thing for authors if it could be so arranged, but as to the means, 1 could not devise them. 3488. You know what property an author has in his copyright for publication of a novel or any other book that he publishes ? — Fourteen years, and remedy by action for any innovation. 3489. Do you conceive that giving dramatic writers the same right as that would be an advantage to them ? — I think that it would be a great advantage. Mr. JViUiam Henry Settle, called in ; and Examined. Mr. W. H. Settle. 3490. WHAT are you ? — I am common law clerk, or second clerk in the office of "~~~ Messrs. Lowdham, Parke and Freeth. 3491. Were you employed by the patent theatres to lay an information at Bow- street against one of the minor theatres ? — We were the solicitors. 3492. Against what theatre? — Against the Tottenham-street theatre. 3493. What was the complaint against the Tottenham-street theatre ? — For playing without letters patent or licence from the Lord Chamberlain. 3494. When you laid this information at Bow-street, did the magistrates give you any assistance ? — Quite the reverse ; they evidently acted with a vast deal of par- tiality towards the defendants. 3495. Did the magistrates seem to have given much attention to the law with regard to theatres r — With great deference to those gentlemen, I do not think they understood the law with reference to theatres. 3496. Who were the magistrates? — Mr. Halls and Sir Richard Birnie. 3497. What evidence did you bring? — Actors belonging to the company of the defendant. 3498. Was their evidence received? — No, they refused to give evidence, having acted in some pieces against which the informations were laid. 3499. How did you proceed then? — We were advised by Mr. Adolphus, as the case was so difficult, to summon a great many of the actors, under the supposi- tion that from some of them, even from one, we should get the fact, that they had played for hire, gain and reward, and without licence or letters patent, and also that Mr. Chapman, the defendant, was manager, in conjunction with Mr. Lee. 3500. You say that the magistrates acted with partiality ; what indication did they give of partiality towards the minor theatres ? — I need not of course state here that it was considered a very unpopular measure on the part of the informer in bringing forward such an information, and there was a gieat noise and clamour in the office upon the least excitation of the people, and the magistrate smiled and took part with the people, and did not keep up the solemnity of the court, as he ought to have done. 3500*. How do you mean that he took part with the people ? — He laughed at the evidence that we produced. 3501. You considered yourself unfairly treated? — Yes. 3502. What was the piece that was acted? — Various pieces ; there were various counts in the information ; one of the pieces was, How to Rule a Wife, and Guy Mannering. 3503. You say that your proceeding was unpopular ?— Treated so very much. 3504. Do you mean that it was unpopular generally, or unpopular in the court ? -—Amongst the auditors ; the office was very crowded. 3505. What sort of audience had you?— It consisted generally of performers, and a great many belonging to the minor theatres. 3506. And your case was dismissed by the magistrate ? — The case was dismissed, against the law. - - 3507. What ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 195 3507. What evidence did you give ? — I got some of the performers from the Mr. W. It. Settle. company ; I called them, as it is impossible to get willing witnesses on these occa- — sions, and they were informed by the magistrate that they had no business to give 3 July 1832. information without they liked, as they would subject themselves to penalties by so doing. 3508. Was not the magistrate right in that ? — Probably he was. 3509. Did they give evidence? — Some sort of evidence, that was of no avail. 3510. What evidence did you give of their having acted for hire, gain or reward .' — By payment of the money at the door. 3511. Did you prove that? — Yes. 3512. By somebody that went on purpose ^ — Yes, one of our own witnesses. 3513. Against whom was the information laid? — There were various informa- tions ; the one that we proceeded upon was against Chapman, the manager, for acting and causing to be acted. 3514. What followed ; did you proceed generally as having acted and causing to be acted ? — We tried to prove that he caused to be acted, by giving directions to the printer of the bills, and we called the printer to know from whom he received instructions, and who paid him ; but he could give no evidence, he did not know who gave him the instructions that night. 3515. Did not the magistrates tell him that he ought to give evidence? — No, they did not say anything to him ; we tried to fix Mr. Chapman as having employed him, but he said he could not tell on that particular night. The magistrates held that we must fix it for one night ; we thought that a general employ for the whole week or month would fix him, because we selected a week in which they played in Lent, when other theatres were shut, in violation of the custom. ^^ 1 6. Was that all the proof which you gave ? — No, we called some of the actors to endeavour to prove that Mr. Chapman was manager, but they could not tell. 3517. None of them could tell? — No. A man named Brown, who played on a particular night, was examined ; he was asked whether he played, and he said he should not answer. 3,51 8. Did the magistrates give any reason for their dismissing the complaint? — Yes, they did ; they stated, that having alleged in the information that they played without letters patent or licence from the Lord Chamberlain, the ornis lay upon the informer to prove the fact; and although a similar case had been decided by Lord Kenyon that it was not necessary, he dismissed it : we tried it before Lord Ten- terden afterwards, who decided it the other way. 35 1 g. Did you not hear Mr. Minshull's evidence ? — Yes. 3520. He put a very different construction upon the Act of Parliament ? — Yes, but he confessed, at the same time, that he did not know the law upon the subject. 3521. But he said that he would convict upon the evidence of a spectator? — But I doubt whether he would, if he came to consider it ; if you prove that a man is manager, you could only do that by persons employed in the internal part of the house. 3522. Do you think he would exceed his duty if he did convict upon spectators* evidence? — I think if he came to read that Act, the loth, he would not convict. 3523. But Mr. Minshull said, it would not be necessary for the plaintiff to prove the non-existence of the licence ? — He said upon notice, he thought not. 3524. He said he should require the proprietor of the larger theatre to give notice.? — We had given notice to the manager to produce his licence, and also letters patent. 3525. Did Mr. Halls call upon the manager to produce his licence ? — No, he said that the onus lay upon us. 3526. Do you conceive that the onus lay upon you ? — No, because I was aware of a case decided by Lord Kenyon on the Game Laws, that was a case in point ; it was a case that was tried before Lord Kenyon ; it was an information under the Game Laws for sporting without a licence ; of necessity, the information must allege, accord- ing to the words of the Act, that he did sport without a licence. The defendant's counsel objected, that no proof having been given by the plaintiff that he had no licence, he must nonsuit. But Lord Kenyon held, that the proof lay upon the defendant ; that the proof that he had a licence lay upon him ; and that was our law. 3527. But did you not carry that evidence to the Court of King's Bench? — Yes. 3528. Did not the Lord Chief Justice consider that sufficient to convict ? — Most certainly. Mr. Campbell, our counsel, said, that he should give no evidence of the 679, B B 2 patent 196 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. Jr. H. Settle, patent or of the licence. Lord Tenterden stated that it was not necessary to prove it. 3 July 1832. 3529. Then Lord Tenterden convicted upon that evidence which the magistrates refused?- -Yes. 3530. You consider it was necessary to prove the management in order to bring home the penalty ? — Yes, for causing to be acted. 3531. And that you failed to do when before the magistrates? — Yes, the wit- nesses would not speak, and the magistrates protected them. 3532. Did Mr. Adolphus, your counsel, put that case that was argued before Lord Kenyon before the magistrates, and argue upon it? — No, he brought another case, a similar case as to the owner of a smuggling vessel. 3533- Do you consider that you had any remedy against the magistrates for deciding against you contrary to law ? — I was aware that there were remedies ; but we thought it better to try the case, and show the parties that we could succeed. 3534. It would have been a cheaper plan to take your remedy against the magis- trates, would it not ? — I doubt that. 3535. What remedy had you against the magistrates? — We could have gone to the Court of King's Bench and have obtained a criminal information against them. 3536. In a criminal information, is it not necessary to prove that a magistrate has acted corruptly ? — Yes, it is. 3537. Do you consider that you have a power under the Act of Geo. 2, to pro- secute any actor that you see acting in an unlicensed theatre ? — I have ascertained since I have been in this room, that it is so ; but I knew a case of Mr. Thomas having taken some people up for acting without a licence, and the magistrates refused to hear it without an information was laid ; but I understand that has been over- ruled ; they took money at the doors. 3538. What was the cost of this proceeding against the theatres? — Very heavy indeed. 3539. Can you state to the Committee how much ? — Yes, I should say about 700/. or 800/. 3540. Do you know what they recovered from the defendant ? — Not a shilling ; it was merely to ascertain the rights more than to get any penalties. 3.541. Do you mean to say that they would not have obtained the penalties if they could ? — No, I do not think they would ; I had never any instructions to enforce them. 3542. Was Mr. Chapman put to any considerable expense ? — No, very trifling. 3543. They were not sufficient to ruin him ? — They were not more than 30/. or 40/. 3544. Did Mr. Chapman take the benefit of the Insolvent Act? — Not in conse- quence of that proceeding. 3545. If the patent theatres had proceeded to recover the penalties, could they have reimbursed themselves their expenses ? — Certainly not. 3546. Did you put down the theatre ? — No. 3547. Or obtain any good by the verdict you obtained ? — No, I think not. 3548. Might not you have reimbursed yourselves by the goods of the theatre.'' — They did not belong to him ; he rented the house for 700 /. a year ; he had no property ; he did not even pay the taxes. 3549. That had no effect upon the other theatres? — None at all; I should rather say it encouraged them. 3550. Then the present state of the law is unsatisfactory ? — The difficulties of getting verdicts under that Act are almost insurmountable. 3551. Arising from the fault of the law itself, or from those who administer the law ? — Not so, for I think the law is very clear, but from want of evidence ; we cannot get evidence from any but their own company, and of course they do not like to give evidence against their masters, and it is an impossibility to get them to do so. 3552. Do not you think that the best mode would be to proceed against one of thejperformers rather than against the manager ? — I do not know : the same proof is necessary if any party plays or causes to be played, or acts a part ; the same evidence is required. 3553. Have you served any notices upon the minor theatres that proceedings will be taken against them if they perform the regular drama ? — There were notices given some time past. © 3554- To ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 197 3554. To what minors? — To all the minors except Sadler's Wells. Mr. Jf. H. Settle. 3555- Would proceedings against those be of the same nature as that which you have undertaken?— It was not acted upon, it was merely to warn them that they 3J"ly 1832. were infringing the law. 3556. Have you taken any other proceedings, excepting that which you have detailed ? — No, neither infonnation nor action. 3557. Did the magistrates in the course of this proceeding suggest any opinion a« to the propriety of proceeding in this way ? — I cannot say that they made any particular observation, but they seemed to treat it with a very great degree of contempt. 3558. The taking money at the door used to be constantly evaded, used it not? — Yes, it is now, I think, frequently. 3559. Is there any way that you can suggest in which the difficulty of procuring evidence would be lessened ? — None. As one proof of the difficulty I had, I called on a very respectable gentleman belonging to the company to prove the hand- writing of Mr. Chapman on the affidavit signed in Chancery, and he would not swear it was his handwriting, because it was signed in full ; he had seen him sign before, but it was his initials. Every difficulty was thrown in our way. 3560. If we were to make the law still tighter, it would not be any easier for yourselves ? — Yes ; I think it might be. I should say that you might not require so much evidence ; that the receipt of money at the door, and the proof that the man rented the house, ought to be sufficient, and that it was a theatre ought to be sufficient. 3561. Did they pay the taxes? — No, they did not pay the taxes ; they evaded it in this way : they took the house at a gross rent, which evaded the taxes. 3562. Would you make the house liable ? — Yes, the landlord, if it were let with a view of conducting theatrical business in it. Mr. John Ogden, called in ; and Examined. 3563. HAVE you paid considerable attention to the subject of the drama gene- Mr. J. Ogden. rally ? — I have been an occasional visitor of the theatre for many years ; and I have had a practical experience, as an auditor, of most of the houses, both major and minor, in town. 3564. Have you any suggestions to make to the Committee respecting them ? — , I beg to observe that I have not obtruded myself upon the Committee. I have been required to attend in consequence of some persons who are concerned in this question knowing that I am in the habit of expressing opinions on theatrical matters, and thinking, as a member of the public generally (not having any interest in any theatre either as actor or author), I might give an independent statement. 3565. What suggestions have you to make upon the subject ? — I should say, as one of the public, that I should be glad to see the regular drama rescued from the blighting effects of the monopoly at present claimed and partially possessed by the patent theatres. I have, however, no private predilection for the minor theatres or hostile feeling towards the major : there are material points in the manage- ment of them all which I should certainly wish to see altered. I am therefore per- fectly prepared to give an unbiassed opinion. 3566. Your opinion simply goes to this, that as one of the public, you are averse to the monopoly.'' — Yes. 3567. What monopoly? — The monopoly of representing the regular drama, which is understood to exist in Covent Garden, Drury Lane and the Haymarket theatres. I certainly think that monopoly very objectionable, both in principle and action. 3568. Does it exist ? — I do not say that it practically exists to the fullest extent ; but it exists to so great a degree, that I consider it prevents the development of much talent both in actors and authors. 3569. You would concur in giving the minor theatres the power of acting the regular drama ? — Yes ; but I would not confine that power exclusively to them and the majors. If this were merely a question between the existing larger theatres and the existing minors, I should feel comparatively little interested in the matter. My object wouldbe to make the regular drama entirely open. I think that if talent had a free course in regard to the theatres, the state of dramatic literature would be much better than it is at present. When I consider the great anonymous and other talent that is exhibited even in periodical literature, I cannot but think that 679. B B 3 much igS MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. J. Ogden, much of that diversified ability might be convertible to dramatic purposes ; and that there would be many eminent authors who would write for the drama, under more 3 July 1832. favourable circumstances, who now do not. 3570. Is there not a much larger remuneration? — There may be at present, but I conceive that that would not be the case if the regular drama were free to all the theatres. 3571. Have you signed any petition on this subject ? — I have not. 3572. If the monopoly was done away with, do you conceive that the great theatres would be entitled to compensation for the loss that they might sustain ? — I should beg to state that I consider that entirely a law question. Perhaps the executive Government could not be expected to mix itself up decidedly with this affair ; but if the Government would leave it to the attorney and solicitor- generals to determine whether the patents are valid under all the circumstances of the case, we should have some sure ground to proceed upon as to the question of compensation. If those officers should certify that the patents of the great theatres are valid, or that at any rate the proprietors are entitled to be paid for their interest in them, the question would next come, what they are worth ; which again would greatly depend on the profits, if any, they have made in any given reasonable num- ber of years, of late date. If the patentees have not enforced the law upon minor theatres, I do not feel that the public are bound pai'ticularly to sympathize with them for any injury they may have sustained from those establishments. The law has been open to them ; if they have not chosen to enforce that law I do not con- ceive that the public, at any rate, can be rightly called upon to make them compen- sation for their injuries, real or supposed. But if it be admitted that they are entitled to compensation, it certainly then becomes a question how they are to be compensated ; and I conceive that might be done by enabling the minor theatres now existing, or that may exist for a certain number of years, to pay the majors a certain sum each, (proportioned to the size of the house in each case,) for liberty to perform the regular drama. I would not of course oblige any minor theatre to play the regular drama unless it thought fit to do so. This would be one mode of giving compensation ; but I do not say it would be the only or the best way. 3573. Will you state, as shortly as possible, what you conceive to be the griev- ances of the public under the present circumstances? — I consider that the opinion that the taste of the public for dramatic amusement has much abated is founded on erroneous notions. Very many persons who do not usually visit the theatres have been rather driven from them than given them up. 3574. What is the grievance of which the public complain; and what remedy do you suggest for this grievance ? — I think the public complain that there is not an opportunity of enjoying the regular drama at so many places or so advantage- ously as they have a right to expect. I conceive that the general opinion of the public is that the monopoly ought to be done away, by throwing the trade or pro- fession entirely open, subject only to police regulations. 3575- Then you would allow any number of theatres to be established that the different speculators might choose to engage in ? — Certainly. I think in that case gentlemen who felt that they had some ability and information on the subject, who had studied it well, and who ought, I consider, to be equally men of literature and men of business, (such as some of our best managei's have been,) would then come forward to establish and to manage theatres. Now that the regular drama is a mono- poly, management sometimes goes from father to son, or from uncle to nephew, and so on : by such and other inappropriate means men are secured in the management of theatres who are utterly incompetent for the business ; they manage it badly, and then throw the blame of their failure upon the supposed decline of the public taste. If there were open competition, these evils, as regards the public, would correct themselves. 3576. You do not think, in short, that the actors who have appeared in the great theatres possess the talent capable to attract the public ?— I think that the same effect would follow as to acting talent as to play-writing talent : more of it would be developed, and our actors generally would acquire a purer style, if the regular drama were free and our theatres well managed : at present, I can say that they are comparatively deserted by many, from their being often too full and exces- sively incommodious. I have sometimes paid my money, at both major and minor theatres, on the assurance that there was room, after the houses were crammed full, and have been scarcely able to catch a casual glimpse of the stage. People of course go to such places with a wish to be amused, but they not unfrequently get ill-used ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. J 99 ill-used and disgusted at the treatment they receive ; and that is one material reason, I believe, why the theatres are deserted by many who would wish to be frequent visitors. 3577' You have communicated your feelings and opinions with respect to theatres ; have you reason to think that this is the feeling of a good many persons ? — I have. 3578. Do you think those grounds are grounds of grievance entertained by a great body of the play-going population of this city ? — I do. 3579. You think, the more theatres there are in which the drama could be acted, the better chance there will be for dramatic authors ? — Certainly. And I have no doubt, that under such circumstances as I have mentioned, one theatre at least might be maintained entirely of a classic description ; and that in three years, at such a theatre, Milton's Comus would become a stock-piece ; acted not in the imperfect and interpolated style in which we have seen it given, but in all its native loveliness, as Milton wrote it. 3580. You do not think that taking all patent theatres, and all legal and illegal theatres, there are enough theatres at present in London ? — There are, perhaps, (though I much doubt it,) a sufficient number of theatres ; but I do not think that they are managed at present judiciously, considering the increased refinement of the public taste, or as well as they certainly would be if the drama were entirely free, subject only to a few well-weighed regulations for the preservation of peace and order. 3581. Should you recommend any alteration in that respect? — Whenever anew theatre was opened, I would propose that the managers should register it, with the security of two housekeepers, or other substantial persons, in a specified moderate sum, to make the establishment amenable to police regulations ; and the principal of those police regulations should be, I think, that they should not be allowed to admit above a certain number in each part of the house, proportioned to its size, as specified by a surveyor. ' 3.582. You think that if the drama was thrown quite open, more people would be induced to come forward as managers than at present ? — I think it would then become a matter of ambition ; I consider that many gentlemen who now would not like to enter into dramatic speculations, would have no objection to do so if they were empowered to produce classical pieces of Shakspeare, and other great or good writers, living or dead. 3583. Do you mean to say that you would rather see Richard the Third performed at the Adelphi than at Covent Garden?— It is to be understood that we do not merely speak of persons who are upon one of the first rows of the pit, but of people generally in the theatre. 3584. You would rather see any representation at the Adelphi than at one of the two great theatres? — A regular drama I certainly would, supposing myself to be placed, in each case, at the farthest possible point from the stage. Mr. J. Ogden. 3 July 1 83a. Martis, 10° die Julii, 1832. EDWARD LYTTON BULWER, ESQ., in the Chair. Thomas Halls, Esq., called in ; and Examined. 3585. I BELIEVE you are a tnagistrate at Bow-street? — Yes. 3586. Were you ever applied to on behalf of the proprietors of either of the two great theatres to prevent the performance of the drama at the minor theatres ? — Not on behalf of the proprietors of those theatres, but on behalf of a person named John Parsons. Some time since he laid an information before me against the Tottenham-street theatre, a theatre which existed under that name on the 14th June 1830. 3587. That was for performing the drama ? — Yes. 3588. What was your conduct upon that occasion ? — The information was received, and a day appointed for hearing the information before myself and the late Sir Richard Birnie, and it came on to be heard on a subsequent day, which 1 have not got down : it was in the same month, I think :i4th June. B B 4 3589. Before Thomas Hal's, E»q. 200 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Thomas Halls, Eiq. 3589. Before you r — Before me and Sir Richard Birnie. 3590- What was the result ? — The case was dismissed for want of sufficient 10 July 1832. evidence. 3591. Sufficient evidence to prove what? — Sufficient evidence to prove that the parties were not duly licensed. 3592. What evidence was required? — An examination on oath of the books of the Lord Chamberlain ; and if the books themselves were produceable, the books themselves were required to be produced, which they were not. 3593. What do you mean by the books of the Lord Chamberlain ? — I presume he keeps books ; or any documents he had to show the parties were not licensed. We did not confine ourselves to the books. 3594. The Lord Chamberlain has no authority to license a theatre out of the city of Westminster? — I believe not. 3595' So that it could not appear in the Lord Chamberlain's books, as his power only extends to the city of Westminster and to places which are Royal residences ? — I believe a patent is an authority likewise which might exist out of Westminster. 3596. But the Tottenham -street theatre being out of the city and liberties of Westminster, the Lord Chamberlain could exercise no jurisdiction in granting a licence to that theatre ? — No. 3597. Then nothing could appear upon the Lord Chamberlain's books on that subject ? — No, but from the Patent-office. I have named the Lord Chamberlain's office in mistake ; I should have said the Patent-office. 3598. Did you consider it necessary at Bow-street, a complaint being made against parties for a violation of the statute in acting the regular drama, that the parties making that complaint should prove the defendants had not a licence ? — Yes. 3599- Would it not have been more in the regular course to require the parties so complained against to show the authority under which they acted ? — No, for this reason : being duly licensed is made a substantive part of the offijnce in the clause in the Act of the 10 Geo. 2, which creates the offence. If it had been by way of proviso in a subsequent clause the parties would have been bound, I con- ceive, to prove they were licensed, but it being a substantive part of the offence by the clause creating the offence, the parties laying the information were bound to prove every circumstance which was attachable to the offence itself. 3600. Is it usual to call in parties to prove a negative? — No, unless it is a sub- stantive part of the offence ; in that case it is. If a negative constitutes the gist of the offence, the accusers are called upon to prove it. 3601. In the case of an information under the game laws, where it states the person against whom the information is laid is not possessed of a sufficient estate to qualify him, have not the Court of King's Bench determined that the onus of prov- ing he has an estate lies upon the person who is accused ? — It depends upon the construction of the Act of Parliament. If that is in a subsequent clause to that creating the offence, I can easily understand why it is so. 3602. Did not the case of Mr. Chapman, of the Tottenham-street theatre, come before the Court of King's Bench afterwards ? — Yes, it did. 3603. Did Lord Tenterden entertain the same opinion with respect to the evi- dence that was required ? — I do not know what proof Lord Tenterden had before him that the theatre was not duly licensed. Of course I presume he had sufficient proof. 3604. You did not think it worth while to inquire whether Lord Tenterden's opinion coincided with yours ? — I do not know that it did not. 3605. You did not think it worth your while to inquire whether it did or not ? — I did not know that the point was raised. 3606. Did you inquire whether it was or not? — I inquired, and I believe it was satisfactorily proved they had no sufficient licence. Surely the case itself proves that without inquiry. 3607. Do you mean to say, you understood there was proof adduced before Lord Tenterden that no licence had been issued either from the Patent-office or any other place ? — I presume so ; I do not know the fact. 3608. If the case were to come before you again, should you decide in the same way ? — Precisely. 3609. Do you mean in Lord Tenterden's way, or your own way? — My own. way. 361 o. Y'ou would dismiss the case ? — Yes, if there was not sufficient evidence. 3611. Do ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 20 x 3611. Do you not know that opinion of yours was overruled by Lord Tenterden ? Thomas Halls, Esq. — No, I do not. 361 2. If you were aware that Lord Tenterden's opinion differed from yours, how 10 Jul}' 1832. should you decide in future ? Should you call upon the informer to prove they had no licence, or upon the defendants to prove they had a licence r — I take for granted that the statement of Lord Tenterden's opinion is correct, but my conception of the law is otherwise. 3613. You think the informer must prove the non-existence of the licence ? — In this particular instance I do, as it is a substantive part of the oflPence. 3614. Are you aware that in Westminster, within your jurisdiction, there is a theatre acting without any licence ? — No doubt about it. 3615. You know there is one? — Yes ; I think there are three. 36 1 6. Which are they ? — I think the Olympic is in Westminster ; I do not know whether it is actually open at this moment. 3617. That is licensed by the Lord Chamberlain; are there any acting without any licence or any authority from the Lord Chamberlain, the magistrates, or any one else? — There is a theatre in the Strand, called the Strand theatre, which I believe is so circumstanced. 3618. Then, being aware of that, is it not your duty to prevent that infraction of the law ? — 1 know of no authority that I have to interfere without an information laid before me on oath. 36 1 g. What description of information should you require in order to close that theatre? — I do not know that I have any power to close a theatre at all. 3620. You say you would not interfere without an information ; what descrip- tion of information should you require ? — An information on oath setting forth the offence, conformable to the statute, and applying for any penalty that might be inflicted for it. 3621. What sort of evidence should you consider sufficient with respect to the performance ; should you consider the evidence of a spectator sufficient ? — Any person who could prove dramatic performances were carried on at a particular day, or a particular time, in that theatre, contrary to the form of the statute, would be sufficient evidence to constitute that part of the offence. 3622. And you would then convict and inflict the penalty? — If the proof was satisfactory ; and tliat would be the question for the consideration of the magis- trates. If the question is put to myself, I beg to state I have some doubt whether magistrates, as such, have any such power as the law at present stands. 3G23. Do you mean under the 10 Geo. 2?— Yes; I have my doubts on the subject ; but at the same time I should wish the Committee to understand that it is merely my own individual doubt ; but it has been matter of conversation amongst magistrates, and I have strong doubts, from a review of all the statutes that touch theatrical performances, whether the magistrates have that power. I am quite aware the courts at Westminster have the power. 3624. Will you state shortly upon what ground those doubts rests ? — Upon the alteration that has been made by the late Vagrant Acts, which repeal all other Acts relating to vagrants, and do not in any respect touch theatrical performances. I beg the Committee will understand that the case in question went off on a matter of evidence ; not either upon the merits of the case or the laws of the case, but upon a point of evidence. 3625. Did Sir Richard Birnie agree with you in your opinion as to the necessity * of negativing the existence of the licence ? — Yes. 3626. Fully?— Yes. 3627. When the patent theatres came before you to make their complaints, do you think they received a fair and impartial hearing ? — I gave my mind, as far as I am individually concerned, most attentively to the subject ; and I trust that every thing I undertake, I undertake upon fair principles. 3628. There is a complaint against the magistrates at Bow-street, that they did not receive a fair and impartial hearing ? — I have no information upon that subject. If there is any point in which you can see partiality to have existed, I shall be happy to explain it. 3629. What proof do you consider as sufficient to show they are acting for hire, gain or reward ? — There may be a variety of proof upon that point, but the direct proof is the taking of money. 3630. Suppose an information to be laid against an actor for having performed upon an unlicensed stage, would you consider it sufficient proof of his having 679. c c played 202 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Thomas Halls, Esq. played for hire, gain or reward, that money was taken at the doors ? — Cer- tainly. 10 July 1832. 3631 . Have any cases come before you, since that doubt has arisen in your mind, with regard to the Vagrant Act ? — No ; that is the only case of the kind that, I believe, has been laid at Bow-street for a long course of years. 3632. The last Vagrant Act had passed before that time ? — Yes. 3^33- Do you consider the sale of tickets at shops in the neighbourhood, and the payment of money for them, if you could bring that home to the manager, sufficient evidence against the actor that he had performed for hire, gain or re- ward ? — That is a point which, I conceive, has not been decided ; but I should have no doubt in any respect in treating it as such if I was persuaded it was for the pur- pose of evading the law. I look upon an evasion of the law to be precisely the same as the commission of the offence, if it is direct, but it might be very difficult to prove. 3634. Should you attach more importance to a charge coming before you from the Lord Chamberlain's office, than from the patent theatres, against a minor theatre for playing contrary to law? — I take it an information is a matter of common right. 3635. You never refused to convict for the patent theatres, at the same time admitting you would do it for the Lord Chamberlain ? — I had never any informa- tion from the patent theatres directly before me. 3636. Would the sale of tickets at shops in the neighbourhood, and the conse- quent admission by these tickets into the theatre, be evidence that it was open for hire, gain or reward? — It would depend upon the nature of the evidence, showing the mode in which the ticket was purchased. If it was purchased for the express purpose I should consider it an evasion equivalent to taking money, but it would be difficult to prove, from the indirect mode of purchasing such tickets, that it was actually for the purpose of hire, gain or reward. 3637. Would not the admission obtained by that ticket be sufficient proof that it was sold for that purpose? — I should be certainly inclined to treat it as such. 3638. Was not the information laid against the Tottenham-street theatre at the instigation of the proprietors of Co vent Garden theatre? — Not to my knowledge; I believe it was. 3639. Was it not -done in their name? — No ; it was laid in the name of John Parsons, I believe at the instance of the proprietors of Covent Garden theatre; but I have no right to state that as the fact. 3640. Is the Committee to understand, from what you have already stated, that your conception of the law is this, that when an information is laid against any par- ties for performing the drama contrary to law, the onus of proving that lies with the party giving the information, and you do not feel it part of your duty as a magis- trate to call upon the parties so informed against to produce the licence or authority by which they perform the drama? — If the information is laid specifically under that statute, I think the party laying the information is bound, in applying for the penalty under that particular statute, to prove every circumstance of the case, and that is one of the circumstances, which are contained in the clause creating the offence, for not being duly licensed. 3641. Is there any other mode of laying an information against any parties for performing the regular drama which you feel would justify you as a magistrate in calling upon the parties so informed against to produce the authority under which they are acting ? — I believe not, to the best of my knowledge. 3642. Then, in the existing state of the l.iw, there is no means of convicting any parties by calling upon them to produce the authority under which they act, and if they fail to produce that authority, so convicting them? — I do not go that length. I think it is possible to prove by other evider/ce that they are not licensed. 3643. You do not feel that the law authorizes you under any circumstances to call upon the parties so complained against themselves to prove they are licensed ? — Certainly not to prove the case against themselves. 3644. Suppose any man is committing an act which is held generally to be ille- gal, you think there does not exist any authority in the magistrates to call on that party to show he is acting under legal authority ; but in your opinion the onus rests in the party making the complaint to prove the whole case that the party is offending against the law ? — I beg to state, I confine myself to this specific question ; but I am of that opinion upon my construction of the statute. 3645. Then the law is so far defective that there are no means of calling upon the ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 203 the parties who appear to be committing an offence, to show any authority under Thomas HalU, E»q. which they are acting, which would be a defence against the information ? — Admit- ■ ting that is an offence, I think that is so. My doubt is, whether it is an oflPence in ^o J"ly i^S^- the present state of the law. Theatrical performances do not constitute an offence in themselves unless they are performed in such manner as to bring them within the terms of this or some other statute. 3646. Then what do you conceive to be the use of the Lord Chamberlain's power of licensing? — I know nothing about that. 3647. The Act is founded on the Lord Chamberlain's power? — The. Lord Chamberlain is the officer of the Court. 3648. The Act is very explicit, that no theatre shall be opened, unless it is licensed by the Lord Chamberlain, within the city of Westminster ? — Under the terms of the statute it is so. 3649. The sum of the whole is, that the law, as it at present stands, is entirely defective as to any power to put down theatres in any part of London ? — Yes. 3650. In your opinion, as a magistrate, it is entirely defective for any purpose of that sort? — That is my opinion, most decidedly. 3651. Do you not consider performers equally liable to a penalty as well as the proprietors of the theatre ? — C ertainly ; if the case is proved against the proprietors, and they are proved to be performing, they are equally liable. 3652. Performers never can be expected to produce a licence? — No; but sup- posing the law was such, he might be able to show he was performing in a licensed theatre, which would exempt him. 3653. You would consider Mr. Mash, of the Lord Chamberlain's oflBce, coming forward at Bow-street, and stating that such a theatre had not a licence from the Lord Chamberlain, was sufficient evidence to show the theatre was unlicensed ? — I take it if Mr. Mash or the Lord Chamberlain did it in their own person, they must lay an information upon oath. 3654. Suppose Mr. Mash should appear before you at Bow- street in support of an information laid by the patent theatres, and state that the Strand theatre had no licence from the Lord Chamberlain, would that be sufficient evidence to convict the proprietors of violating the Act of Parliament? — I should think it would. 3655. Then the evidence is very easily obtained ? — Upon that point it is. 3656. What could Mr. Mash have known of it in that case, Tottenham-street theatre being out of the jurisdiction of the Lord Chamberlain ?^ — Nothing at all ; I am supposing a case in which the Lord Chamberlain could prove the charge. 3657. That is with respect to the Strand theatre?— I should think with respect to that it would be sufficient evidence. 3658. Are you of opinion that in consequence of the alterations of the Vagrant Acts it has become necessary to amend and enlarge the Act of 10 Geo. 2, c. 28, to render that Act, under the present circumstances, effective for the object for which it was passed ? — Out of the city of Westminster I think it is necessary. 3659. Why not within the city of Westminster ? — Within the city of West- minster theatres must be licensed by the Lord Chrmberlain. I do not see there is that difficulty of proving a theatre is not licensed by the Lord Chamberlain as there may be with regard to a patent. 3660. You said you felt some technical difficulties in the case? — Only in that case. There was not sufficient evidence, in my judgment, that the theatre was not liceUvSed at the Patent office. I must presume that some evidence was produced in the higher court. 3661. Supposing all theatres in the city of Westminster or elsewhere were brought under the control of the Lord Chamberlain, and the Lord Chamberlain granted licences to all, there would be no difficulty in putting down those theatres which did not receive a licence, if the Lord Chamberlain was the only person who could grant a licence ?■ — I think there would be no diflBculty if it was properly worded. I beg to make one observation in consequence of the question that was put to me before the last. I think the question applied generally to the whole of the statute. The statute likewise gives power to the higher courts of Westminster to inflict these penalties, and I do not think any judgment of my own upon the effect of the Vagrant Acts can at all operate on the higher courts. It is only so far as the jurisdiction of the magistrate is concerned, and that it is not generally defective has been proved at the Court of King's Bench. 3G62. Lord Tenterden's decision you said will not bind you in any future case ? — Not in the slightest, independent of any general points of law. We always view c c 2 the 204 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Tfiomas HalUyBsii. the decisions of the higher courts with great respect, as they are our guides; but with regard to whether an information can be laid successfully before a magistrate 10 July 1832. or not, the decision of the Court of King's Bench would not affect me. 366;^. The question applied to a summary information before a magistrate ?— - Yes ; I am of that opinion, as applied to that. 3664. Do you think there are more theatres in Westminster than are absolutely necessary or required by the public ? — There are such arrangements as to the time and seasons of opening these theatres, that it may be difficult to specify whether there are more than are required. There ai'e certainly more than are necessary for the city of Westminster if they were open each night. 3665. You stated, in the case of the Tottenham-street theatre, you considered there ought to be a search made in the Patent-office, to prove there was no patent existing at the theatre. Are you not aware that this Act takes away from the King all power to grant any patent, except in the city of Westminster ? — It did not affect existing patents. 3666. Then what they must have looked for was a patent previous to the 10th Geo. 2 ? — Yes, or any legal authority. 3CG7. What power had the magistrates, or anybody else, to grant a legal autho- rity for the Tottenham-street theatre ? — I do not believe there is any power. 3668. Then was it not absurd to call for proof to negative an authority which could not exist at all ? — It might exist by patent, but not by a magistrate's licence. 3669. That patent must have existed before the 10th of Geo. 2, and therefore before Tottenham-street was built ? — Possibly ; but I believe Sadlers Wells existed before there was a house within a considerable distance of it. 3670. Are not those theatres which are open out of Westminster by virtue of a magistrate's licence for music and dancing, bound to write over their doors by what statute they are licensed ? — They are. 3671. Should you, in that case, require the informer to search whether there was any patent or licence ? — Not unless it is so specified in the statute, which I be- lieve it is not. 3672. An information against those theatres licensed for music and dancing for acting the regular drama would be under the 10th Geo. 2 ? — Yes. 3673. Then in that case, with that written up over the door, should you expect the informer to produce proof there was no patent or other licence .-' — I should not draw any distinction ; their being licensed for one thing could not affect their com- mitting an offence of another description. 3674. You might presume they had two licences ? — I never presume anything j I only require proof. 3675. The Coburg or the Surrey being in a situation where there is no autho- rity by law to grant them any licence, except that for music and dancing, must be proved not to be licensed? — I believe the Coburg, or any other theatre so situated, might, by legal possibility, have a patent. 3676. Previous to that Act; previous to 1737? — Yes. 3677. Is it not a matter of common notoriety that no such patent exists ? — I dare say it is. 3678. Is there any theatre which has a patent granted previous to that ? — All the patents are previous to that. 3679. Are you not aware that Drury Lane performed on a 21 years' licence, and not a patent?— I am not aware of that ; I never saw the patent of any one of the theatres. If I did, I should not exercise my own knowledge, but require strict proof. If we were once to open that loose door, we should never be able to act with any degree of justice. 3680. Then we are to understand you, as a magistrate, being perfectly aware the law is violated every night in the Strand theatre, do not think it is your duty to interfere to vindicate the law ? — Certainly I have no power to interfere ; I am bound to receive informations upon oath which are laid before me, but a magistrate has no power in his individual capacity. 3681. Suppose a beer-shop is open in your neighboui'hood, and it was not licensed, should you call upon the informer to prove there is no licence, or upon the other party to produce a licence? — They must produce their licence, because it is under a different Act of Parliament. It is impossible to reason upon one case from the other. 3C82. Why should informers against theatres be called upon to prove the non- existence ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 205 existence of a licence any more than informers against beer-shops? — Because the Thomas Halls, Esq. offences are specific, as they are created under the statute. 3683. Suppose another case to come before you, in which you thought proof of 10 July 1832. the non-existence of a patent necessary, how far back previous to the 10 Geo. 2, 1737, should you expect the search to be made for this patent to be proved before you ; through how many reigns ? — If there was no record of it in the Patent-office, that would be sufficient evidence. If it was proved there was no record of such patent, that would be sufficient. 3684. Then you would expect them to search all the records back to William the Conqueror or Hardicanute ? — I did not say that. 3685. You would expect them to search the Record-office in the Tower ? — Where theatrical patents are registered. 3686. Through all times of English history? — Since the time patents were created. I believe patents were not granted so long ago as you i-efer to. 3687. How do you know that there may not have been patents granted by Wil- liam Rufusr — I never heard of any. 368S. There never were theatrical representations without some licence or other? — Probably not. Mr. Francis Place, called in ; and Examined. 3689. YOU are the author of a pamphlet which was put forth some time ago, Mt. Francis Place. called '' A New Way to pay Old Debts " ?— Yes. 3690. What was the chief purport of that pamphlet ? — It was written in conse- quence of what I conceived was a fraudulent attempt on the part of those who were projecting to rebuild Drury Lane theatre. Some of my friends had paid deposits for shares, and that led me to examine the reports which had been made by the projectors, when it appeared to me to be a fraudulent transaction. That induced me to write my pamphlet, not as a pamphlet originally, but as information for my particular friends. They showed it to some of the projectors, and they returned the deposit-money, with interest, for the time they had it in their posses- sion. The papers were out of my hands for some time, and they got into the hands of others, who were projecting a third theatre, some of whom asked my leave to print them ; I consented, and they printed the pamphlet. 3691. Since that time you have given great attention to the subject of theatres? — Yes, more or less. 3692. Do you consider it a matter of notoriety that the affairs of the two great theatres are in a very bad and unprosperous state r — That is acknowledged by the proprietors. 3693. What do you consider the cause ? — The size of the theatres. 3694. Do you consider that has any connexion with the monopoly ? — Exactly that. The monopoly led them to construct large houses ; they built the public out. This appears to me to be the cause of all their difficulties. 3695. Then you consider the size of the houses as the chief cause of the ruin of the proprietors of the theatres ? — Yes. 3696. Do you consider the performances now given at the minor theatres has much to do with that ? — I have not examined that question particularly. I am quite certain the size of the houses is sufficient to account for the ruin without any- thing else. 3697. Have you at all examined into the nature of the patents granted to the two great theatres ? — I read them some time ago. I have not read them lately. 3698. Do you consider they were granted as a gift or a trust? — They, like all other patents, I take it, were granted for the good of the public, and not for the sole interest of the parties to whom they were given. 3699. Do you consider that object, the good of the public, has been effected ? — No ; 1 think the large houses have destroyed the drama as well as the property embarked in them. It has deteriorated actors and authors. 3700. You have examined into the losses of the two great theatres ; the loss at Drury Lane is very considerable, is it not ? — Yes ; and I have made some memo- randums. The loss upon each of the houses is very considerable. In the pamphlet alluded to, it is said that the committee of the projectors reported the claims on Drury Lane exceeded 435,000/., with a rent-charge of 7,500/. which was valued at 150,000/.; thus the claims were 585,000 /. These are their own figui-es. The new house cost 212,000/. and the assets realized about 30,000/. This is the best information I have been able to procure, and I believe it is tolerably correct. 679. c c 3 3701 • The 2o6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. Francis llace. 3701. The assets of what? — The assets arising from the insurance, and the old materials left after the fire in i8og. The value of the assets, deducted from 10 July 1832. the money the new house cost, leaves a balance of 767,000/., which shows the sum at that time embarked in Drury Lane was 767,000/. Of this sum about 370,000/. was given up as lost and gone for ever. 3702. Where have you obtained that information? — I have obtained that infor- mation from the reports of the Drury Lane committee, printed by themselves. Two of the items are confirmed by evidence delivered in this room by the treasurer of the theatre. 3703. Thei-e is no doubt about their being authentic ? — None whatever. As far as it goes it is clearly authentic. This sort of evidence can only be of use to show the object intended by the patents has not been realized. 3704. Do you mean the public would have supported the monopoly if it had been used for the public amusement? — I have no doubt about it. I think it follows that if the houses had not been more than from half to two-thirds their present size they would have flourished. It is the excessive outlay, and the high prices for admission, the consequences of the monopoly, inducing them to build houses which cannot be filled, which has ruined them. 3705. Then you conclude they have not fulfilled their trust by the public not supporting their theatres? — Yes. I never paid, and I never will pay, "js. to go to the boxes ; many whom I am acquainted with have staid away for the same reason, as well as from their not being able either to see or hear. 3706. And do you not think there is some fault to be attached to the description of entertainment they give ? — I do not know that it can be called a fault ; they have been compelled to deviate fi'om what you call the regular or legitimate drama. I have an abstract here from a deposition of Mr. Harris, made in the Court of Chancery, which shows most clearly that from the rebuilding of Covent Garden theatre in 1 809 to 1821, they did not clear a shilling by the regular drama. 3707. What did they clear by ? — By the Chi-istmas pantomimes. Mr. Harris, in his appeal to the House of Lords, Exhibit No. 1, page 62, says, " upon the success of the Christmas pantomimes in a great measure depended the whole profits of the different seasons." In page 64 is an account of the receipts of the house during the run of the pantomimes for eleven seasons, beginning in 1810-11 and ending 1820-21. The money produced was 184,242/.; the annual average is 16,767 /. The profit, as it was called, during these eleven seasons, (case, page 9,) averages 13,500/., leaving an annual balance of 3,267/. in favour of pantomimes, a sum more than sufficient to pay all the expenses of these pantomimes. The average profits, as they call tliem, of each of these seasons was 13,500/., and the average produce of the pantomimes was 16,767 /. It follows then necessarily that no profit was got from all their other performances ; not a shilling beyond the expense from anything but the pantomimes during the eleven seasons when the concern was most prosperous. 3708. That has not been the case recently? — No; that was from 1810-11 to 1820-21 ; even pantomimes have failed since that time, and there has been no income beyond expenditure. There was no actual profit from the time the house was enlarged after the fire, not even so much as two per cent, clear interest on the capital from 1809 to 1822. With reference to Drury Lane, I stated the claims "were 767,000 / ; a large proportion of the 767,000 /. was given up. If we were even to suppose that half the whole outlay was abandoned, that 383,500 /. was relinquished, there would still remain 383,500 /., and there are 20 years' interest upon it, making it still 767,000 /. 3709. Then from that statement of loss you appear to draw this deduction ; first, you consider it shows the monopoly had not protected the two great theatres from loss J and, secondly, you would assume that very loss was to be considered a proof that the two great theatres have not attained their object, namely, the good of the public, because in that case you think the public would have supported them ? —Yes. 371 0. Were the patents ever sold ? — Yes ; in the reports of the Drury Lane pro- jectors in 1811, and in evidence given before this Committee, it is proved that the patent which was said to be dormant, that is, dead and buried, was sold for 1 6,000 /. It was sold in 1792. 3711. What patent was that? — Killigrew's patent. The two patents were in the hands of the proprietors of Covent Garden theatre, and it was thought neces- sary ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 207 sary that Drury Lane should have one ; as they were acting under a licence which, Mr. Francis Place. strictly speaking, was, I think, illegal, they thought it right to obtain the patent. 3712. Was the theatre at that time in a flourishing state ? — Yes. 10 July 1832. 3713. In a more flourishing state than they are now? — Yes, it was then in a flourishing state, and that gives the highest value of the two patents. 3714. Then you would estimate them at 32,000/.? — Yes, as was supposed at that time. 3715. Do you consider the two great houses are entitled, in consequence of those great losses, to any compensation, supposing the patents were thrown open ? — Compensation for an outlay, or a compensation for the patent, or both ? 3716. Compensation for the patents, and the ground upon which they made the outlay?— I think they are not entitled to compensation upon any ground at all; they speculated beyond their strength, lost their fortunes, (which I am very sorry they did,) and have not performed the conditions of the grant. They have neither been of use to themselves nor to the public, and I do not see what ground for compensation can be laid. 3717. Then you consider those sums of money laid out form no ground whatever for compensation ?— I think they do not form any. 3718. Do you consider that the monopoly has fostered actors and actresses to the full proportion in which actors and actresses can be fostered in this country ? — No ; I think it is impossible without competition. There is so much growing talent, and such perfection of talent, in other professions, that competition for fame in theatricals, as well as in other things, would produce similar results. I know very well the present distressed state of the drama, and I attribute it to the size of the theatres. The only first-rate actors they have left us in tragedy are Mr. Macready, whose range is limited, and Mr. Kean, who only plays occasionally ; in comedy, Mr. Kemble, Mr. Liston, Mr. Dowton and Mr. Farren. Of these, at the present moment, there are under engagements at the two monopoly houses, in comedy Mr. Farren, and in tragedy Mr. INIacready. Of women there are not one first-rate actress now upon the stage at either house. This is the state to which the drama has been brought by the monopoly. 3719. Do you consider that is a general feeling among the tradespeople in the middle classes ? — I know it is the opinion of many among the middle class of people, and of many literary men, who are very competent to judge. 3720. What do you consider would be the effect of throwing open the theatres, that is, allowing the regular drama at the minor theatres? — It would prevent the proprietors of the so called patent houses losing any more money. I do not believe at the present moment the patents would sell for anything without the theatres. 3721. You mean by shutting them up ? — No, let them take their chance. I think you will find if the houses were sold they would not pay what they call their debts and the losses incurred since they were built, exclusive of the investment of capital, which, with interest, is 600,000 /. or 700,000 /. each, at the least ; if they were sold there would be nothing left for the company of Drury Lane nor the proprietors of Covent Garden, and no chance of further losses. 3722. What do you consider would be the effect of throwing open the theatres, as far as the public is concerned ? — There would be speculations in that as in other trading concerns, and after a while the play-going public would have the entertain- ments they desired, in reasonably-sized theatres, and at reasonable prices. 3723. Do you think there would be more theatres than there are now? — There would soon be the number that was proper, there would not be more j it is the case in other large concerns, and would be the case with theatrical concerns. 3724. Have you considered the question of licensing plays? — The opinion I entertain with respect to licensing is, that the power of licensing should be compulsory. 3725. That is, licences for the theatres ? — Yes. 3726. But with respect to licences for plays ? — I do not think there need be any licence for plays. 3727. Do you not think there would be political plays? —Yes; and there ought to be. In respect to immorality and indecency, writers, managers and players will go to the verge of sufferance ; they always have done so ; and the public will correct them as it has corrected them. When the Recruiting Officer was brought out at Covent Garden some three or four years ago, a great deal was cut out, and yet some of the performers took more out ; they would not speak the words. It could not be otherwise. There is a sufficient safeguard in the deference they are compelled to 679. c c 4 pay 2o8 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMI'lTEE Mr. Francis Place, pay to the audience. I do not think the theatre ever led the public in these respects, but that they were governed by the public. I have taken some pains to investigate JO July 1833. tiie subject, and have satisfied myself, that from the Restoration to the present time the indecency and immorality exhibited on the stage was just what pleased the public, and as the public became more moral and more particular the theatres con- formed to their wishes. 3728. Do you know who the licenser was when the Recruiting Officer was played ? — I do not know ; it was in 1 705. 372Q. The licenser was not appointed at that time ? — No, the Master of the Revels" and the Lord Chamberlain had the power, which they endeavoured to increase. 3730. To what period are you alluding when you say the performers carried the corrections further than the licenser, in the case of the Recruiting Officer 1 — Three or four seasons past. The Recruiting Officer, and other plays of Wycherley, Vanbrugh, Congreve, Farquhar, and others, which would not be tolerated now, were played at the commencement of the last century with great applause, and continued to be played as long as the public would endure them. With respect to the patents, the Committee is aware they were trifled with from the beginning. There were patents granted to other persons. Queen Anne granted a patent or a licence ; George the First and George the Second both granted patents or licences ; King George the Third granted a patent in the nature of a licence for 21 years to Drury Lane, when both the original patents were in the hands of the proprietors of Covent Garden theatre. 3731. Do you consider from that trifling the persons who embarked money in the two great theatres ought to have considered it in the nature of a speculation ? — Certainly ; they could not expect them to be continued against the public interest for ever. We find there was a patent to Betterton, who carried his company to Lincoln's-Inn-Fields, then to Vanbrugh's theatre in the Haymarket, and back again to Lincoln's-Inn-Fields. 3732. Do you think the public would have subscribed their money to build those theatres if they had not thought these theatres possessed these exclusive privileges ? — No, I do not think they would. 3733. Then the public were induced to advance their money under false pre- tences r — I dare say the parties thought they had an exclusive right. I do not mean to say they intended to commit a fraud in that particular. 3734. Then the public were ill-used in subscribing their money? — They were ill-used ; and my friends who subscribed would have lost their money if it had not led to the investigation whigh saved them. The Drury Lane Committee, or some of them, saw the matter so clearly, that they not only paid back the deposits to my friends, but they paid them interest for the time they had the money. 373,5. But do you not think these ill-used people are entitled to compensation? — Certainly not : the persons who speculated in the Golden Lane BreVvery, where a very large sum was lost, were deceived, and deceived themselves ; they did not consider themselves entitled to compensation. 3736. Do you mean to state that, in your opinion, there ought to be no limit to any political allusions in a play, or any indecency or immorality, which might be produced at a theatre, other than the limit which would be imposed upon it by the judgment of the audience? — Yes, I think no other restriction is necessary. In the case of the Recruiting Officer and of the Beaux Stratagem, Mr. Kemble and Mr. Keeley used words which were much softened from the original, yet they caused a sensation in the house which prevented their using them any more. I thought the rebukes they received wholesome and sufficient corrections. 3737. Do you believe that opinion, which you have just expressed, is the pre- valent and general opinion of the public ? — No, I do not think it is. I know it is the opinion of many well-read and intelligent men, but I do not think it is the eneral opinion. 3738. You think the small theatres might fairly be allowed the privilege of play- ing Shakspeare ?— I think it might be fairly left to all to play what they please. 3739. You think it would natually settle like other things?— No doubt it must. If you want to have any thing done as well as it can be done, you must leave it to competition. 3740. Suppose the minor theatres had the privilege of performing any plays of Shakspeare, and nevertheless, from the actors at that small theatre being incom- petent ON DRAIMATIC LITERATURE. 209 petent to play it, they should be prevented from giving Shakspeare's plays the effect Mr. Francis Piac^, which they received at the larger theatres, and consequently they do not attract "" the public so much as a vaudeville, do you think the minor theatres would not '° "^"'y ^^32. perform Shakspeare, which would not attract the public, but would perform vaude- villes which would attract ? — Certainly ; they would play that which would bring ^^ most money ; and they would judge of the propriety of what should be played by the state of their company. Mr. Richard Malone Raymond, called in ; and Examined. 3741. ARE you the manager of the Liverpool theatre? — Joint-manager of the Mr. Liverpool theatre. ^- ^- ^«3""o«<'< 3742. Are there two theatres in Livei-pool ? — There are three or four. 3743. How long have you been manager? — -Not quite three years. 3744. Are you in the habit of representing many new dramas which have been brought out in the London patent or other theatres ? — We have occasionally played some farces, never any plays. 3745. Is yours a theatre which acts the regular drama ? — No. 3746. You have played some farces which have been produced in London ? — The first season we opened the theatre we did that repeatedly. 3747. Have you ever had any communication with the authors of those pieces, with respect to remuneration ? — Never. 3748. Supposing the authors had power to prevent your acting those plays with- out remuneration, should you have thought it worth your while to pay them any- thing for the power of acting them? — It would depend very much upon the terms they would have to propose. 3749. You would feel yourself authorized, or you would find it advantageous to you, to play those pieces though you paid the author a small sum, say 20 /. ? — Most decidedly, if we thought the piece would be productive in proportion to the sum we paid for it. 3750. Have you played any pieces for which you would have been able to pay that sort of remuneration ? — I do not know that we have to the amount that is mentioned. 3751. Would you have paid a smaller sum ? — Yes. 3752. Do you think, generally speaking, the managers of provincial theatres would be able to remunerate authors with small sums or large sums for the power of playing their pieces after they had been performed at the London theatres ? — Yes, 1 think so. 3753. You think they could afford a moderate sum ? — Yes. 3754. Do you think such a copyright or property in their pieces might be given to authors without injuring the provincial theatres by stopping the performance of those pieces' in the country unless they paid for them ? — If they were prohibited from playing pieces produced in London, there would be a great scarcity of new pieces in the country. 3755- That would arise from the provincial theatres not being able to remunerate the authors ? — From their not being able to remunerate the authors if their demands were exorbitant. 3756. Do you think they would in general agree with the provincial managers as to terms ? — I think, in general, they would. ' 3757- Upon the whole, you see no objection to such an enactment? — I do not. William fVil/cins, Esq., called in ; and Examined. 3758. I BELiETE you have been concerned in the building of several provincial j^. fVilkins, Esq. theatres ? — Yes, I have ; a great many. * ,„^^ ' 3759. Are you proprietor of or concerned in some theatres ?— I am proprietor of six theatres, the freehold or very long leases. 3760. What theatres are they ? — The Norfolk theatres : Norwich, Bury, Cambridge, Ipswich, Yarmouth and Colchester. 3761. Do you remember one or two seasons ago there was a Bill brought into Parliament to increase the profits of dramatic authors by requiring the provincial theatres to remunerate them ? — Yes, I remember calling upon a Member of this Committee on the subject. 3762. You objected to that Bill ? — Yes ; very strongly, 679- 9 D 3763. Will 210 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE W. Wilhins, 1.5^. 3763. Will you State the grounds upon which you objected? — Upon various grounds. The provincial theatres labour under such great disadvantages already 16 July 1832. that any greater burthen would be ruinous to them. Nothing but the circumstance of having six theatres belonging to one company, which enables them to retain the company all the year through, and to change their place of exhibition constantly, could possibly enable my tenants to keep the theatres open. 3764. Then your objections arose from the present languishing state of the provincial drama r — Yes, in some measure, certainly. 3765. Should you have had any objection to its enactment some years ago when the provincial theatres were in a better state ? — I should, for I thought it unrea- sonable. I do not see upon what principle dramatic authors of a certain stamp are entitled to call for remuneration. 3766. Of what stamp are you speaking of? — Not original writers, such as furnish plot and character, and so on, by their own ingenuity. These are not the sort of plays which go down in the present day ; the public taste is altered, and melo-drama and translations from the French, and old pkys modernised and adapted to our customs, and sometimes to particular performers, are the only things that are suc- cessful. I look upon such writers as not entitled to the same degree of reward. 3767. Are you aware they are remunerated in other countries by the provincial theatres ? — I do not know that they are, except writers of original dramas, who have a lien upon the performance ; but not mere cookers-up of dramas. I can hardly call them literati. 3768. You would allow it in the case of an original writer? — Yes, because a man's original talent is always of a high value, and ought to be productive to himself. 3769. Does not the principal attraction of your theatres in the provinces arise from novelty of that sort, whether original or translations, or whatever description of production they may be? — Yes, I am sorry to say such is the state of the public taste that it is the case. 3770. Then is it not fair the authors of those pieces should have some remune* ration from those who profit by the produce of their brains ? — I can carry that principle through all the branches of dramatic literature or science. It may be so, but if I write a book on mechanics, the law protects my copyright only, it does no more. Any petty schoolmaster may avail himself of it, and may make it a source of profit to himself by teaching his scholars ; I cannot prevent it. 3771. You have the copyright? — Yes, and dramatic authors have the copyright of their works. 3772. Do you not think if there was an increase of remuneration to dramatic authors, dramatic writing would improve, as you would attract first-rate talent to the theatres ? — I do not know that it is regulated by that. They receive a certain sum at present, but formerly they had a certain number of nights. 3773. What difference does it make in what way they receive remuneration, so that the remuneration is sufficient ? — Why it virtually does differ, as it does not appear to come out of the pocket of the manager ; the public pay for it. 3774. Suppose the author demanded 10/. or 20^. for the performance of a very successful piece brought out in London, would it not be worth the while of the provincial managers to pay that ? — If it was a successful piece, and likely to have a run, it might be worth while ; but they are in general so ephemeral, they do not run more than two or three nights. 3775. Now, in the instance of the Hunchback, would it be worth while to pay for that ? — Yes ; I consider that is an original drama. I think the author of the Hunchback ought to have remuneration from all theatres that can afford it. 3776. Could not the provincial theatres aflbrd to pay for it? — I cannot say they could afford it, but they would be obliged to pay for it. 3777. Do you conceive such an enactment would be unobjectionable if confined to original pieces ? — I think it would be less objectionable. 3778. But still there would be an objection ? — Yes, because it increases the bur- thens of the provincial theatres, which are so great already. 3779. To what do you attribute the decline of the provincial theatres? — There are vari6us causes ; in thf first place, perhaps, the increase of sectarianism. 3780. Religious feelings ? — Yes, that is one cause, and the taste of the English people is also very much altered ; they are not a play-going race generally. 3781. Do you consider the play-going population has increased in the same ratio as the population generally ? — I consider it has decreased in an inverse ratio. 3782. In ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 211 3782. In town and country ? — I am speaking generally of the provincial theatres' ^^- W''»*»«*j Esq. From being connected with six of them, I frequently go down to see the property is not injured. 10 July 1832. 3783. Your theatres are patent theatres? — One, Norwich, is, the others are not. 3784. You play by the licence of the magistrates for 60 nights ? — By a magis- trate's licence for a certain time. 3785. Do you ever produce new pieces ? — I know of three or four instances. 3786. Have you submitted them to the Lord Chamberlain ? — Yes. 3787. You consider yourselves entitled to act any play which has been printed ? — Yes, I believe that is so. 3788. Have you not been in the habit sometimes of getting manuscript plays that have not been printed ? — -I do not know the machinery of the thing ; it is possible ; but I know nothing about it. 3789. The objection you have stated to granting copyrights to authors is the additional weight it would throw on the provincial theatres ? — Unquestionably it would be a very heavy weight. 3790. At the same time you stated that Mr. Knowles ought to receive something for the Hunchback wherever it was performed ? — I think every man is entitled to receive compensation for original talent. 3791. But you think a man ought not in justice to receive compensation for what you do not consider the legitimate drama? — I do not consider he has any claim upon the public. 3792. You do not consider a man is entitled to the produce of his labour however he may bestow that labour? — If it is original ; but the fact is, the source of his work in general he draws from different quarters. There is no ingenuity displayed where mere translation is employed. 3793. It will not have so long a run, being an ephemeral piece, as a legitimate drama of great merit? — No. 3794. Then in the long run, supposing the copyright is granted to authors, and they could have a certain sum for every night it is performed, a translation would not afford him so large a profit as a legitimate drama ? — I do not know of any ground upon which to form a calculation. 3795. It would not last so long, and therefore would not produce him so much? —No. 3796. Consequently, if a copyright is granted, the original talent displayed in the legitimate drama would be better rewarded than the talent or vvant of talent dis- played in a small ephemeral piece ? — Very likely it would ; for instance, Foote's pieces are in a great measure taken from the French ; I should say Foote had no claim to compensation beyond the literary copyright, because he has displayed nothing but adaptation. 3797. Who is to be made the judge of that ? You might call Virgil an adaptation ? — I do not say that. 3798. Any man who borrows largely you might call an adaptator ? — Any man who borrows largely from Virgil has no claim on the literary public. 3799. Virgil borrows largely from Homer? — We cannot help that ; we are all plagiarists more or less ; there is nothing new under the sun. 3800. You say the provincial theatres have declined of late ? — Decidedly. 3801 . From what causes? — From various causes: from the increase of sectarianism chiefly, but also from the genuis of the English being materially altered ; they are not the play-going people they used to be ; also from the circumstances of the times. 3802. You say there are not so many play-goers because sectarianism has in- creased ; what are the other causes ? — The taste of the English people is altered. 3803. Do you think the actors in provincial theatres are as good as they formerly were ? — They are very good ; they form the nursery for the theatres in London. 3804. Are they as good as formerly? — Quite as good. 3805. Has there been an increase of provincial theatres r — On the contrary, I believe a decrease. I may state, that seven years ago I let my theatres upon lease to a person who gave me 1,150/. for my six theatres, and after an interval of four years I have been obliged to take 350/. per annum less, and he is now calling upon me for a further reduction. 3806. In general the provincial drama is in an exceedingly bad state ? — In a very bad state. 679. D D 2 3807. Scarcely 212 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE fV. mtlciru, Esq. 3807. Scarcely any change could make it worse ? — If you shut them up altogether it would be worse. If the theatres were shut up, there would be certain reserved 10 July 183a. rents I am obliged to pay, and it would cost me more than now. In Norwich, my tenant has an annual loss of 500/., which is only made up by the other theatres, going from place to place for a short time. 3808. Do you consider sectarianism prevails largely in Norwich? — To a very great extent, and Colchester is similarly circumstanced. 3809. Do you consider the taste for the drama could be at all revived ? — I do not know by what circumstance. You must procure better writers. There is a great paucity of good writers. 381c. Supposing authors could obtain a permanent reward ; that is, suppose he had a certain sum every time his play was performed at the provincial theatres by which he might obtain an income, do you not think an author would have a natural desire to produce a piece which would be permanent rather than produce something ephemeral ? — He would desire, of course, but it does not follow that he would succeed. 381 1. Would it not be his interest to endeavour to do so ?— Certainly ; a man will exert all his talent and power in pursuit of any object which it is interest to attain. , 3812. Do you think there has been a dearth of literary talent in the country for the last few years ? — I think literary talent has been on the decline generally. 3813. Keeping pace with the decline of talent in the drama? — Yes ; and in the arts and sciences I think we have not kept pace with foreign writers. 3814. With foreign writers generally? — Yes. 3815. Do you think their writers are as good as Byron, Scott or Southey? — I allude chiefly to dramatic writing. There are different kinds of dramas, some for representation and some for the cabinet. Lord Byron's dramas, for instance, are better for the cabinet than for representation. 3816. If, as you say, wherever the interests of men direct them to one quarter their full powers and energies will be exerted, do you not consider if the current is particularly strong in favour of the drama, that talent would be directed there as well as into other quarters? — No, I think men of true literary talent look to reward of a different character, to fame and reputation. 3817. Then you do not think fame and reputation would be obtained in the drama ? — Yes, if talent can be obtained. 3818. You stated, wherever any particular interest lay in the exertion of any particular powers, it would be natural to expect great powers would be exerted in that direction ? — Certainly. 3819. Would that apply to the drama? — Yes ; but authors of great talent, who write for the drama, or for the arts and sciences, look to posthumous fame, and pre- sent reputation, for remuneration. 3820. That reputation would be acquired in the drama as well as in anything else ? — I think a play-writer must be born, as well as a poet, nonjit. 3821. You consider it just that dramatic authors should be paid for their works at the provincial theatres, though they could not afford to give it ? — There is no man who should not be paid for his labour some how or other, either by reputation or profit. Some men are satisfied with fame, others by less noble rewards, by pay. 3822. What form of theatre do you consider best adapted for seeing and hear- ing ? — I think the best form is the semicircle. We know the ancient theati-es were built in that form. In the theatre at Omena, which is a semicircle, the voice may be heard all over the house. That form is the most perfect ; but there are other considerations which must be taken into account. In the first place the ancients always performed in the open air, and as air is the vehicle of sound, it is necessary it should be pure, but you cannot get that in a theatre that is closed from the air : the air in a theatre is not pure, and is not capable of producing that clearness of tone. There is also a prevalent belief that theatres should be constructed of wood to make it more sonorous, but that is a mistake, as in fact it is like speaking in a tub. 3823. Do you think it is indifferent whether it is constructed of wood or stone? — I think it should be constructed of more permanent materials. If you could have a theatre of iron or a stage of iron, you would have a perfect theatre. 3824. Do you consider a semicircle better than a horse-shoe ? — Our theatres are in •'■eneral constructed in the horse-shoe form, and so are the ancient theatres. The Roman theatres were larger than ours, and we have every reason to believe they heard perfectly well. They were of the horse-shoe rather than the semicircle. © 3825. You ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 213 3825. You think when it is in the open air you hear better ? — Yes ; the elasticity W. WUkins, Esq. of the air is greater. 3826. Do you think the ancients had any secrets with respect to the conveyance '° ■'"'y ^^32. of sound? — No, none. In the ancient theatres they performed in masks: some writers say it was to increase the sound of the voice, but I believe it was merely for the purpose of concealing the features. 3827. Do you think an architect could secure a perfect conveyance of sound in any theatre ? — Yes. 3828. You do not consider it is accidental? — No; I consider it is a point of science. 3829. If you were desired to construct a theatre that should be perfectly adapted to seeing and hearing, would you construct it as large as Drury Lane or Covent Garden ? — Certainly not ; for as our representations take place at night you cannot secure the prevalence of pure air. 3830. You attribute it to the air more than any thing else? — Yes, as a vehicle of sound certainly ; if the air is pure its power of conveying a sound will be greater. 3831. How do you secure the prevalence of pure air in a small theatre ? — I consider so, ceteris paribus ; the apertures are larger. 3832. Have you ever built a theatre? — Yes, several provincial theatres, and rebuilt them also. 3833. Have you any general observations to offer to the Committee? — I hope, if the object the Committee have in view may lead to the remuneration of authors, they will think a little of the powers of managers. We play now at Norwich, under the Lord Chamberlain's licence ; an Act of Parliament passed to enable the Lord Chamberlain to licence a theatre at Norwich. 3834. Was it to enable the Lord Chamberlain to licence, qr the King to grant a patent ? — I do not remember. 3835. What Act was it ? — A local Act, about 70 years ago. At all other places we are quite at the mercy of the magistrates, who may licence or not at their pleasure. 3836. Is their licence granted or withheld capriciously? — No, not at all ; but there is room for caprice : and at the University we have no licence whatever; and, therefore, I should humbly propose that something should be done to enable the Vice-Chancellor at Cambridge to grant permission to perform during the vacations, so that the inhabitants should be enabled to have theatrical amusements like the inhabitants of every other place. If it took place during the vacation, it would have no improper influence on the minds or studies of the students. 3837. Have you reason to suppose that the Vice-Chancellor would grant a licence if he had the power ? — Yes, he does so at present, but he does it at his risk ; and some timid Vice-Chancellors are afraid to do it. 3S38. Was not there a disturbance some years ago at the theatre ? — Yes, I be- lieve there was. 3839. You do perform there now during the vacation .^^ — Yes, the Vice-Chan- cellor permits it without any power. 3840. Then you are liable to prosecution every time you act? — It lies with the Vice-Chancellor whether he will receive informations or not. 3841. Does the theatre answer at Cambridge during the vacation? — Yes ; it is one of the things that makes up for the loss at Norwich. The loss there was 500/. a year ; it was only made up by establishing the Bury and other theatres, so that they go from one to another. 3842. You said your theatre was a nursery for good performers ? — Yes. 3843. Can you name any performer of reputation who has come out at those theatres? — Yes ; Mrs. Siddons came from Norwich. 3844. Since you had them? — No; they have been a very short time in my possession, not more than 15 years. 3845. During the last 15 years have they produced any eminent actors?— Some very good actors. 3846. Can you name any ? — Some of the best actors at the minor theatres. 3847. Who are they? — There is a very celebrated lady, Mrs. Sloman, who is one of the best tragic actresses I ever saw ; she is gone to America, as she has not physical powers for the large theatres, and they could not give her enough money at the minor theatres. 3848. Have you found persons who are very good actors in a small theatre who have not physical powers for the large ones?— Yes ; it happens frequently. I have 679. 1^ D 3 known 214 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE IV. IVilkins, Esq. known three or four who were extremely good performers at a small theatre in the country, when they came to Di'ury Lane or Covent Garden they have totally lo July 1832. failed. 3849. Was that from want of physical organs or bashfulness ? — Certainly not from bashfulness, for that is a virtue I never heard they possessed in an eminent degree. Mr. George Bobvell Davidge, called in ; and further Examined. Mr. G, B. Davidge. 3850. HAVE you any share in a provincial theatre ? — I am lessee of the Royal Amphitheatre at Liverpool. 385 1 . That is not for the regular drama ? — No. 3852. Have you ever had any share in a provincial theatre for the performance of the regular drama ? — Never. 3853. Who is the manager of the old Liverpool theatre ? — Mr. Lewis. 3854. What are the entertainments of the amphitheatre ; you do not act the regular drama ? — No ; similar pieces to the amphitheatre in London ; Ducrow's theatre. Mr. /. R. Planche, called in ; and Examined. Mr. J. R. Planche. 3855. YOU are the author of Oberon and other dramatic pieces ? — I am. — - 3856. It was stated you received 400/. for Oberon from Covent Garden theatre ? — I received 400 /., including the copyright ; 300 /., the common terms for a three act opera, which I had been in the habit of receiving before at the theatres, and 100 /. for the copyright. 3857. What other works have you written ? — I have placed, of one description or another, 73 dramas upon the stage. 3858. Which have been the most successful ones?— Charles the Twelfth, the Brigand, the Woman never Vexed, Maid Marian, and the Rencontre. 3859. What has the Brigand produced you ? — £. 100. 3860. Has that been very profitable to the theatre ? — I have heard from the treasurer of Drury Lane that it produced a great deal of money to them. 3861. Do you conceive it would be very advantageous to authors to have the law in this country analagous to the law in France, to have a copyright in their works ? — ^There cannot be a shadow of a doubt of it. 3862. Do you consider it would be easy to obtain any money from the provincial theatres ? — There would be some difficulty in that. 3863. If a piece could not be performed without the leave of the author, do ■ you think authors in general would demand reasonable terms ? — Most decidedly. 3864. What would you demand for Oberon ? — I will mention a case that occurred to me, as an instance. In the case of Charles the Twelfth, one of the most fortunate of my pieces, and also one of the most original, I asked Mr. Murray, of the Edinburgh theatre, five guineas for permission to perform that piece in any theatre of his for any length of time. I have his letter in my pocket in answer to that, in which he states, that in consequence of the depressed state of provincial theatrical property, and the introduction of half-price, it did not enable a pro- vincial manager to get up a piece at all, and under these circumstances he should be very happy to give it to me, if he could aflibrd it, but he could not, it being an afterpiece. He afterwards obtained surreptitiously a copy of it, which he played many nights as a first piece ; he then had a paragraph inserted in the papers, re- questing him to play it as an afterpiece, to accommodate those who could not come at first price, and it had a considerable run as an afterpiece. 3865. Are all your pieces licensed? — All of them. 3866. Have you ever had to wait previous to the work being read? — No, I never remember a play being postponed. 3867. You always met with prompt attention ? — I have had no communication with the licenser personally, it has been produced generally on the day named, at least the delay did not arise from the licenser. 3868. When you put a play into the hands of a manager for approval, have you ever had much delay 'i — Yes, considerable. 3869. What do you call a considerable delay ? — A whole season sometimes. 3870. Do you think if the legitimate drama were allowed at the minor theatres, it would be advantageous to authors r — Certainly. 3871. Would works like Oberon be as well performed at a minor theatre as at ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 215 at Covent Garden ? — No small theatre would attempt to play a piece of that Mr. J. R. Planch^. description. ' 3872. Do you consider the small theatres would be able, from the natural order 10 July 1832. of competition, to afford a fair price to authors ? — They have afforded a fair price to me. 3873. Have you written for the minor theatres ? — Yes; I have written for the Olympic, the Adelphi, and Sadler's Wells. 3874. So far as authors are concerned, it would be advantageous to them ? — Yes. 3875. Suppose the property of dramatic authors in their pieces was extended, as is proposed, and that provincial theatres objected to pay anything to an author for the right of representing it ; would it not be worth the author's while for mere fame or reputation to permit it to be acted at a provincial theatre ?— Yes, certainly, cases might occur ; because now they obtain them surreptitiously, and they act them in very imperfect parts, an instance of which occurred in the case of the •' Rencontre." 3876. You heard Mr. Wilkins's evidence; do you conceive that provincial theatres are in a state to be able materially to increase the remuneration to be given to dramatic authors ? — I conceive if they are playing at a loss ; but as Mr. Wilkins has confessed melo-dramas and translations draw some money, if the representation of those pieces which are the most successful in London enable them to lessen their loss, it will be certain gain to them, and if they lessen the loss 1 /., the author would surely be entitled to 1 5. 3877. Would not that be too trivial ? — No, I will say a farthing ; but I do not think it is from those theatres we should seek remuneration ; but from Birmingham, Dublin, Liverpool, Bath, where managers are in the habit of making money. 3878. Do you consider, in fact, that the provincial theatres could give much to authors ? — If I may answer the question by putting another, I would ask, was five guineas too much for permission to act Charles the Twelfth in every theatre ? It must have cost Mr. Murray as much to obtain a copy of it by a short-hand writer. 3879. You consider if the means of remuneration were even so small as that, such an enactment would be valuable to authors? — Yes. I seldom take up a provincial play-bill in which I do not see a piece to be performed for which 1 should have a right to claim some small profit. 3880. Do you think 100 /. or 200/. a year would be obtained by the dramatic author under such circumstances ? — I have no doubt that at this moment I should be receiving 100/. a year from provincial theatres, without any detriment to their interests, if the law had existed at the time I began to write. 38!5i. Do you think it would be sufficient to enforce that law to give authors a right of action, the same as in the case of literary copyright ?~ Certainly not ; I fear there are very few who could run the risk of an action. 3882. What would you propose.'^ — I had the honour some time ago to submit to the House of Common, through the medium of Mr. Lamb, a bill upon this subject ; and I took the opinion of several legal and literary gentlemen, and it was proposed it should be by summary process before a magistrate ; that unless the manager of a theatre could produce an attested permission from the author to play that piece he should be fined a certain sum ; not for playing the piece, but for breaking the Act of Parliament. 3883. Do you not think there would be difficulties in carrying that summary process into effect ; as, for instance, in the case of a translation, how could the justice decide that another person had not translated the same piece ? — The title is copy- right ; they have no business with the same title, because they profess to play a piece performed in London ; no other would satisfy them. 3884. Do you think it would detract from the attraction of the piece if they gave it another name ? — Most decidedly. 3885. Suppose they gave it another name, and said " translated from the same piece as Mr. Planches favourite piece in London " ? — They would not hazard that, in my opinion ; they will always find ways to evade the law ; but I should be satis- lied with such an Act in my favour. 3886. You think magistrates would be able to carry it into execution ? — I cannot say that. 3887. Do you not think they would be very shy in pronouncing a piece a plagiary or not? — I know that is the opinion of Mr. Lamb. 3888. At the time that bill was introduced was it considered by authors in general that the remedy by action would be of no use at all ? — Certainly. 679. D D 4 3889. You 2i6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. J. R. Planchc. 3889. You Say that some of your plays have been delayed a whole season at some of the theatres? — I do not mean to make any complaint, but I merely state a cir- 10 July 1833. cumstance which has occurred. 3890. Have you ever known an instance where a piece has been kept back at a theatre contrary to the wishes of the author ? — I do not call it to my recollection at this moment. It has not occurred to me ; I have experienced a delay which I thought detrimental to my interests, and also to the interests of the theatre ; but I could not complain of it as wilful or personal. 3891. When a piece is accepted by one of the theatres, have you the power of withdrawing it if not produced within a certain time ? — I should consider I had, unless I had sold it, and was paid for it. 3892. One of your pieces was, the " Woman never Vexed ;" that was founded on an eld comedy ? — Yes, it was quite so. 3893. Suppose they contended before a magistrate that piece was only an altera- tion of an old comedy, would it not be a difficult thing for a magistrate to judge of that r^ — ^That is not the original title. It was called " The New Wonder, or the Women never Vexed," and the title of mine was *' The Woman never Vexed, or the Widow of Cornhill." Mr. Lowndes, the printer, reprinted the old play, and sent it into Covent Garden as the acting play. Mr. Dolby, who had bought my copy- right, proceeded against him in Chancery, and stopped him, but at the cost of 30/. to himself, he having given me 50 guineas for the copyright. 3894. Your reliance is on the attraction of the title?— Yes, certainly. 3895. Do you not think it would be possible for a country manager to act the same with a different title, and insinuate in the play-bills that it was the same piece under another title ? — I have heard it said that there was no Act of Parliament ever framed which you could not drive a coach and six through, and therefore I cannot pretend to judge of that. Jovis, 12° die Julii, 1832. EDWARD LYTTON BULWER, ESQ., in the Chair. Mr. Thomas Morton, called in ; and further Examined. Mr. T. Morton. 3896. YOU wish to add something to your former examination ?— In my former examination I left my memorandums at home, and I omitted many things 12 July 1832. which I thought might be worth the Committee's attention. 3897. What is it you wish to state ? — First of all, I think I said before that I thought the drama would sustain an injury by allowing the minors to perform what is called the legitimate drama ; that was a mere assertion on my part, and I would now, with your permission, endeavour to explain my meaning, by showing how that is grounded ; and I would take a practical view of the question. I be- lieve the expenditure of the Theatres Royal exceeds 3,000 /. a week. I know the expenses of Drury Lane the season before last were 265 /. a night, and I understand last season it was diminished by 5 /. or 6 /. a night ; and, therefore, that will amount to more than the sum I have named for the expenditure of the two theatres. Of course this large expenditure is devoted in a great measure to the payment of performers, and I hardly need add, that that expenditure would com- mand the elite of the dramatic corps ; and yet, in despite of that, I do not know a complaint so frequently made, both by the press, and in society, as that our third and fourth-rate characters are inadequately sustained. That I think a very im- portant thing for the consideration of this Committee ; because what chance is there of the minor theatres, whose first-rate salaries aie only commensurate with our third or fourth, acting the great tragedies or comedies effectively and well ? I think it is true that is the proportion ; our third and fourth rate salaries are equivalent to the minors' first-rate salaries ; and, of course, I should say our performers are in the same ratio ; or to bring it to a practical illustration, our King Claudius perhaps would be their Hamlet, and then perhaps it might be asked what their King Claudius would be ? I think Shakspeare has called him by his true title " a king of shreds and patches." With respect to Shakspeare and his plays, I think I may be allowed to say he has spoken his wishes upon this subject very forcibly, for in the ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 217 the prologue to Henry the Fifth, impressed with the nobleness of his subject and Mr.T Morton, the mightiness of his powers, he asks for " A kingdom for a stage, princes to act, and monarchs to behold the swelling scene !" I think he very feelingly complains ^^ J"ly >S3*« of how he is " cabin"d, cribb'd, confined within the girdle of those walls;" and for my part, it seems a command upon his countrymen that his pieces should be produced only in the noblest temples of the Muses. 3898. Why were not those commands obeyed by his countrymen at that time, and why were not Shakspeare's plays performed upon larger stages, because they were performed at that time upon stages smaller than those of the minor theatres ? — I only express that as the wishes of the author. 38119. But no such stage prevailed in those days? — He asks you to piece out his imperfections by your thoughts ; in short, it seems a poetical illustration of the subject, and I have given it as it struck me. 3900. What is your own opinion, as that may be more valuable ? — My own opinion is, that it would injure the drama very much. 3901. How do you account for the stages being so small in Shakspeare's time, as you stated you consider it to be a demand of Shakspeare's upon his countrymen that his plays should be represented upon large stages ? — Yes, it appears to me so. 3902. Then how do you account for his countrymen disobeying his commands in those davs, and representing his plays on smaller stages than those of the minor theatres ? — For the same reason that Thespis played in a cart. It was in the infancy of the drama, and that was the cause. He would not have written this ode, this splendid prologue, but to account for the imperfection of the theatre. I never wit- nessed a representation of any of Shakspeare's plays at the minor theatres without sorrow or disappointment. 3903. Do you consider the Haymarket a minor theatre ? — -No, I do not. 3904. You consider the stage of the Haymarket theatre large enough ? — I do not. I do not think I have seen Shakspeare's plays acted at the Haymarket, and certainly I think they are feebly performed compared with Covent Garden or Drury Lane. 3905. Is that the fault of the performers or the stage ? — Generally both. Shakspeare's plays are principally tragedies, and Mr. Morris does not engage a tragic company. v 39u6. Mr. Kean plays there? — Yes, he plays as a star, and Mr. Kean acts there as he does every where, powerfully ; but I think you want the pomp, pride and circumstance of tragedy. 3907. You would prefer Mr. Kean on the stage of Covent Garden or Drury Lane to the Haymarket ? — I should prefer the whole play there. I have also seen other great plays acted in minor theatres. I will instance a very fine play, the School for Scandal. That play contains 16 or 17 characters, and I think they all require a large portion of talent to represent them adequately. I remember seeing the School for Scandal, and it appeared to me carelessly done and very imperfectly studied. 3908. You consider it is because there is not a sufficient body of actors at the minor theatres? — Just so. 3909. Suppose there was a sufficient body of actors at the minor theatres, there is no reason why it might not be as well played ? — None at all. 3910. Then it would be probable, if men of large capital embarked in the minor theatres, they would engage as large a body of actors, and consequently it would be as well performed ? — ^If you can anticipate that such a large body of talent is to be speculated with, which I doubt. 3911. If persons of sufficient capital were to take the minor theatres, so as to pay the best performers, the drama could be as well performed as it is now at the great theatres? — Certainly, if the theatre was of that reasonable capacity which I advocate. 3912. You say it proceeds in a great measure from the want of actors? — Yes. 3913. What is it you consider chiefly trains an actor to be a good actor ; playing in the legitimate drama ?— Certainly. 3914. Now there are only two theatres allowed to play the legitimate drama, with the exception of the Haymarket ; consequently, if there were more oppor- tunities of playing the legitimate drama the actors would be improved ? — It might be ; but such is the state of the profession at present they are not to be had ; no capital would produce them. 679. r, £ 3915. But 21 8 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE y[T. T.Morton. 3915- But suppose there were more opportunities foi- an actor in playing the ■> legitimate drama, since he is made better by playing the legitimate drama, their 12 July 1832. acting would be better than it is now ? — It might be better ; but I thinic the pre- sent taste which governs these minor theatres is extremely injurious to the actors. Formerly, in my earlier days, the country theatres were the school from which the metropolis derived all its actors, and then they certainly acted only the better part of the drama in the country. I remember, in Bath, when the School for Scandal was sure, with a stock company, to produce its ten excellent houses in a season. It was the same in other things. 3916. In fact, you mean to say it is the class of performances existing at the minor theatres which tend to degrade the drama ? — Yes. 3917. And if they were to play the legitimate drama, they would not deteriorate the drama so much as they do now ? — Not if they were competent for it. 39 1 8. At what period are you speaking to the School for Scandal being exhibited at the Bath theatre? — Thirty years ago. 39 \ 9. Do you recollect who was the principal performer there ? — Mr. Dimond, and then came EUiston. Edwin came from Bath. 3920. But he left long before that? — Yes, Edwin left it 10 years before that. 3921. Edwin played Sir Peter Teazle, and Bonner played Charles? — I do not recollect. 3922. Do you not recollect the Bath theatre at that time was looked upon as a school for performers? Mrs. Siddons and others appeared there to great advan- tage, who could make no impression on tlie London boards ? — No, I think that example is very unfortunate, for it is unnecessary to say what impression Mrs. Siddons made on the London boards. 3923. But when she first appeared she made no impression, and went to the Bath theatre? — Because she was not a good actress at that time. 3924. Then did she become a good actress instantly ? — ^^No, 14 years elapsed. 3925. Do you mean to say that 1 4 years elapsed after her failure in London and her re-appearance ? — I do not know ; but there was a lapse of 14 years after she played in the Runaway, until her appearance in London in Isabella. 3926. What are the other observations you wish to make? — I said I had seen the School for Scandal performed, and I thought very carelessly, and the dialogue very loosely studied. I remember in particular the gentleman who played Moses ; he certainly said a great deal more than was set down for him. I do not say he did not show considerable tact in doing so, for he suited himself to the taste of the audience he was playing to ; and his jokes about pork and sausages produced a great deal of delight, perhaps when Shakspeare's dialogue fell from him without a titter or hand of applause. There are other plays which I have seen performed with great satisfaction. 3927. That is owing to the low taste of the audience ? — Yes. 3928. Do you consider that the large theatres have at all tended to produce that taste in the audience by the production of melo-drama? — I believe the Tale of Mystery was the first melo-drama produced. 3929. Have the great theatres produced pieces equally tending to produce that taste of the public as the minors ? — Yes ; I consider they have been to blame. 3930. What do you think was the object in granting the patents ; to preserve the dignity of the drama? — I think so. 3931. Then if the taste of the public has been deteriorated in the way you state, the dignity of the drama has not been |)reserved ? — I think not. 3932. What other point do you wish to speak upon? — The next point is the necessity of a licenser or some controlling officer, and upon that it has been said it ought to be left open, and things would find their level. I do not think so. I think, on the contrary, the effect would be very injurious indeed to the drama and to the public mind, for so far from finding their level, the very cause of the Licen.sing Act was that things did not find their level. We know that Fielding's Pasquin was the sole cause of the Licensing Act ; and I think any body who reads that play will agree with me that a control becomes absolutely necessary. 3933. Suppose that is true that a licence is necessary by law ; do you consider it is better a play should be licensed by one licenser or a licensing board ? — I think the less is left to individuals the belter. 3934. What particular character or part of that play do you object to ? — The political excitement it causes ; the licentiousness of its political observations. 3935. What ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 219 3935- What has it done that it might not be represented in these days ? — Mr. T. Morton. I cannot tell from my recollection, but I believe it is a matter of Parliamentary notoriety that that was the cause of the Licensing Act. 12 July 183a. 3936. " The Golden Rump" is supposed to be the cause? — I formerly read Lord Chesterfield's speech. 3937. In Pasquin there is nothing more than what takes place every day; it is an account of the general election r — But the satire on political power is very severe. 3938. Do you mean to say if Pasquin was represented now it would raise a great excitement ? — I think so ; a very great one. 3939. But you cannot point out any passage of that play r — No ; that is my impression. 3940. Do you think it is the character of Colonel Promise or Captain Place ? — No j but the whole texture of it, the object of it has a political tendency. 3941. As much so as The Man of the World? — The Man of the World is very political. That passed the licenser with some difficulty ; it was originally called The True Born Scotchman. 3942. Do you consider the Beggar's Opera to be political ?— It is covertly so, but not so palpable. 3943. You say the less the licensing power is left to an individual the better? — Yes ; I think all power is so situated. 3944. Do you think a Board to license plays would be preferable to one licenser? — Yes ; 1 think the less it is trusted to individual caprice the better. 3945. Have you any other observation to offer ? — In further illustration of that, I think it is worth while to remark, I am sure eveiy playgoer would agree with me, there is a tendency in the audience to force passages never meant by the author into political meanings. I think constantly I have observed that ; and also we all know that a theatre is a place of peculiar excitement ; I think their applause is enthusiastic, and their dislikes very violently expressed. I do not know anything more terrible than an enraged audience. 3946. Then it is chiefly from the necessity of not having violent political allusions rather than indecency or immorality that a licenser would be necessary ? — I think so ; I think indecency corrects itself. The better taste of the audience will always check that. There are two recent instances to show the danger of a theatre being a place for political discussion. The first I will mention is, the visit His Majesty paid to the theatre soon after his accession to the throne, and when the Revolution of Paris broke out. Immediately it was known His Majesty commanded Massaniello, handbills were printed about the town to induce the public to assemble in the theatre, not to partake with His Majesty in the social enjoyment of the drama, but to teach him, through the story of Massaniello the Fisherman, the danger to his throne if he disobeyed the wish of his people, and the King was advised to change the play in consequence of that. That, I think, is far from the purpose of theatrical exhibition. The other instance was the publication of that infamous bill of fare, which has been alluded to in this room, which was issued by the Coburg. 3947. That was put down immediately after it appeared? — It appeared. 3948. By whom were those handbills circulated? — I do not know. 3949. Was it by the theatre, or by individuals? — No, certainly not by the theatre. 3950. Who were they published by ? — I do not know the printer's name. It was a handbill, distributed all over London, to the purport I have mentioned. 3951. That was not the fault of the theatre?— No; on the contrary, the theatre never wishes to be made the arena for political warfare. 3952. No licenser could prevent that ? — No ; it only shows the tendency of the public in excited times to give it a political feature. A gentleman very high iu his profession, M, Talma, told me the original French Revolution made slow progress until the theatres became the arena of its triumphs, and then it spread very rapidly. 3953. You have written several very successful plays? — I have written several. 3954. Do you think it is an advantage to an author to have three or four theatres to take his play, where it might be accepted or refused ? — It might be, if they had actors competent to the task. 3955. Or if they had funds competent to remunerate an author? — I do not know whether he would make a sacrifice of his little reputation for the sake of his pocket. That is another question ; but I think, as far as my experience goes as a writer and a reader of plays, you would be legislating for only a possible event, for I have never 679. E E 2 in 220 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. T. MoHon. in my life known a play put by, which the manager thought well of, or delayed beyond the season. 12 July 1832. 39,56. But the manager may not think well of a good play? — Certainly, human judgment is fallible ; but it is his interest to think well of a good play, as the whole success of a season depends perhaps on a piece. 3957. But he is not more infallible than the publishers? — The publishing houses refuse works which afterwards produce a very extraordinary effect. 3958. In your capacity of an author, with respect to the alteration of the law of copyright, do you not think it would be advantageous to authors to have the copy- right of their plays secured to them ? — I think the law at present is very defec- tive; it is unintelligible and not available. 3959. Do you think a law analogous to that in France would be beneficial to authors? — I think it would. I think I heard the Committee state something respecting a doubt they had about a burletta, that the definition was difficult, and the description very intricate. Would it not be sufficient to ascertain what burlettas were when this Act was passed giving them permission ? I presume the Legislature never meant to provide for what had never happened. We know at that time the Act allowed them to play these burlettas, they were invariably pieces in verse, sung in recitative, at Sadler's Wells, Astley's and every other place. We know those which belong to great theatres, such as the Dragon of Wantley, Thomas and Sally, ' Midas, and those things. That was certainly the only burletta which I have described that was performed at the time that liberty was given to the minor theatres. 3960. That may be received as the definition at that period ? — Certainly. 3961. At the same time that is not the way in which the word is construed by the present age ? — No, that is my idea of burletta, and 1 think that is what the Legislature intended to license, and nothing else, 3962. Does it specify anything with regard to the number of acts? — No, I think there may be any number of acts. 3963. But the whole was to be recitative and music from beginning to end? — Yes, and very whimsical things they were sometimes. I remember seeing at the time when The Monster devastated this town, there was one at Astley's, and it began, " Who is this Monster, do you know ? He comes from hell among the fiends below." That shows it was exceedingly low that sort of entertainment at that time, which was all, I believe, the Legislature ever meant to grant. 3964. You have qQoted a passage from Shakspeare, with a view of proving that Shaicspeare would desire his plays to be acted in larger theatres than existed in his time? — That was the object of the quotation. 3965. Is it your opinion that the plays of Shakspeare would appear t^ greater advantage in larger theatres ; that if he had lived in our time, he would have been pleased to have seen them acted in our theatres? — My opinion is, they are acted better in large theatres, and from that, 1 suppose, he would have thought so too. 3966. To what cause do you attribute there not being larger theatres erected in Shakspeare's time ? was it the small size of the town, and the general poverty of the country which prevented those splendid edifices which have arisen in our time ? — It was the infancy of the dramatic art, and, like other infancy, it had its cradle and not its temple. 3967. The general state of this metropolis, in short, prevented those splendid edifices which our improvement in wealth has given us? — Yes, they have increased in splendour and magnitude. 3968. Now, with regard to actors, do you think the legitimate drama more likely to be promoted by actors who have exhibited talent in the legitimate drama at provincial theatres, such as Edinburgh, Dublin, Liverpool and Bath, being drawn to the metropolis by their talent and celebrity fi'om those theatres, or do you think the interests of the legitimate drama, meaning Shakspeare, Ben Jonson and the classical writers of the country, would be more promoted by a general opening of theatres to a great extent in this metropolis, to which all pretenders to histrionic fame might aspire ? — I think the metropolis demands professors and not pupils. 3969. Then you think the previous education at these provincial theatres, where the dramas of Shakspeare had been always performed, is more likely to be beneficial © to ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 221 to the interests of the drama than an education attempted in the metropoh's? — ^It Mr. T. Morton. was so formerly, but I fear now it is not so. I am told at the country theatres (if I may believe the reports of the stars who travel through) the talent is exceed- 12 July 1832. ingly humble. 3970. Do you happen to know whether the remuneration afforded to actors at the country theatres is sufficient to induce beginners to attempt there ? — I think remuneration is not the object of dramatic heroes. I think it is fame and an enthu- siastic admiration of the art. 3971. Then do you think there is such a total fiiilure in the country theatres, and so great a falling off in the talent that used to originate there 30 years ago, that you apprehend any additional theatres in London would produce talent which the country has not produced? — I think it might. 3972. Has it always been the practice, when any talent was exhibited in the country theatres, that talent found a ready market in the great theatres in London ? — It is very much courted and sought after. 3973. Was it the practice for the great theatres to send persons to inquire for talent in all parts of the country ? — Very eagerly. 3974. So that any real talent which existed was certain to find a reward in the metropolis ? — Yes, it has indeed, I think, 3975. Do you think that allowing all pieces to be performed, without any licens- ing whatever, would be either consistent with the political safety of the country, or with the interests of the drama itself? — I think both would be in great jeopardy by that allowance. 3976. You mentioned the play of Massaniello ; do you happen to know that the frequent performance of that play at Brussels was the main cause of the revolution which took place at Brussels in 1830? — I never heard that fact. 3977. You conceive, for the morals of society and for the safety of our political « institutions, some limit is necessary by the constituted authorities to plays which may be presented to the audience ? — Certainly I do ; a very guarded one. 3978. How many years have you been, as an author and in other ways, connected with theatres ? — Forty. 3979. You have frequently witnessed the effect of particular passages on an audience ? — Very often indeed. 39S0. In particular moments of excitement they produce very great effect ? — Tremendous. 3981. You say that talent is always sought for, and it can find easy access to the London theatres ? — I think so. 3982. Do you happen to know that Mr. Henderson found great difficulty in getting any engagement ; and if it had not been for his appearing at the Haymarket he probably would not have succeeded? — I do not know that ; Mr. Henderson was engaged at the Haymarket more than 40 years ago, which is the extent of my memory. 3983. Perhaps you never read his correspondence with Mr. ? — I never did. 3984. He quarrelled with Mr. Garrick, and stated he kept him back purposely. Do you apprehend Mr. Munden would have got engaged at the theatre if it had not been for the death of Mr. Edwin ? — I dare say he would ; the only wonder is he was so long away from the theatre. 3985. Do you not apprehend if Edwin had lived Munden could not have got an engagement there? — I do not know that. 3986. Do you not know he was engaged purposely to fill his place? — Where there is a vacancy, they supply it as well as they can. 3987. Do you not happen to know that the particular characters of Edwin he filled he did not succeed in, and he took another line of character, old men? — I saw him play Jemmy Jumps 200 times, which was one of the characters of Edwin. 3988. Do you mean he played Jemmy Jumps 200 times? — Yes, from beginning to end. 3989. Did you ever see Edwin in Jemmy Jumps ? — Frequently; but upon this question I know many reasons why great country actors are not engaged. 3990. Do you happen to know how old Mrs. Siddons was when she died ? — I do not. 3991. It is 56 years ago since she came out at the Bath theatre, so that she could not have been long from London ? — I do not know. 3992. Mr. Dowton says, in his evidence, that Mrs. Siddons said to him, " I am glad to see you at Drury Lane, but you have come to a wilderness of a place to act 679. E E 3 in ; 222 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMIVIITTEE Mr. T. Morton, in ; and God knows, if I had not made my reputation in small theatres, I' never should have made it here ; but the public give me credit for what they saw'me do 12 July 1832. and heard me say at a small theatre ?" — I think that is an odd speech. 391)3. Her opinion was, that if she had not made her reputation at a small theatre previously, she would never have succeeded there ? — I rather think, for I have spoken to Mrs. Siddons on the subject, it was, that if she had not made her reputation in the small Drury Lane theatre, she never would have got it in the large one. 3994. Then you mean to say she had not made her reputation at Bath before she came to Drury Lane ? — In coming to a fresh audience, she must make a reputa- tion before that audience. 399,5. Do you not know she had played Isabella and other characters at the Bath theatre, and excited the greatest admiration ? — Yes. 3996. Then she had made her reputation at a small theatre before she came to a large one ? — She had made her reputation there certainly. 3997. At old Drury Lane she could not make her reputation when she first appeared ; she was dismissed ? — Yes, because she did not act so well, and had not those characters which were her forte. She appeared in the Runaway, which is a comic character, a sentimental lady. 3998. If she played in the Runaway it must have been immediately before she went to Bath, as it came out somewhere about 1774 or 1775, and Mrs. Siddons played in that, and in 1776 or 1777 she played in Bath, and two or three years after she came to London, so that she must instantly have made an impression there after having failed on the London boards ? — I am not aware of that fact. 3999. Do you consider that dramatic literary talent is generally low at this time ? — Certainly. f 4000. You have said the talents of actors throughout the country generally is low ? — Very low. 4001. You say such talent as may be found throughout the country is certain to receive attention at the metropolitan theatres, but there is so very little ; so that if the monopoly should be continued to the great houses it would not be upon the ground of its having produced great talent in writing, and great talent in acting ? — The talent in writing is very humble at present. 4002. It would not be upon the ground of the great talent which they had produced in dramatic writing; if we were to continue the monopoly of the great houses, it would not be on the gi'ound of the great dramatic talent existing at present, or great talent in acting? — No, not on that ground. 4003. Then on what ground should you say it should be ; would you say it should be on the ground of good faith to those who have embarked their money on the faith of those agreements with the two theatres ? — I think that is a very sub- stantial argument. 4004. Do you think there is any other argument ? — I stated before, that in the present state of the minor theatres they are inadequate to the performance of the drama. 4005. You observed just now, in reply to a question, that you considered a licenser necessary, both for the preservation of morality and for the preservation of our political institutions, but at the same time you stated before it was not on the score of morality, because that would cure itself? — No, it is on the score of politics. 4006. You wish then to correct that observation r — Yes. 4007. In point of fact, do you, in your long experience, know of any dramatic composition of great talent which has not ultimately found its way before the public at one or other of the great theatres ? — I have not ventured to say that. I must repeat what I said before ; there is a great desire in the managers to obtain the best literary compositions, and also a great desire to obtain the best actors. 4008. Did you ever know of any very celebrated performer in the country who did not ultimately find his or her way to the theatres of the metropolis? — There ai'e many reasons why a good actor should not be engaged at the theatres. In the first place, men make a very false estimate of their talents. Nothing is so common as for actors and managers to differ simply upon the remuneration. The actor puts his estimate upon his talents, and the manager puts his, and the consequence is, if they differ, that man is not engaged. There is another reason ; some men, though eminent in a few characters, are not generally useful. Mr. Kean, for instance : If Mr. Kean had the power of impressing upon his memory a new cha- racter he would be double and treble the value he is now. I know an instance : Mr. ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 223 JMr. Macklin played but three characters, Shylock, Sir Pertinax Macsycopliant, and Sir Archie Macsarcasm. Luckily for Mr. Macklin his talents were such that he had an individual attraction ; if that had not been the case, Mr. Macklin must have starved. Then there is another reason which does not appear before the public, but which is extremely important in a theatre, which is, the temporary inability of the performer. It is astonishing to those who are intimate with the Green-room to know what a baleful influence a bad and malignant spirit and a mischievous temper has in a theatre ; and that is the reason why many eminent performers have not been engaged, together with the other circumstances. These reasons may account why many performers of talent are not engaged at the theatres royal. 4009. Do you know any instance within the last 15 or 20 years in which a person of celebrity at the country theatres has been refused access to the theatre to try the opinion of a London audience upon their talents ? — I am not acquainted sufficiently with the provincial drama to answer that question. 4010. Have you ever heard of such a case? — Mr. Cooke was held back a long time. 4011. Within the last 15 or 20 years, do you know of any talent of great cele- brity in the provinces which has not found its way to a trial on the London boards ? — Of my own knowledge, I do not. 4012. In point of fact, have not the great theatres made great sacrifices in giving enormous and exorbitant remunerations to favourite actors ? — Very large salaries indeed. 4013. Is it not an inference from that, that having given these salaries, and made great sacrifices for celebrated actors who have made their reputation in town, that they would necessarily have given celebrated actors in the country from whom they could expect success adequate salaries? — I stated before they made eager search for talent. 4014-15. Have not the minor theatres given adequate salaries ? — I do not know. 4016. Suppose Miss Kelly was refused an engagement at the large theatres, would it not be hard that she should not be able to go to a minor theatre ? — If her terms were reasonable. 4017. It is a proof her terms were reasonable, because she is engaged at the Lyceum? — I do not presume to say why Miss Kelly is not engaged at the large theatres. 4018. You mentioned her as an instance? — Yes; I mentioned also Mr. Kean and Mr. Dowton ; but I stated there were three ways of accounting why a good actor or actress might not be engaged at the theatre. 4019. Do you not know it was a complaint among theatrical persons, that while the Kemble family kept such complete possession of the stage, country talent was excluded ? — I never heard that. 4020. Do you apprehend if Mr. Cooke had applied to Drury Lane, at the time Mr. Kemble was there, to play Hamlet or Richard, or others of those charactei-s, that he could have got an engagement ? — That I do not know ; Mr. Kemble was not always manager at Drury Lane. 4021. But you know they had always great influence? — I dare say they had. Mr. T. Morton. 12 July 1832. Mr. William Moore, called in ; and Examined. 4022. YOU wish to be examined upon this subject? — It was the request of Mr. Mr. IFilUam Moore. Harris I should be examined by this Committee. 4023. What connexion have you with Covent Garden theatre? — I am a trustee to Mr. Harris, who holds seven-twelfths of the theatre. 4024. What statement do you wish to make respecting the theatre? — I wish to make a statement with respect to the sums which have been advanced on the security of the patent of Covent Garden theatre, which I would prefer making to the Com- mittee alone, and not in public. 4025. Is it the private affairs of Mr. Harris?- -It is merely the extent of the incumbrances, the amount of the different sums that have been advanced on the security of the patents of Covent Garden theatre. 4026. That had better be given in his original statement, if Mr. Harris wishes to make a statement ? — He thinks it is essential the Committee should be acquainted with the sums advanced by different people on his seven-twelfths of the theatre, in order that the Committee may feel the confidence that has been placed in the title of the patent of Covent Garden theatre. 679. _ E E 4 4027. What 224 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE "Mt. William Moore. 4027. What value do you put upon the theatre ? — I do not feel competent to answer that question. I can only give an idea of the value from the sums that have 12 July 1832. been advanced by different parties. 4028. Do you know what the aggregate amount of the money advanced is? — Yes, I do; 65,500/. has been advanced to Mr. Harris and his father at different times by different people, on the faith of the patents of Covent Garden theatre ;. the title, when monies have been advanced, has been referred to from time to time, and has been found completely satisfactory, so as to induce parties to advance money to that extent. 4029. Do you think those sums would have been advanced if Mr. Harris had/ not conceived he possessed exclusive privileges by the patent? — These sums would not have been advanced if it had not been presumed the patent rendered the theatre valuable, which would have been of no value if it had not been for the patent. 4030. Does not Mr. Harris claim compensation if the patent is done away with? ■ — ^I do not know what I can say as to his claiming compensation, but he respect- fully submits it to you. 4031. If you would send in any statement it would be at the option of the Com-^ mittee to examine you upon that statement. Does the whole of that 65,500 /. remain upon the theatre? — Yes, in addition to the rental and seven-twelfths of 90,000/., for that is what he has personally raised on the security of the patent. 4032. Have you ever looked into the patent rights of the great theatres, or have you studied them 1 — No, I cannot say I have studied them, but 1 know as much as the proprietors know, I believe. I have been 25 years intimately ac- quainted with Air. Harris ; I am his trustee, and all his affairs are conducted by me in this country ; the security has been submitted to the different parties advancing the money, and they have thought it a sufficient security, and have ad- vanced the money accordingly, 4033. Do you think that if the properties in Covent Garden and Drury Lane were placed before the public in the shape of a lottery, the public would subscribe for them ?— I am afraid of that; there are perhaps gentlemen more competent to ^udge than I am, the lottery-office keepers. The incumbrance upon Covent Gar- den is 267,000/. 4034. Have you any plan to submit which you think would restore prosperity to the great theatres, or stop the ruin ?• — If it was left to me, and the present arrangement was one of my own, I think it is the most likely way if it was per- mitted to remain, that is, to pay off all the incumbrances upon Covent Garden theatre, upon the terms they are now acting on. 4035. That is letting the theatre ? — Letting the theatre, to preserve a certain annual income, and apply that income to the liquidation of the debts. 4036. You have let it to Mr. Laporte ? — Yes. 4037. Have you let him the whole of the theatre? — With the exception of n boxes and two-thirds, which he has not got, as they are already disposed of In addition to the sums I spoke of, monies have been raised upon them, the Duke of Devonshire's box, Lord Spencer's, the Duchess of St. Alban's and others, in addi- tion to those sums. 4038. Do you know what the whole amount of the incumbrances upon that theatre is.'' — 1 think it is 265,000/., and these 11 boxes and two-thirds, in addi- tion to that 265,000/. ; these 1 i boxes, which are let to different noblemen, which are of great value also. 4039. Do you know at all what the average income of the theatre is, what it has been for the last three or four years? — No. 4040. You have been a frequenter of the theatre for many years ; for how many years? — For 30, intimately acquainted with Mr. Harris, and that has drawn me into that way. 4041. What do you think would be the effect of allowing all plays to be per- formed without licence, to contain every thing which the writer may please to put down, political allusions, or, in short, every thing at his discretion ; what, in your opinion, would be the effect of that, when there should be no limit to indecency of language or political allusions in those performances? — I think it would have a bad effect upon the morals of the frequenters of the theatre, and a bad effect gene- rally ; for when minor theatres failed in decent exhibitions, they would resort to indecent exhibitions. You could not have a stronger proof of that than at the Coburg lately. 4042. Have ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 225 4042. Have you ever witnessed any particular excitement in the audience at par- Mr. William Moor ticular moments ? — Yes, very great. 4043. Passages very much seized on by the audience? — Yes, sentences which 12 July 1832. have been uttered in old plays have been taken up at the time they were per- forming, which neither the proprietors nor the actors thought of till the audience caught at them. 4044. What sort of excitement was that ? — Violent excitement or enthusiasm ; that sort of excitement which you may imagine from several thousand persons expressing a warm feeling at once. 4045. Do you think any power of licensing would prevent the people expressing their opinions, and making their application of passages in old plays ? — Certainly not. 4046. Have you observed in later years that the audience have occasionally expressed their disapprobation of immoral passages in plays ? — Yes, invariably. 4047. That accounts for what we understood to be the practice ; namely, strik- ing out a number of immoral passages from old plays ? — Yes ; if they were to act old plays without that they could not get an audience. 4048. Is that sense of decency very much manifested by audiences of the present time? — Yes, very much. 4049. Then may we not imagine from the improved morals of the public, that on that score the necessity of having a guardian of the morals of the theatre in the Lord Chamberlain may be dispensed with, and it may be supposed to be sufficiently guarded by the good feelings of the audiences generally? — Perhaps not sufficiently, but frequently. Very often managers and actors would attempt (as I have known instances of that) to use indecent expressions, and if it succeeded, very well ; it was a very good joke ; but if it did not, and it has seldom succeeded, it was not re- peated. I have known experiments of that kind, but the thing has generally failed. 4050. They are very dangerous experiments ? — Yes, very dangerous ; if it suc- ceeded it was a good joke and was repeated, but it seldom or ever succeeded. 405 1 . Then the necessity for a licenser, in your opinion, must chiefly if not altogether arise, in the present state of society, from your apprehension of the political feelings of the audience ? — Yes, and improper things. Authors will introduce improper things into their plays, and will feel much hurt at the licenser striking them out, which any moral man will think ought not to be in. 4052. You say Mr. Harris has been advanced 65,500 /. ? — Yes ; the public, or different people, have advanced to the estate of Mr. Harris 65,500/. on the security of Covent Garden theatre, upon his seven-twelfths, which would not have been advanced was it not that the title was good, and the property was secure. 4053. Have you advanced any part of the 65,500 /. ? — Yes, I have. 4054. "What portion of it ?— (No answer.) 4055. Have you observed that the theatre has been less frequented of late years than it was formerly ? — Yes ; within the last 1 years the average returns of Covent Garden theatre was 53,000/. or 54,000/,, and in 1 years before that 83,000/. or 84,000 /., a difference of 30,000 /. 4056. To what do you attribute that ? — I have not sufficiently studied the thing ; but I consider the minor theatres have done them dreadful mischief, and I attribute it to the minor theatres more than to any other cause. 4057. Do you not suppose the religious feeling, and the difference of hours in the fashionable world have been great causes of the falling off"? — It is a cause, but not the great cause. I consider it is the minor theatres more than anything, for 10 years ago the hours were much the same, or 12 or 15 years ago, and yet the theatres were successful. 4058. Do you think the extension of the privilege of acting the legitimate drama to the minor theatres would do the least harm P^YeSi 4059. We find it in the evidence it is not those plays which fill the minor theatres the most ; are you not aware of that ? — If they are badly done they will not, but if they are well done they will. They play at the Adelphi a perfect drama, as you have said, and they have filled the Adelphi and ruined Covent Garden. 4060. Are you speaking of the legitimate drama ? — Yes, of The Wreck Ashore, and other pieces, which have done as much injury as the legitimate drama could. 406 1 . You would then restrict them to burlettas ? — I think the patent theatres would naturally wish to restrict them to burlettas, because the present system does them great injury ; there are many pieces played at the Adelphi as perfect as they could play them anywhere. 679. F F 406a. You 226 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. William Moore. 4062. You attribute the falling off in the prosperity of Drury Lane and Covent — Garden to the improvement in the performances in the minor theatres, and the 12 July 1832. deterioration in the performances of the larger theatres ? — I do not say deterioration at the large theatres ; but the performances at the minor theatres are certainly improved. 4063. Do you not conceive the performances, take them as a whole, are inferior at the large theatres to what they were some years ago ? — The company at Covent Garden theatre in the year 1822 was the most perfect perhaps that was ever exhibited since we had a stage in England, and I take my judgment from a remark of old Mr. Harris, who is now dead ; I sat with him when he was seeing one of Shakspeare's plays, and he made the same remark ; and if you go over the per- formers who were at Covent Garden ten years ago, I think you will see they had the best set of performers that were ever seen in England. 4064. Do you not conceive, if the patent theatres were smaller than they are now, they would be attended by a greater number of persons than they are at pre- sent? — I think not. Mr. Elliston altered Drury Lane, as it was thought too large, but it has done the theatre no good, the receipts are not better than they were before. 4065. What sort of performances have they produced at Druiy Lane since that time ? How many great tragedies or comedies have they produced at Drury Lane ? — I am not competent to enter into minutiae, but I take it upon the broad scale. I say there was a theatre which was said to be on too large a scale, and it was altered at the expense of 3,000/., and has failed. 4066. Do you, in point of fact, know that in the case of the same play being performed at a large theatre and in a small theatre by the same performers, every part being filled by precisely the same persons, the receipt in the small theatre was infinitely less in proportion than the receipt at the large theatre ? — Yes, certainly. ' ' 4067. You have known that? — Yes, over and over again. They performed a play at the Opera House to 600/., and the same company then crossed over the way to the little theatre and performed the same play, and there was only two-thirds of that. 4068. Do you not think you have stated a sufficient reason for the falling off of the receipts from the nature of the company, you having stated that in 1822 there was a good company, and at present there is not ? — I do not mean to say there is not a good company now, but the company is not equal to that of 1 822 ; 1822 per- haps was the richest company the theatre ever produced. 4069. Then was not the prosperity of the theatre owing to the company, and if so, the adversity is not attributable to the minor theatres, because there is a falling off in the company? — I think it is attributable to the minor theatres in the greatest degree ; the greatest evil of the patent theatres is the minor theatres. I do not speak selfishly, for I do not wish Mr. Harris better than I wish Mr. Yates. I think there is the greatest merit attached to the directors of the Adelphi ; but from all I have seen it has done injury to the patent theatres, 4070. Do you not think if I could get as good a company in the patent theatres as they had in 1822, that Drury Lane and Covent Garden would attract as much as they did at that time ? — No, I do not think so ; for they have the Adelphi, and Madame Vestris at the Olympic, which are powerful attractions, against them, which they had not at that time. Mr. James Kenney, called in ; and Examined. Mr. JflMM Kenney. 4071. YOU are the author of various plays? — I am. 4072. What successful plays have you been the author of? — Latterly I have written Massaniello, the farce of the Illustrious Stranger, the comedy of Spring and Autumn ; at the Haymarket, Sweethearts and Wives ; and before that, Raising the Wind, and Love, Law and Physic. 4073. You are the author of Massaniello?' — Yes. 4074. How many nights was Massaniello played? — I apprehend it must now have exceeded 150 nights. 4075. At what theatre ? — At Drury Lane. 4076. What have you received for it ? — Nothing. 4077. Did you make an agreement to receive anything ? — Yes ; but I made an agreement with the lessee for the time being, Mr. Price, that I was to be paid a certain sum, which was arranged at 50/. every third night the piece was acted, up to the 24th. 4078. That ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. aay 4078. That engagement was not fulfilled ? — No. Mr, Jame» Kenney. 4079. Had you not a remedy by law ? — It happened at the expiration of the ■■ season in which Massaniello came out ; it came out in the month of May in one ^^ ^"'y *^32« season, and at the expiration of that season, or rather in the middle of the next, the lessee became a bankrupt, and the treasury was taken possession of by the committee in trust for the theatre, who managed conjointly with Mr. Price for several weeks or months ; in fact, till the termination of that season. My applica- tion to the treasurer was answered by a promise on his part to submit my case to the committee, and to demand on my behalf the 300/. that was due to me. Their answer was, they had nothing to do with it. They were then continuing to play the piece every third or fourth night through the whole season or nearly. Their answer was, they had nothing to do with it ; it was the debt of their lessee, and they were not responsible for it, nor could they pay it, nor any part of it. 4080. What sum do you think Drury Lane has received by the representation of Massaniello ? — It is very difficult to compute ; but I apprehend from its having been played so often, and its being still played so constantly when the theatre is open, that the profit must have been very great indeed. 4081. You have heard it stated that this piece has rather a revolutionary ten- j dency ; do you consider it as such ? — No, I apprehend quite the contrary. I was rather fearful it might be considered a Tory play, for it has a Tory moral decidedly ; and during the revolution in France, the fifth act was suppressed on account of its having that sort of moral. It was deemed a satire on the mob, and hence the fifth act was suppressed during the late revolution in France. But, however, there is no question, if I may be allowed the expression, that it has a Tory moral. The revolutionary fisherman is humiliated, and a lesson is taught very opposite to a revolutionary one. 4082. So far as you are concerned, as an author, do you think there ought to be some considerable alteration in the laws affecting dramatic copyright ? — Indeed I apprehend so ; for I can only say, having met with the greatest success for years past, indeed having had a most brilliant success, what remained for me afterwards was most bitter and most humiliating; I had to go from week to week to demand the small sum of 10/. in remuneration for my productions ; and when I say it was bitter, it was bitter also with respect to the two treasurers, who I know suffered as much in seeing me enter the treasury as I did myself. 1 can say I am overwhelmed with these humiliations and injustice. 4083. Do you see any prospect of being remunerated for that piece hereafter? — Indeed none ; except that I am told a case of partnership might be decidedly estab- lished on the part of the committee. Mr. Calcraft was there frequently, and al- though he was not manager, he attended as chairman of the committee ; he attended at the rehearsals, and often addressed me as if he was concerned in the management of the theatre on behalf of the committee ; and I am advised that, in the Court of Chancery, which no poor man like me can venture into, I might have redress, but that is the only choice I have. I can only say the piece, after the refusal of my claim, has been acted oftener than it was before, as the principal support of the theatre, and was afterwards handed over, as I have stated in the preface to a sub- sequent production, to the present lessee, as the lawful property of the theatre, upon some custom, that when a piece is once played in the theatre they shall have a right to continue the representation. 4084. Have you submitted The Pledge to any theatre? — The Pledge was acted at Drury Lane ; but I apprehend there was nothing which affects the great ques- tion in that, although I had many complaints, but that was against the particular* management. 4085. Does Drury Lane claim the exclusive privilege of performing that piece r — Not now ; it would be open to Covent Garden to perform it now, because it has recently been published. I withheld it in the hope that it might be of advantage to me ; that something might be done in the way that this Committee are kindly endeavouring to do, and that the copyright might be of some value to me. 4086. As a literary man, who have turned your attention to the drama generally, had you any feeling previous to the performance of Massaniello, that it would be advantageous to the drama that the legitimate drama should be performed at other theatres besides the great ones ? — Why I thought, to speak generally, that an in- creased and extended population required it, and the public should no more be required to come from Mile End, or the extremities of this extending city, to two theatres, more than to two churches. 679. F F 2 4087. Do 228 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. James Kenney, 12 July 1832. F 4087. Do you think the drama would be deteriorated at all? — It is not a ques- tion I have considered much, but I do not think it would. I think if smaller theatres on a moderate scale were santioned by the law, so that they might engao-e such companies as would be adequate to the representation of the legitimate drama, it would be for its advantage. I know it is an every day observation that the theatres are too large, and many pieces have produced the most excellent effect, and had great success at the Haymarket which would have had no chance at the larger theatres. Perhaps I may be allowed to make another observation with reference to the larger theatres. I think their prosperity has been in a great measure over- whelmed by the necessity of keeping a company of every description ; an expensive operatic company, a company for melo-drama, for pantomime, and for tragedy and comedy ; whereas the effect of an extended taste for the drama seems to be to clas- sify theatres, so that each theatre might have an establishment at less expense. 4088. Have you any other general observation to offer? — No; I came here merely to satisfy the Committee on any points on which they might be desirous of questioning me, and I confess I am strongly interested that our case should be amended in some shape. I have experienced a good deal of liberality from the proprietors of both the winter theatres, and I should be very sorry to be supposed to betray any hostility to them. 4089. Supposing no play could be acted at any theatre without the permission of the author, and the law provided for that, then your play would not have been thus performed without your consent? — No, certainly ; if there was a law by which we were entitled to stop the representation of our plays, or to withdraw them, or take them to another theatre ; or if we were entitled to demand our money at the week's end, like an actor, it would be a different matter. 4090. Have you anything to offer respecting the law of copyright ? — I have not considered it sufficiently. 4091. That is the feeling with regard to dramatic writers generally ? — Certainly, I believe we are of one mind upon that subject. The large salaries which are now paid to actors, are pleaded as a cause for their not paying authors ; and they are certainly more than double since the time of the production of the School for Scandal, and such comedies as Speed the Plough, John Bull, and other things which have been exceedingly profitable. At that time the salaries of the best per- formers did not exceed 15/. a week, now that sum is thought trifling for a night's performance. They will be paid at the week's end. '• 4092. Are there any sums due to you from Covent Garden for any piece they have played ? — Yes, there is a small sum for the Irish Ambassador, about half of the stipulated profits. 4093. Do you see any prospect of getting that ? — I am in a state of uncertainty upon the subject. The last time I applied I asked for a small instalment of lo /., which I am sorry to confess was an object to me. It was pleaded to me on account of an anterior arrangement, by which the receipts had been put into the hands of the actors ; some authors had been provided for, but not I. Miss Kemble received all her money for Francis the First, a very meritorious play, and certainly deserving of all she obtained for it ; but I thought there was no reason why I should not be paid as well as those who came six months after me. •♦ 4094. Did the Irish Ambassador bring much money into the treasury of Covent Garden ? — It was played nearly 30 nights successively. 4095. What was your stipulation with the theatre for that piece? — I was to have had at the utmost 125 /. ; that is, having taken it there with the explanation that it had been offered to Mr. Price, who, because he had no Irishman, could not venture to act it, I allowed them to take it on much less terms than I had been accustomed to receive. 4096. Then you only received half of 125 /. ? — I have not received half; there is still 75 /. due to me. 4097. I think you say the interest of the drama would be promoted if the per- formances were classified at particular theatres, by which you mean that the per- formance of opera, tragedy, comedy and pantomime at one theatre creates great expense to the theatre ? — Very great expense ; and when it happens that the principal attraction of the season has been an opera or a tragedy, the rest of th& company have been a redundancy ; they have had sinecures. 4098. Do you think it would be to the advantage of the public if the perform- ance of tragedy and comedy was limited to a certain number of theatres, and vaudevilles and pihces de circonstance were to be performed at other theatres ; in o short. ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 229 short, that sort of classification to which you have alluded ? — I should anticipate Mr. Jamet Kennty. some ill consequence from its being absolutely thrown open without a control of » some sort. I think that the claims for licences should be investigated, and a case ^i* July 1832. should be made out before a licence is granted. 4099. If the thing is thrown perfectly open, do you or do you not think the interests of the drama would be very much deteriorated ? — It is a question I can hardly answer ofF-hand. 4100. I ask you as an author, if there were 10 or 12 theatres? — I am afraid, if it was thrown absolutely open without a control of some sort, and without an inves- tigation of the claims of the particular persons applying for licences, and as to the sufficiency of the theatres, it would be attended with bad effects. It is such a tempting opportunity that I am afraid it would be very ruinous, and we might be as badly off" for our money as we are now in certain cases. 41 Qi. Do you not think if there were a great many theatres performing the legitimate drama, the consequence would be that there must be a great number of inferior actors ? — A great number certainly. 4102. Now, supposing you were to write a play of the same talent you have exhibited in writing plays, would not a great many of the points which are pro- duced by the acting be lost, in consequence of the deficiency of the performers ? — ■ I think it would operate two ways, that if there would be a necessity for employ- ing a great deal of inferior talent, it would, from the very great competition, elicit more genuine talent. 4103. With reference to your feeling as an author as to the effect upon your productions, how would you feel with reference to a play you might write with the same talent you have exhibited, would you feel the same confidence of its produ- cing that effect upon the public at those small theatres that your efforts have pro- duced when represented at the great theatres with that abundance of good actors to represent your plays ? — Judging from the probation in France, I should say no, for there is no doubt that talent is in a much more prosperous state there, and there is much more of it. 4104. Does not the classification exist in France ? — Yes. 4105. Then do you attribute the quantum of talent to the classification? — Yes, and I think they would all prosper better. I think if the interests of all the proprietors were compromised, an indemnity might be given to those who were disposed to give up their rights. 4106. You think that liberty might be given to perform the legitimate drama at every theatre, without prejudice to the public taste, and to authors and the drama itself? — I do not know that it would be prejudicial to authors. I think the other would be the best plan ; I think that throwing it open would be attended with very ' evil consequences. 4107. Would you not rather have five markets to take your pieces to than one? — I would, if those markets were not all bad ones ; but it is much to be appre- hended that they would be so if the thing were thrown open, as many men would be glad, builders and others, to set any one going. It is such a tempting specula- tion, much more so than a commercial adventure. 4108. Are not the disbursements of a theatre all ready money? — Oh dear, no, tradesmen give very long credit. 4109. The salaries of the actors, and the current expenses are all weekly ? — As far as relates to the actors and the officers of the theatre, they are all paid weekly. 4110. Then it is a more difficult enterprise to enter into without a certain capi- tal than the generality of commercial speculations? — Certainly, it requires a great deal of experience, and I believe the lessee system, by letting in a great deal of in- experience, has been injurious to the interests of the drama. 4111. With respect to certain immoral and political passages in plays, which have been alluded to by different witnesses, do you suppose the taste of the audi- ence would be a sufficient guard against immoral And improper passages being in- troduced, without a licenser? — I think there still exists a power for a licenser to wait the event of pieces, and pieces that have been licensed have been suspended in times of excitement, such as Venice Preserved and King Lear, during the in- sanity of the late King, and as happened with many plays. It is in the power of , the licenser ; he could suspend Massaniello when it has a mischievous tendency. I believe the immorality of the thing corrects itself. 4112. You think the immorality corrects itself? — I should think so. I remem- ber Mr. Colman writing me a very good-humoured letter upon the subject relative to 679. F F 3 some 230 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. James Kenney. some scene which he thought a little too free, and he said, " Depend upon it, if -^ I do not cut it out, the audience will cut it out for me," I expressed my acquies- is July 1832. cence, and said, if any actor or manager had expressed the same thing I would cheerfully have expunged it. 4113. You conceive the real ground to be depended on for the necessity of a licenser, is with reference to the political allusions which may act upon the feelings or passions of an audience ?— Yes, and I think the personal opinions of a licenser may be very injurious in that respect. 41 14. You think if a licenser is necessary from political allusions, or any other cause, if the licence was granted by a greater number than one, it would be advan- tageous P — ^Yes, I think there should be a greater number ; it might be read in general by an individual without injury, but in case a difficulty was felt I think it should be submitted to several. 4115. Do you think it would be to the interest of authors if the legitimate drama was allowed to be played at more theatres than at present ? — [No an- swer.) 4116. You said, if the thing were thrown open entirely it might produce a great deal of dangerous speculation ? — Yes. 4117. Supposing a very large number of persons were desirous that a theatre should be erected or licensed, and were to apply to the Lord Chamberlain to license it, and the Lord Chamberlain was obliged to license the house, do you think it might safely be trusted to that large number of persons, all householders, to ascertain whether or not a theatre ought to be licensed ? — Certainly. I think a limited extension of them would be of great advantage. 41 1 8. There are three points of view in which this is to be considered : first, with reference to the public. You have said you considered it desirable that the theatres should be so situated that the public might be able to attend them without going to a particular part of the town to see a play 1 — Yes, without going to a great distance ; I think that is hard. 41 19. That is your opinion as far as the public is concerned ?— Certainly. 4120. Then as regards actors : you say, though it might produce a subsistence for inferior talent, if the legitimate drama was performed at several theatres, it might be a nursery for good actors ? — Certainly. I think the old established theatres would have a great advantage over any new ones. 4121. But you think it would be a nursery for good actors? — Certainly. 4122. Would it be advantageous or disadvantageous on the whole to the art of acting ? — I should say advantageous generally. 4123. Then as regards authors: do you think that it would be advantageous or disadvantageous to authors to have several theatres where the drama is allowed ?— I do think so. 4124. You think it would be advantageous? — 1 do, certainly. 4125. Then with regard to the classification of theatres : you think it would be advantageous that plays should be classified ? — Yes. 4126. Do you think if there was no law to impose a classification it might be trusted to the interests of managers to fall into that classification ? — Yes, as in the case of Mr. Arnold, whose licence is for English operas, which he has been able to produce, and do a great deal of honour to the musical genius of the country, and exhibit musical talent in general on a larger scale than if he had a larger general company. 4127. Then would you impose it as a condition of the licence that they should only perform a certain class of representations, or would you leave the classification to them as to which they found the most attractive to the public ? — ^That might be a question, otherwise there would be no classification at all, if the law did not sanc- tion it. 4128. You do not think the manager would only perform that sort of play which he found most attractive to the public ? — I think he would. 41 29. Then if he would it would not be necessary to impose any particular regu- lation in the licence ? — I do not know that it would. 4130. The interest of managers, if they were enlightened and experienced, would lead them to do that ?— Yes, as in the case of the Adelphi, where they would not attempt to play a regular tragedy or a classic comedy. 4131. Then, being advantageous to authors to have the legitimate drama per- formed at several theatres, and advantageous to the public to see whether they like it, there is no objection to allowing the legitimate drama to be performed at the small ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 231 small theatres? — No. I should beg to observe, that authors have already felt the lilx.Jamei Kenney, advantage of the extension of the theatres. Some of the most respectable talent of the day have written with success for Madame Vestris, and have been very hand- J^ July 1.832. somely remunerated ; and she has done me the honour to make similar applications to me. A great deal of our best talent has contributed to the performances at the Adelphi with great advantage. 4132. Do you think a successful minor theatre would be always able to give authors a fair remuneration ? — Certainly. I think there is every chance that both these theatres are likely for a long time to pay authors exceedingly well. 4133. Do you think the remuneration that is given by the minor theatres for trifling pieces, such as French vaudevilles and pieces de ciixonstance, does in point of fact diminish the number of productions in the regular drama, tragedy and comedy, and so on. If there is a large remuneration given by the minor theatres for these trifling pieces, does not that diminish the demand for and the encourage- ment to write in the higher class of the drama ? — I apprehend that talent is pro- duced by a demand for it in every way, and where the talent of the performers at a theatre is particularly eminent in one branch, authors will naturally lean that way, as during the time of Miss G'Neil and Mr. Kean there were many successful new tragedies ; and when the comic companies of Drury Lane and Covent Garden were very brilliant, authors wrote comedies also. Now at present the talent seems to be the other way. You get these vaudevilles more satisfactorily represented upon the whole than the regular drama, and therefore authors incline that way. 4134. Is it not much easier to write a vaudeville for a small theatre than to write a regular drama ? — Certainly. 4135. But the remuneration is as considerable for a vaudeville ? — Yes, in propor- tion to the quality. 4136. Then the remuneration being as considerable, and the task easier, does it not lead the authors into that line rather than into the regular drama ? — No. _,1 have no hesitation in saying that the feelings of authors will lean the other way, that their inclination will always be to produce what is honourable to their talents. 4137. But they are withdrawn from that by the small theatres, in order to pro- duce what is profitable ? — It is only profitable in its proportion. It is not profitable out of the proportion to its inferior quality. 41 38. Although there would be more honour in producing a drama of the higher class, there is more profit in producing these trifling things ? — Yes, because authors are not paid at all, or they have so much difficulty, owing to the unprosperous state of the patent theatres, that their labour is threefold what it would be in going into a theatre where the remuneration is put on a certain and respectable footing ; that is the reason, and that would be my great temptation to go to a minor theatre, and perhaps my sole temptation. 4139. Then the effect of these small theatres has in fact been to produce from all the talent those trifles of the day ? —Yes, as all writers must make a beginning ; it is a nursery for authors as it is for actors. Mr. Jerrold, who made so successful an experiment at Drury Lane, first wrote for them. 4140. With respect to you and other authors whose fame is established, do you find it more profitable to write for the minor theatres than to write a regular drama, under the circumstances in which the drama is placed by the patent theatres? — If they were paid on the score I have always been paid, or which my agreements have stated I should be paid at the patent theatres, there would be no comparison that my advantage would be to go to them decidedly ; it is only on the account I stated, that although the remuneration be more moderate, yet it is satisfactory and is forth- coming. I believe that is so both with Madame Vestris and the Adelphi. 4141. But the taste of the public causes a better remuneration to be given to these trifles than the regular drama, as the matter now stands ? — A certain remu- neration is given. I dare say there are many gentlemen who are in this room who have no complaint against the patent theatres ; perhaps my case is individual, and I should be sorry this Committee should be influenced by my complaints ; there are several gentlemen who have been paid every shilling at the patent theatres with less trouble than I have ; I only say the diflSculty they are in, and the notoriety that they are in an unprosperous state, renders it a painful office to go for your money, and on that account I think it would be more advantageous to go to a minor theatre. 4142. When you gave the Irish Ambassador to Covent Garden theatre, was there no arrangement ; were you not given to understand there was a risk as to 679. F F 4 payment ? — 232 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE VLr. James Kenney. payment ?^ — -My arrangement with Mr. Bartley by letter was, that if the piece sue- - ceeded decidedly, I should have lOO guineas, without reference to its run, and if it 12 July 1832. was acted 20 nights, I should have 25/. more. Mr. Bartley said, " Nothing succeeds now, and nothing will succeed ; we have a great respect for your farce, but we cannot flatter ourselves it will be more successful than anything else." I said to Mr. Bartley, " I shall consider the circumstances of the theatre, and if it is not successful, you shall have every fair indulgence from me ;" but I said, " If it dis- appoints you in that respect, you will consider that, I am sure." The answer was, " Certainly we will." Now it was stated to me in most unequivocal terms, that the piece had been most unexpectedly successful. Mr. Bartley came to me on the 9th night, when it was acted with Hamlet, and said, " We had 90 /. for the first account in our pit, a thing we had not seen since the first night of Hamlet this season." In fact, to speak plainly, from its success, I considered my case altogether altered, and more so when I found an arrangement had been made by which all the recent productions had been preferred ; and then I wrote to Mr. Bartley, to state that any understanding as to my indulging the theatre must be at an end, when the whole sum was given to the proprietor's daughter for her play. I said, " Had you not better have called me in to be a party to such an arrangement ?" 4143. You mean to say, if you had been a proprietor's son you would have got your money ? — I mean merely to state, when this arrangement was made. Miss Kemble's play was in rehearsal, and announced for a given day, and the proposal to remunerate authors who came in after that was made by Mr. Bartley, the acting manager. If Mr. Robertson, the treasurer, was examined, I apprehend he would confirm my statement, that the piece, contrary to Mr. Bartley's expectation, was decidedly productive and successful. I merely state the fact. Mr. Edward William Elton, called in ; and Examined. . Mr. E. W, EUon. 41 44. YOU are an actor at the minor theatres ? — Yes. •~~- 4145- Do you consider there is any peculiar hardship in the present law as relates to actors generally ? — I do. I consider the hardship is very great, and I considered so before I was an actor at the minor theatres. 4146. In what respect? — I have been an actor in a London minor theatre scarcely more than 1 2 months. 4147. At what theatre? — At the Surrey principally ; a short portion of time before that at the Garrick theatre, at the east end of the town. That is all the time I have passed in the London minor theatres. The rest of my professional life has been passed in provincial theatres ; some of them of the first class, where I have been in the habit of practising in legitimate as well as other dramas, and I have always thought the present state of the laws as regards the monopoly of the drama ^n London peculiarly hard upon actors, particularly inasmuch as it narrows the field for the exertion of that talent with which God has gifted them. 4148. If any great talent is exhibited at the provincial theatres, do you not con- sider that is sought for in the metropolitan theatres ? — I do not ; and I not only consider it is not sought for, but I have known instances where men of consider- able standing and considerable provincial reputation have applied to the major theatres, offering their services, or requesting a trial of their talents, and their applications have not even been attended to, nor have they even received those answers which one gentleman expects from another when he addresses him. 4149. Do you conceive if the metropolitan theatres did seek for the talent of the provincial theatres, there might be talent displayed at the provincial theatres which would not have a fair field for talent in the metropolitan theatres ?• — Most certainly I do. 4150. Do you conceive a man may be a good actor on a small stage, and not so good an actor on a large stage? — I think there will be, with regard to many actors^ a very considerable difference. I know, as an old play-goer as well as an actor, that there is a considerable difference between the acting of the greatest actors on the boards of a moderately sized theatre and a large one. I have seen Mr. Kean act in theatres of all sizes, and have acted with him in many, and I invariably found the nicer and better points of his acting were lost or materially impaired in large theatres, when full effect was always given to them in theatres of moderate size. 4151. Do you consider that actors are trained to great excellence in their art more by one species of composition than another ? — Most certainly. 4152. Do you think they can obtain the same excellence in vaudevilles, pieces de circonstance, and so on, as in acting regular tragedy and comedy ? — Certainly not : ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 233 __ not ; I have always found it the contrary with regard to the talent I may possess ; Mr. E. W. Elton. I have found my spirit and power of producing effect elevated or depressed in exact proportion to the kind of drama in which that talent was exercised, that is, 12 July 1832. in proportion to its excellence or inferiority. I have felt myself occasionally de- graded by the nature of the performances I have been compelled to take part in. 4153. Do you consider that is a feeling among actors, that the legitimate drama is a better nursery for talent than any other? — I believe that is the feeling of all actors who exercise their art with a real love for it, and a sense of its importance. 4154. Do you conceive the drama could be so much encouraged as to produce more real talent in the histrionic art than we find at present ? — I do ; I think the more open the field for competition is the greater the chance for producing good actors ; I think the greater the demand for good acting, by encouraging the per- formance of the legitimate drama, the greater will be the number of good actors. I have found in the productions of every art that the supply is generally in propor- tion to the demand. 4155. Supposing there were seven or eight theatres which had a right to perform the legitimate drama, do you consider it is possible there would be a sufficient sup- ply of actors to furnish each theatre with a respectable company ? — In the present state of things I do not ; but I do not think seven or eight theatres in London, if they were allowed, would ever be playing the legitimate drama at one and the same time. I think they would classify themselves to a certain extent, according to the demands of their different locations. 4156. And you think they would do that if they were not compelled by any law? — I do. 4157. You belong to the Surrey theatre? — Yes. 4158. Does the manager of the Surrey theatre perform the legitimate drama? — He performs anything he pleases, Shakspeare or other pieces ; but I believe, as far as I have seen, he finds it more to his interest in general to perform minor dramatic pieces than to perform the legitimate drama, that is tragedy and comedy ; but I am inclined to think he has occasionally, nay frequently, found it more to his interest to play the legitimate drama, if I may judge from the appearance of the houses, but not generally, owing to the present state of the law partly, which renders it difficult to procure a company by which the legitimate drama can be played in a minor theatre in all its parts in such a way as to render it attractive. 4159. The staple profit to hira is derived not from the legitimate drama, but smaller pieces ? — Yes, I should think so. 4160. In that case, though he follows no law with regard to the selection of pieces, he follows his oWh interest generally, and takes that which is the most advantageous to him ? — Precisely so. There may be rare times when he or the manager of any theatre may have the means of commanding talent expressly de- voted to the legitimate drama, and at those times he finds it more to his interest to play it. There may be other times when that is not the case, and he then plays minor dramatic pieces. 4161. What is the present performance at the Surrey ? — The Hunchback has been performed for the last three nights. 4162. How did that succeed ? — It was most eminently successful, if you allude to the effect produced on the audience. 4163. Were the audience numerous ? — ^Yes ; I believe the houses were better than have been seen there for the last three months. 4164. No fault was found with the acting? — I do not know that. I have not seen or sought the criticisms. The effect upon the audience appeared much greater than at Covent Garden theatre, the piece being much more loudly ap- plauded ; and I can only attribute it to the circumstance of their being better able to hear, see, and appreciate the drama in a moderate sized theatre ; for I would not insult your understandings by saying it was better played at the Surrey theatre than at Covent Garden. 4165. Do you not consider it a great hardship upon the author that you should be able to play that ? — I conceive it is a great hardship; I wish the laws were so framed that actors might be liable to a penalty as well the manager, for then the actor would have an opportunity, without infringing his articles of agreement, of refusing to offend against the law. 4166. You have acted in provincial theatres ? — ^^I have. 41 G7. Do you think the provincial theatres could afford to pay an author a small sum for his piece?— I think a provincial theatre of the first class could affijrd a 679. G G remuneration 234 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. E IF. Elton, remuneration to authors, which would not be felt as a severe tax upon them, but would be of importance to authors. 12 July 1832. 4168. They could pay as much as 2/. or 3/, per night? — I do not think they could pay so much as that ; but I have been told by the authors of successful pieces, if they had even been paid as little as half-a-crown per night for the repre- sentation of their pieces throughout the country, they would have received a large sum, and a sum which, in instances of very popular pieces, would have satisfied them. I heard Mr. Jerrold make that remark with respect to Black Eyed Susan. 4169. Are there any general observations you wish to make, especially with regard to actors ? — I think the present laws affect the exertions of actors very mate- rially. There are so many theatres in the country which demand the first-rate talent, that not one-sixth part of these actors of first-rate talent that are necessarily demanded by pi-ovincial theatres, can ever hope to get engagements at Covent Garden or Drury Lane ; and yet a country actor's life is considered but as a state of necessary probation, and in most cases is one of positive endurance and depriva- tion. The highest salary I know paid in a provincial theatre of the very first class, is three guineas a week, and very few receive so much as that, and have to pay their own travelling expenses from town to town, and frequently to provide their own stage dresses ; yet it is expected a man receiving that salary shall be able to embody the first characters of Shakspeare. 41 70. Do you happen to know any particular instance of clever leading actors of undoubted talent who try to appear before a London audience, who have not been able to obtain engagements at the large theatres ? — I do. 4171. Are those instances many ?— Not perhaps many. 4172. Have you any objection to name them? — I cannot say I know such facts; I do not know of actors of talent having applied to Covent Garden or Drury Lane and being refused engagements, as such repulses would not perhaps be confessed to ; but I have known actors and actresses of the first-rate talent exhibiting their talents in the country very much against their will. I have always observed a strong wish to exist amongst provincial performers that there should be more markets in London for talents, for country actors are always looking to the metropolis as the end and aim of their ambition, and their provincial engagements are considered by them merely as a means of attaining that end. 4173. Is it your belief that those individuals have remained in the country merely on account of the difficulty of getting engagements in London ? — I am sure of it. I do not know whether it will be considered improper if I mention my own case. I have been for eight years a provincial actor ; I have filled situations of first-rate importance in Liverpool, Manchester, Norwich, and other theatres, not quite of so much importance as those but nearly so, and I have always found the provinces utterly inadequate to my support and that of my family. 1 have made applications to the large theatres for a mere trial of my talent, and those applications have been wholly unnoticed, not even answered. 1 at last had applications made to me from the London minor theatres, and observing, with other actors, that those theatres had of late years, with the sanction and the encouragement of the public, made great strides towards attaining nearly the same respectability and excellence as the large houses, I was at length induced to accept those offers. 4174. What parts in the country theatres did you most excel in? — Richard the Third, Othello, Hamlet, and parts of that class. 4175. Did you offer probationary to play any of those parts in the London theatres? — I once did ; I wrote at the same time to Mr. Charles Kemble of Covent (larden theatre, and Mr. Alexander Lee of Drury Lane. Mr. Kean at that time had seceded from the stage for a time. I made an offer, certainly a very bold one, to undertake Mr. Kean's characters, or make a trial in them, at a moderate salary, for the remainder of the season. I expressly offered to do so at a very moderate salary. I never received an answer to either application. 4176. Did you state the sum ? — I did not. 4177. And you believe others are in the same situation? — I believe so. . 4178. You now perform principal parts at the Surrey theatre? — I do. 4179. If those small theatres were not existing you would have no engagement in London? — If the legitimate drama was not played at the minor theatres I should certainly have had no engagement in London. 4180. You would still be performing at the provinciid theatres? — Yes; I would not have accepted an engagement at a minor theatre had it been otherwise than it is. 4181. You ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 235 41 81. You would be performing at a very inadequate salary? — Yes. Mr. E. IV. Elton. 4182. Do you know performers in the country who sustain characters there equally clever with the individuals who sustain those characters in London? — 12 July 1832. I know many who are equally clever, in the opinion of the audience who witness their talent. 4183. In your opinion ? — Yes ; I have seen instances. 4184. Do you know whether it costs a great deal to give an actor a trial at a great theatre? — I never heard so. I should mention, when I made the application I alluded to at Covent Garden and Drury Lane theatres, I made that application not from an obscure theatre, or as an obscure provincial actor, I was playing the leading characters in the Liverpool and Manchester theatres, Mr. Lewis's theatre, with Mr. VandenhofF at Liverpool, and solely at Manchester. 41 85. Younever heard it stated that it costs 100/. at a patent theatre to give an actor a trial ? — No. 41 86. Your line is the tragic ? — Yes. 4187. All Mr. Kean's characters? — Yes. 4188. And melo-drame too? — I have been compelled to play a great deal of melo-drame very much against my will in town and country, 4189. You have played with Mr. VandenhofF? — Yes. 4190. Is he the principal tragic actor in the Liverpool company? — ;He was then so at Liverpool, but not in Manchester, Chester, and other towns. 4191. What parts have you played with Mr. VandenhofF? — I have played Edgar to his King Lear, Pierre to his Jaffier, lago to his Othello, and the like. 4192. Have you ever played at Birmingham or Bristol? — I have played in Birmingham, not in Bristol. I give it as my opinion as an actor, for this reason in addition to others, that the right of playing the legitimate drama in London should be given to other theatres as well as the large theatres, unrestrictedly ; that I think it would be advantageous to the proprietors of the great theatres such should be the case. It has been stated, and it is well known, that the actors at the great houses are generally obtained from provincial theatres. The provincial theatres have been the school for the actors at the large theatres in London ; but it happens frequently that upon recommendations of persons known by the managers of the large theatres, actors and actresses are brought from the provincial theatres, and fail after they have made long engagements. There have been instances of actors and actresses making engagements for three and even five years, at large salaries at the patent houses, who have failed on their first appearance, and the managers. have been consequently saddled with those engagements, although the performers were useless. Now, if the legitimate drama were acted at the minor theatres, they would become the finishing schools, instead of the provincial theatres, and actors and actresses being then placed before the eyes of the public and of managers, and their talent and popularity matters of notoriety, no such mistakes could be made. 4193. Do you suppose if there were these nurseries for actors, and the large houses possessed the greatest capital, they would naturally attract the greatest actors ? — Certainly ; I think the theatres would always grade, and consequently attract and possess talent, in proportion to the wealth and spirit of the manager, or the local wealth and intelligence of the public. 4194. Then you think no good actors would be allowed to remain at the minor theatres ? — I mean to say, when a vacancy occurred at the great houses the manager would have an opportunity of seeing and judging whether that vacancy could not be eligibly filled up from the minor theatres. 4195. You mean the vacancy would be filled up from the minor theatres, and therefore the minor theatres would have a bad company? — No, unless there were vacancies for actors, managers would not engage them ; and as vacancies occurred at the minors, they again would be filled up from the provinces. 419C. Do you mean there would be greater talent at the minor theatres, and there would be a greater opportunity for the large theatres to select from that talent when they had a vacancy ? — That is my opinion. 4197. Then the great theatres would take the lead in that respect? — Yes. G G 2 [ ^36 ] LIST OF APPENDIX. No. 1.— Copy of Davenant's Patent - - -- - - . - - -p. 237 2. — Copy of Killegrew's Patent -.--......p. 23^ 3. — Copy of the Entry in the Books of the Lord Chamberlain's Office of the Patent for the Drury Lane Theatre -...-. .....p. 240 4. — Outline for a general Opera Arrangement, proposed by Messrs. Sheridan, Holloway and William Sheldon, with the approbation of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, his Grace the Duke of Bedford, and the Marquis of Salisbury - - - - - p. 241 5. — Copy of the Annual Licence for the Little Theatre in the Haymarket - - - p. 243 6 — Copy of the Entry in the Books of the Lord Chamberlain's Office of the Patent for the Liverpool Theatre ...........p. 244 7. — A Return, specifying the Number and Name of each Theatre, and the Terms upon which each Theatre has been Licensed annually by the Lord Chamberlain, from the Year 1820 -----.---.---p. 245 8. — The King's Reply and Command, granting Mr. Arnold an Extension of his Licence for the Lyceum Theatre ------■.-----p. 247 g. — Copy of the original Appointment of the present Examiner of Plays - - . p. 247 10. — Copy of the Oath taken by the present Examiner of Plays upon his original Appointment ----.---....p, 248 11. — Particulars of the Deductions from the Salary of the Examiner of all Theatrical Entertainments --.--.-.-.--p. 248 1 2. — Comparative Dimensions of various Theatres ...----p. 249 13. — Receipts of Covent Garden Theatre in each Season, from 1809-10 to 1831-32 - p. 249 14. — Statement of Plays and Aflerpieces produced at Covent Gardent Theatre, within the last Ten Years ............p. 249 15.— Letter from Mr. Harris, one of the Proprietors of Covent Garden Theatre, to the Chairman; dated Wierre au Bois, July 18, 183a - p. 250 [ 237 ] APPENDIX. Appendix, No. 1. " COPY of Davenant's Patent. CHARLES the Second, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c., To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting ; Whereas Our Royal Father, of glorious memory, by his letters patent, under his Great Seal of England, bearing date at Westminster the 26th day of March, in the 14th year of his reign. Did give and grant unto Sir William Davenant, by the name of William Davenant, gentlemen, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, full power, licence and authority, that he, they and every of them, by him and themselves, and by all and every such person and persons as he or they should depute or appoint, and his and their laborers, servants and workmen, should and might lawfully, quietly and peaceably, frame, erect, new build, and set up upon a parcel of ground lying near unto or behind the Three Kings' Ordinary, in Fleet-street, in the parishes of Saint Dunstan in the West, London, or in Saint Brides', London, or in either of them, or in any other ground in or about that place, or in the whole street aforesaid, then allotted to him for that use, or in any other that was or then after should be assigned or allotted out to the said Sir William Davenant by Thomas Earl of Arundel and Surrey, then Earl Marshall of England, or any others. Com- missioners for building for the time being in that behalf, a theatre or playhouse, with necessary tiring and retiring rooms, and other places convenient, containing in the whole 40 yards square at the most, wherein plays, musical entertainments, scenes, or other the like presentments might be presented : And Our said Royal Father did grant unto the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, that it should and might be lawful to and for him the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs, executors, ad- ministrators and assigns, from time to time to gather together, entertain, govern, privilege and and keep such and so many players and persons to exercise actions, musical presentments, scenes, dancings and the like, as he the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs, exors, admors or assigns, shall think fitting, and from time to time to act plays in such houses so to be by him or them erected, and exercise musick, musical presentments, scenes, dancing or other the like, at the same or others, houses or times, or after plays are ended, peaceably and quietly, without the impeachment or impediment of any person or persons whatsoever, for the honest recreation of such as shall desire to see the same : And that it should and might be lawful to and for the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs, exors, admors and assigns, to take and re- ceive of snch as should resort to see and hear any such plays, scenes and entertainments whatsoever, such sum or sums of money as was or thereafter from time to time should be accustomed to be given or taken in other playhouses and places for the like, plays, scenes, presentments and entertainments, as in and by the said letters patent, relation being there- unto had, more at large may appear : And Whereas We did by Our letters patent, under Our Great Seal of England, bearing date the 16th day of May, in the 13th year of Our reign, exemplify the said letters patent granted by Our Royal Father, as in and by the same, relation being thereunto had, at large may appear : And whereas the said Sir William Davenant hath surrendered Our said letters patent of exemplification, and also the said recited letters patent granted by Our Royal Father into Our Court of Chancery to be can- celled, wch surrender We have accepted, and do accept by these presents ; Know ye that We, of Our especial grace, certain knowledge and meer motion, and upon the humble petition of the said Sir William Davenant, and in conson of the good and faithful ser- vice which he the said Sir William Davenant hath done unto us, and doth intend to do for the future, and in consideration of the said surrender, have given and granted, atid by these presents for Us, Our heirs and successors, do give and grant unto the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs, exors, admors and assigns, full power, licence and authority, that he, they and every of them, by him and themselves, and by all and every person and persons as he or they shall depute or appoint, and his and their laborers, servants and workmen, shall and may lawfully, peaceably and quietly frame, erect, new build and set up in any place within Our cities of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, where he or they shall find best accommodation for that purpose, to be assigned and allotted out by the surveyor of Our works, one theatre or playhouse, with tiring and retiring rooms, and other places convenient, of such extent and dimensions aa the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs or assigns, shall think fitting, wherein tragedies, comedies, plays, operas, musick, scenes and all other entertainments of the stage whatso- 679. G G 3 *''"> Appendix, No. 1. Davenant's Patent, 1663. 238 APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE Appendix, No. i. ever, may be shown and presented : And We do hereby for Us, Our heirs and successors, . grant unto the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs and assigns, full power, license and Davenant's Patent authority from time to time to gather together, entertain, govern, privilege and keep such 1662. ^^^ ^'^ many players and persons to exercise and act tragedies, comedies, plays, operas and other performances of the stage, within the house to be built as aforesaid, or within the house in Lincoln's-inn-Fields, wherein the said Sir William Davenant doth now exercise the premises, or within any other house where he or they can best be fitted for that purpose within Our cities of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, which company shall be the servants of Our dearly beloved Brother James, Duke of York, and shall consist of such number as the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs or assigns, shall from time to time think meet ; and such persons to permit and continue at and during the pleasure of him the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs or assigns, from time to time to act plays and entertainments of the stage of all sorts, peaceably and quietly, without the impeachment or impediment of any person or persons whatsoever, for the honest recreation of such as shall desire to see the same; and that it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs and assigns, to take and receive of such Our subjects as shall resort to see or hear any such plays, scenes and entertainments whatsoever, such sum or sums of money as either have accustomably been given and taken in the like kind, or as shall be thought reasonable by him or them, in reward of the great expence of scenes, musick, and such new decorations as have not been formerly used : And further, for Us, Our heirs and successors. We do hereby give and grant to said Sir William Davenant, his heirs and assigns, full power to make such allowances out of that which he shall so receive by the acting of plays and entertainments of the stage as aforesaid to the actors and other persons employed in acting, representing, or in any quality whatsoever about the said theatre, as he or they shall think fit ; and that the said company shall be under the sole government and authority of the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs and assigns, and all scandalous and mutinous persons shall from time to time by him and them be ejected, and disabled from playing in ihe said theatre : And for that We are informed that divers companies of players have taken upon them to act plays publicly in Our said cities of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, without any authority for that purpose. We do hereby declare Our dislike of the same, and will and grant that only the said company erected and set up, or to be erected and set up, by the said Sir William Davenant, his heirs and assigns, by virtue' of these presents, and other company erected and set up, or to be erected and set up, by Thomas Killigrew, esquire, his heirs and assigns, and none other, shall from henceforth act or represent comedies, trajedies, plays or entertainments of the stage within our said cities of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, which said company to be erected by the said Thomas Killigrew, his heirs and assigns, shall be subject to his and their govern- ment and authority, and shall be styled the company of Us, and of Our Royal Consort; and the better to preserve amity and correspondence betwixt the said companies, and that the one may not encroach upon the other by any indirect means. We will and ordain that no actor or other person employed about either of the said theatres ejected by the said Sir William Davenant and Thomas Killigrew, or either of them, deserting his company, shall be received by the governor or any of the said other company, or any other person or persons to be employed in acting, or in any matter relating to the stage, without the consent and approbation of the governor of the company whereof the said person so ejected or deserted was a member, signified under his hand and seal. And We do by these presents declare all other company and companies, saving the two companies before mentioned, to be silenced and suppressed : And forasmuch as many plaj's formerly acted do contain several pro- fane, obscene and scurrilous passages, and the women's parts have been acted by men in the habits of women, at which some have taken offence, for the preventing of these abuses for the future. We do hereby strictly command and enjoyn that from henceforth no new play shall be acted by either of the said companies containing any passages otl'ensive to piety and good manners, nor any old or received play containing any such offensive passage as aforesaid, until the same shall be corrected and purged by the said masters or governors of the said respective companies from all such offensive and scandalous passage as afore- said : And We do likewise permit and give leave that all the women's parts to be acted in either of the said two companies for the time to come may be performed by women, so long as these recreations (which by reason of the abuses albresaid were scandalous and offensive) may by such reformation be esteemed, not only harmless delight, but useful and- instructive representations of human life, to such of Our good subjects as shall resort to the same; and these Our letters patent, or tlie inrollment thereof, shall be in all things good and effectual in the law, according to the true intent and meaning of the same, any thing in these presents contained, or any law, statute, act, ordinance, proclamation, pro- vision or restriction, or any other matter, cause or thing whatsoever to the contrary in any- wise notwithstanding, although express mention of the true yearly value or certainty of the premises, or of any of them, or of any other gifts or grants by Us or any of Our proge- nitors or predecessors heretofore made to the said Sir William Davenant in these presents is not made, or any other act, statute, ordinance, provision, proclamation or restriction, heretofore had, made, enacted, ordained or provided, or any other matter, cause or thing whatsoever to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding. In witness whereof We have caused these Our letters to be made patent. Witness Ourself at Westminster this 15th day of January, in the 14th year of Our reign. Howards By the King. ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. a^ Appendix, No. 2. 19 COPY of KiLLioREw's Patent. Charlks the Second, by the Grace of God, King of Enp;Iand, Scotland, Fiance and Appendix, No. s. Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c., To all to whom theis present shall come, greetinge ; . Knowe ye that Wee of Our especial grace, certain knowledge, and mere mocon, and upon Killigrew's Patent the humble peticon of Our trustie and welbeloved Thomas Killigrew, Esquire, one of the 1662. groomes of Our bedchamber, have given and granted, and by theis present, for Us, Our heires and successors, doe give and grante unto the s'l Thomas Killigrew, his heires and assignes, full power, licence and authoritie, that he, they and every of them, by him and themselves, and by all and every such person and persons as he or they shall depute or appointe, and his and their labourers, servant and workmen, shall and male lawfullie, quietly and peaceably frame, erect, new build and sett up in any place within Our citties of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, where he or they shall finde best accom-: modacon for that purpose, to be assigned and allotted out by the surveyor of our workes, one theatre or playhouse, with necessarie tyreing and retyreing rooms, and other places convenient, of such extent and dimension as the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires or assignes shall think fittinge, wherein tragedies, comedies, plays, operas, musick, scenes, and all other entertainment of the stage whatsoever, may be shewen and presented : And Wee doe hereby for Us, Our heires and successors, graunt unto the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires and assignes, full power, licence, and authoritie, from time to time, to gather together, entertaine, governe, priviledge, and keepe such and soe manie players and per- sons to exercise and act tragedies, comedies, playes, operas and other performacons of the, stage within the house to be built as aforesaid, or within any other house where he or they cann be best fitted for that purpose, within Our cities of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, which said company shall be the servant of Us and Our deare Consort, and shall consist of such number as the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires or assignes, shall from time to time thinke meete ; and such persons to permitt and continue att and dureigne the pleasure of the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires or assignes, from time to time to act playes and enterteynraent of the stage of all sort peaceably and quietly, without the im- peachment or impediment of any person or persons whats"', for the honest recreacon of such as shall desire to see the same : And that it shall and male be lawful to and for the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires and assignes, to take and receive of such Our subject as shall resort to see or heare anie such playes, scenes and entertainment vvhatso'', such some or somes of money as either have accustomablie bin given or taken in the like kinde, or as shall be thought reasonable by him or them in regard of the greate expences of scenes, musick and such new decarons as have not been formerlly used ; and further, for Us, Our heires and successors. Wee do hereby give and grant unto the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires and assignes, full power to make such allowances out of that which he shall soe receive by tlie acting of playes and entertainment of the stage as afsd to the actors and other persons imployed in actinge, representinge, or in any qualitie whatso'' about the said theatre, as he or they shall thinke fitt ; and that the s"! companie shall be under the sole . government and authoritie of the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires and assignes ; and all scandalous and mutinous persons from time to time by him and them to be elected and disabled from playeing in the said theatre : And for that Wee are informed that divers companies of players have taken upon them to act playes publiquely in Our said citties of London and Westminster, or the suburbs thereof, without any authoritie tor that pur- pose, Wee doe hereby declare our dislike of the same, and will and graunt that onely the said companie to be erected and settupp by the said Thomas Killigrew, his heires and assignes, by virtue of theis present, and one other companie to be erected and sett up by Sir William Davenant, knight, his heires or assignes, and none other, shall from henceforth act or represent comedies, tragedies, plaies or entertainment of the stage within our s^l citties of London and Westminster, and the suburbs thereof, which said companie to be erected by the said Sir William Davenant, his heires or assignes, shall be subject to his or their government and authoritie, and shall be styled the Duke of York's Companie; and the better to preserve amitye and correspondence betwixt the said companies, and that the one male not encroach uppon the other by any indirect meanes, Wee will and ordaine that noe actor or other person imployed about either the said theatres eisted by the said Thomas Killigrew and Sir William Davenant, or either of them, or deserting his companie, shall be received by the governour of the said other companie to be employed in acting, or in anie matter relateing to the stage, without the consent and approbation of the governor of the companie whereof the s'' person so eiected or deserting was a member, signified under his hand and seale ; and Wee doe by theis present declare all other companie and companies before mentioned to be silencid and suppressed : And forasmuch as manie playes formerly acted doe conteine severll prophane, obscene and scurrulous passages, and the women's part therein have byn acted by men in the habit of woemen, at which some have taken offence, for the preventing of these abuses for the future, Wee doe hereby strictly comand and enioyne, that from henceforth noe new ))lay shall bee acted by either of the said comp^ conteyninge anie passages offensive to pietie and good manners, nor any old or revived play contpyninge any such offensive passages as aforesaid, uutill the same 679. G G 4 shall 240 Appendix, No. 2. Killigrew's Patent, 1662. APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE shall be corrected and purged by the said masters or governours of the said respective com- panies from all such offensive and scandalous passages as afsd ; and Wee doe likewise permit and give leave, that all the woemen's part to be acted in either of the said two companies for the time to come may be performed by woemen, soe long as their re- creacons, vi^hich, by reason of the abuses afsd, were scandalous and offensive, may by suche reformation be esteemed, not onely harmless delight, but usefull and instructive representtions of humane life, to such of our good subiect as shall resort to the same ; and theis our letters patent, or the inrollment thereof, shall be in all things firme, good, effectuail in the lawe, according to the true intent and meaning of the same, anything in theis present contained, or any law, statute, act, ordinance, proclamacon, provision, or re- stricon, or any other matter, cause or thing whatsoever to the contrary in anywise not- withstanding, although express mencbn of the true yearely value or certenity of the premises, or of any of them, or of any other guift or grant by Us or by any of Our pro- genitors or predecessors heretofore made to the said Thomas Killigrew, and the said Sir William Davenant, in theis present is not made, or any statute, ordinance, provision, proclamacon or restricbn heretofore had, made, enacted, ordeyned or provided, or any other matter, cause or thing whatsoever to the contrary thereof, in anywise notwithstand- ing. In witness whereof. Wee have caused theis Our letters to be made patent. Witness Ourselfe at Westminster the 25th day of April, in the 14th yeare of ourreigne. By the King, (seal) Howard. Appendix, No. 3. COPY of the Entry in the Books of the Lord Chamberlain's Office of the Patent for the Dkury Lane Theatre. Appendix, No. 3. Entry of Patent for the Drury Lane Theatre. George the Third, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting ; Whereas by an Act which passed in Parliament in the fiftieth year of our reign, mtituled, *•' An Act for rebuilding the late Theatre Royal Drury Lane," upon the conditions and imder the regulations therein mentioned, our trusty and well-beloved Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore, and Harvey Christian Combe, esquires, are appointed trustees for the pur- poses therein mentioned : And whereas by another Act which passed in Parliament in the fifty-second year of our reign, intituled, "An Act for altering and enlarging the powers of an Act of His present Majesty for rebuilding the late Theatre Royal Drury Lane," pro- vision is made for the appointment of successors to the said Trustees respectively ; Now know ye, that We for divers good causes and considerations Us hereunto moving, of Our especial grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, have given and granted, and by these presents for Us, Our heirs and successors, do give and grant unto the said Samuel Whit- oread, Peter Moore, and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, in trust for the Theatre Royal Drury Lane Company of Proprietors, for and during the full end and term of twenty-one years, to commence from the ad day of September in the year of our Lord Christ i8i6, full power, licence and authority to gather together, form, entertain, govern, privilege and keep a company of comedians for Our service, to exercise and act tragedies, plays, operas and other performances on the stage, within a house to be built in Drury Lane, or within any other house built or to be built, where they can best be fitted for that purpose, within the city of Westminster, and within the limits thereof, and within such places where We, Our heirs and successors, shall reside, and during such residence only ; such house or houses so to be built (if occasion shall require) to be assigned and allotted out by the chief officer of our works for a theatre or playhouse, with necessary attiring and retiring rooms, and other places convenient, of such extent and dimensions as the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore, and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, shall think fitting, wherein tragedies, comedies, plays, operas, music, scenes,, and all other entertainments of the stage whatsoever may be showed and presented, which said company shall be Our servants, and be styled Our Royal Company of Comedians, and shall consist of such numbers as the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore, and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, shall from time to time think meet : And We do hereby, for Us, Our heirs and successors, grant unto the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore, and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, full power licence and authority to permit such persons at and during the pleasure of the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors or assigns, from time to time to act plays and entertainments of the stage of all sorts, peaceably and quietly, without the impeachment or impediment of ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 241 of any person or persons whatsoever, for the honest recreation of such as shall desire Appendix, No. 3. to see the same, nevertheless under the regulations hereinafter mentioned, and such , others as the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore and Harvey Christian Combe, their Entry of Patent for successors or assigns, from time to time, in their discretion, shall find reasonable and the Drury Lane necessary for Our service : And We do hereby for Us, Our heirs and successors, further Theatre, grant to them the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns as aforesaid, that it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore and Harvey Christian Combe, thtir successors and assigns, to take and receive of such of Our subjects as shall resort to see or hear any such tragedies, plays, operas or other entertainments whatsoever, such sum or sums of money as either have accustomably been given and taken in the like kind, or as shall be thought reasonable by them in regard of the great expense of building, hiring and fitting up the said theatre: And further, for Us, Our heirs and successors. We do hereby give and grant unto the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, full power to make such allowances out of that which they shall so receive by the acting of tragedies, plays, operas or other entertainments of the stage as aforesaid, to the actors and other persons employed in acting, representing, or in any quality whatsoever in and about the said theatre, as the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Meore and Harvey Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, shall think fit ; and that the said Company shall be under the sole government and authority of the said Samuel Whitbread, Peter Moore and Harvev Christian Combe, their successors and assigns, and all scandalous and mutinous persons shall from time to time by them be ejected and disabled from playing in the said theatre : And for the better attaining Our Royal purposes in this behalf. We have thought fit hereby to declare that henceforth no representations be admitted on the stage by virtue or under colour of these Our letters patent, whereby the Christian religion in general, or the Church of England, may in any manner suffer reproach, strictly inhibiting every degree of abuse or misrepresentation of sacred characters, tending to expose religion itself, and to bring it into contempt, and that no such character be otherwise introduced or placed in any other light than such as may enhance the just esteem of those who truly answer the end of their sacred function : We further enjoin the strictest regard to such representations as any way concern civil policy or the constitution of Our Government, that these may contribute to the support of Our sacred authority, and the preservation of order and good government: And it being Our Royal will and pleasure that for the future Our theatre may be instrumental to the promotion of virtue and instructive to human life, We do hereby command and enjoin that no new play, or any old or revived play, be acted under the authority hereby granted, containing any passages or expressions offensive to piety and good manners, until the same be corrected and purged by the said governors from all such offensive and scandalous passages and expressions ; and these Our letters patent, or the inrolment or exemplification thereof, shall be in and by all things good, firm, valid, sufficient and effectual in the law, according to the true intent and meaning thereof, anything in these presents contained to the contrary thereof in anywise notwith- standing, or any other omission, imperfection, defect, matter, cause or thing whatsoever to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding. In witness whereof We have caused these Our letters to be made patent. Witness Ourself at Our palace at Westminster this 19th day of June, in the 52d year of Our Reign. By Writ of Privy Seal. fVilmot. Appendix, No. 4. 1791. — OUTLINE for a general Opera Arrangement, proposed by Messrs. Sheridan, HoUoway and William Sheldon, with the approbation of His Royal High- ness the Prince of Wales, His Grace the Duke of Bedford, and the Marquis of Salisbury. 1st. Mk. Vanbuegh's interest in the Haymarket Theatre and property to be purchased Appendix, No. 4. of him, and to be vested in trustees, upon the trusts hereinafter mentioned, and subject thereto, in trust for those friends of Mr. Taylor who purchased Mr. Vanburgh's interest. Outline for who may at the same moment agree with Mr. Taylor for the granting him a new lease at the a general Opera expiration of the present one, either for the same rent as is now paid, or for any other rent Arrangement, as shall be agreed upon between them, for the whole of Mr. Vanburgh's present term under the Crown, as also for any new term that he may obtain. 2d. Mr. Vanburgh to use and exert his utmost interest with the Crown for the obtaining such an addition to the subsisting lease as will make up 50 years. 3d. The consideration to Mr. Vanburgh to be i2,ooo/., to be paid down, and an annuity of 400 /. to be reserved to Mr. Vanburgh during his life, and also to Mrs. Vanburgh during her life, if she survive him, and (except the Crown rent) to be the first charge upon the property, unless otherways to his satisfaction provided for; and the 3,500/. insurance money to be released to him, Mr. Vanburgh remitting to Mr. Taylor all arrears of rent now due to 679. H u him, 242 APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE Outline for a general Opera Arrangement. Appendix, No. 4. h'm, with a reservation of all such rights of admission and of silver tickets during this pre- sent term under the Crown as he at present is entitled to, as also to Mr. De Burgh of his silver ticket ; and if a future term is obtained by Mr. Vanburgh's interest, the same privilege to be continued. 4th. All parties to unite in an application to the Crown for a patent for operas only» under the control of the Lord Chamberlain, for the term of 21 years, to be obtained in such name as shall most facilitate the obtaining the same, and bv the patentee to be assigned to the trustees of the whole property, upon the trusts hereinafter mentioned ; and the patent, subject thereto, to be the property of Mr, Taylor. 5th. Any expense attending the obtaining of a patent from the Crown to be borne by the Haymarket Theatre. 6th. It having been agreed on all sides that Mr. Harris should derive a just compensation in respect to his dormant patent from the Haymarket property, at the same time the various and necessary charges laid on this theatre rendering it very desirable that the arbitrator should add as little as possible to those expenses, it is agreed that the Haymarket Theatre shall be charged only with an annuity of 250/., redeemable for 5,000/., towards that com- pensation ; and that all further expenses attending the settlement with Mr. Harris shall be borne by the proprietors of Drury Lane Theatre, upon the said dormant patent being an- nexed inseparably to that theatre with the consent of the Duke of Bedford. 7th. In this case it is to be understood, as a part of the settlement bona fide between the three theatres, that the patents of Drury Lane and Covent Garden shall never be exercised for the performances of Italian operas ; and that the Haymarket Theatre and patent shall be for Italian operas only, with such occasional aid as has been usual from balls and mas- querades. 8th. The management to be given up to the direction of five noblemen, to be named by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Bedford and the Marquis of Salisbury, with no other restriction than that the expense shall not exceed the sum of 21,000/. annually, including rent and taxes. 9th. The subscription to be raised to 25 guineas for 50 operas only. The performances to commence so as to have 60 performances in the season, unless prevented by extraordinary circumstances. lOth. The appropriation of the 41 boxes to remain as settled in the deed with Gallini, but the consideration given for those boxes to be proved to the trustees ; and if an adequate consideration has not been given, the deficiency to be made good, or the box to be given up to the trustees, on the repayment of the consideration given ; and all other demands upon either property to be submitted to investigation and proof before they can be admitted as charges upon the trust. 11th. The proprietors of these 41 boxes to be treated with for the purchase of a further term in them, so as to raise a sum of 16,000/. or 20,00c/., one moiety of which to be applied in payment of the Pantheon creditors, and the other to those of the Haymarket. 12th. The annual surplus above the sum allowed for the expenditure of the establish- ment to be disposed of in the following manner: 13th. 1,500/. per annum to be applied to pay off Gallini the sum of 8,500/., secured to him by the deed above mentioned : 14th. i,ooo/. per annum to finish the building according to the plan begun by Mr. Taylor, but with the approbation of the five directing noblemen. 15th. Any sum not exceeding 4,000/. yearly to be divided between the Pantheon and Haymarket creditors. 16th. An annuity of 200/. to be given during life to such persons lately interested in the Pantheon Theatre as the Duke of Bedford and Marquis of Salisbury shall approve of. 17th. A proper trust to be created, and three trustees to be named for these purposes; and all receipts and profits of the theatre and property in the Haymarket to be paid to the account of the trustees, and at the bankers approved of, and subject to the purposes of the trust. 18th. Mr. Taylor to have the free use of the house for three nights in the course of the season, not interfering with the opera nights. 19th. Mr. Taylor to recommend a banker and receivers, subject to the approbation of the five directing noblemen, who must have the power of removing them at their discre- tion, and of taking such security as they judge proper. 20th. Mr. Taylor to be at liberty to insure the theatre and property from fire to the full value of the same, provided that the policies be lodged with the banker to the fund in the name of the trustees ; and that within 30 days previous to the expiration of any policy he do produce and lodge with the banker of the fund the new policies in the names of the trustees, in failure of which, the trustees are immediately to insure. The expense in either case to come out of the general fund, into which all money recovered on any policies is to be paid. 2 1 St. Any surplus beyond the several yearly sums and expenses above provided for to be paid to Mr. Taylor. a2d. The ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 243 22d. The Pantheon opera debts are estimated by Mr. William Sheldon at 40,000^., but supposed to be reduceable to 30,000 /. : let them be taken on the Haymarket property at 30,000/., without interest or further detail. If they do not exceed that sum, then any profits which may arise this season from the Pantheon to go in reduction of it ; but if they do exceed 30,000 I., then the profits to be applied in addition to that sum. 23d. Twenty-four boxes to be allotted in the first, second and third tiers in the Hay- market Theatre for the disposition of the Duke of Bedford and the Marquis of Salisbury, and for the accommodation of their friends, subscribers to the Pantheon, who now have no boxes in the Haymarket Theatre. 24 th. The Pantheon to be dismantled and restored, as soon as the Haymarket Theatre is fit. 25th. The Theatre Royal in Drury Lane to be rebuilt with all possible expedition ; but if not completed so as to admit the re-establishment of the opera at the Haymarket Theatre at the beginning of the next season, then the profits of the Pantheon to be continued to be applied in discharge of the Pantheon debts ; and the rent of the Haymarket paid by the proprietors of Drury Lane Theatre to be applied in reducing those of the Haymarket Theatre. 26th. The three trustees to be named, one by Messrs. Sheridan and Holloway, on the part of the Haymarket ; one by Mr. Sheldon, on the part of the Pantheon ; and one by the five directing noblemen. 27th. To be referred to John Maddocks, Esq. and Arthur Piggott, Esq., to prepare a proper deed for the carrying the above outline into execution ; and in which deed are to be inserted all such clauses, provisions and declarations as in their opinion shall be proper or necessary for effecting the trusts proposed, and securing the rights and interests of the several parties, according to the true spirit and meaning of this outline and of the arbitrators. 28th, Messrs. Maddocks and Piggott, with such assistance as they shall appoint, to receive and investigate the proofs of the titles to the boxes and the claims on the trust. 29th. The whole property, after all the objects of the trust are satisfied, to be Mr. Taylor's. 30th. The trust to be for 10 years ; but if the objects of the trust should not be satisfied in that term, then to be renewed. 31st. Every part of this arrangement to be subject to His Majesty's approbation. We recommend this outline as a just and honourable settlement for all parties. Appendbc, No. 4, (signed by) We approve of the same. (signed by) R. B. Sheridan, Tho^ Holloway, W"^ Sheldon. George, P., Bedford, Salisbury. Outline for a general Opera Arrangement. Appendix, No.5, COPY of the Annual Licence for the Little Theatre in the Haymarket, I DO hereby give leave and licence unto David Edward Morris and James Winston, esqra. Appendix, No. 5. to have performed at the Little Theatre in the Haymarket, in the parish of St. Martin-in- the-Fields, within the liberties of Westminster, from the 15th day of June next, to the Annual Licence for 15th day of October following, and no longer, any such theatrical performances as have the Little Theatre heretofore been, or that shall hereafter be permitted and allowed to be acted, represented in the Haymarket. and performed on the stage, and from that period to the 15th day of June the said theatre shall not be opened for any species of entertainment whatever, without application being first made 10 the Lord Chamberlain's oflSce, specifying the nature of such entertain- ment, and a licence being granted for the same. Given under my hand and seal this day of Majesty's reign. in the year of His (signed by The Lord Chamberlain.) 679- 1 1 jS^ APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE Appendix, No, 6. COPY of the Entry in the Books of the Lord Chamberlain's Office of the Patent for the Liverpool Theatre. Appendix, No. 6. George the Fourth, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, To all whom these presents shall come, greeting ; Entry of Patent for Whereas by an Act which passed in Parliament in the eleventh year of his late Majesty King George the Third of blessed memory, intituled, " An Act to enable His Majesty to license a playhouse in the town of Liverpool, in the county palatine of Lancaster," so much of an Act which passed in Parliament in the tenth year of the reign of King George the Second, intituled, " An Act to explain and amend so much of an Act made in the twelfth year of the reign of Queen Anne, intituled, ' An Act for reducing the laws relating to rogues, vagabonds, sturdy beggars and vagrants into an Act of Parliament, and for the more effectual punishing such rogues, vagabonds, sturdy beggars and vagrants, and sending them whither they ought to be sent, as relates to common players of inter- ludes,' " whereby all persons are discharged to represent any entertainment of the stage whatever, in virtue of letters patent from Us, or by license from the Chamberlain of Our Household for the time being, except within the liberties of Westminster, or where We are residing for the time being, is repealed with respect to the said town of Liverpool ; and it is thereby enacted, that it shall and may be lawful for Us, Our Heirs and Successors, to grant letters patent for establishing a theatre oj playhouse within the said town of Liver- pool, which shall be entitled to all the privileges, and subjected to all the regulations to which any theatre or playhouse in Great Britain is entitled and subjected : Know ye therefore, that We, for divers good causes and considerations Us thereunto movina-, of Our especial grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, have given and granted, and by these presents, for Us, Our Heirs and Successors, Do give and grant, unto our trusty and well- beloved George Case, of the town of Liverpool, in the county palatine of Lnncaster, esq. his executors, administrators and assigns, for and during the full end and term of twenty- one years, to commence from the 24th day of June m the year of Our Lord 1828, full power, licence and authority to establish a theatre or playhouse in the said town of Liverpool, in Our said county palatine of Lancaster, and to gather together, form, entertain, govern, privilege and keep a company of comedians for Our service, to exercise and to act such tragedies, plays, operas and other entertainments of the stage only as have already been or shall hereafter be licensed by the Chamberlain of Our Household, within the said theatre or playhouse to be established in Our said town of Liverpool, where the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, can best be fitted for that purpose, during the said term of twenty-one years (except at such time or times as the Chamberlain of Our Household shall judge it expedient, either on account of mournings or otherwise, to stop entertainments of the stage), which said company of comedians shall consist of such numbers as tlie said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns shall from time to- time think meet. And we do hereby for Us, Our Heirs and Successors, grant unto the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, full power, licence and authority to permit such persons at and during the pleasure of the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, from time to time to act plays and entertainments of the stage of all sorts peaceably and quietly, without the impeachment or impediment of any person or persons whatsoever, for the honest recreation of such as shall desire to see the same, nevertheless, under the regulations hereinafter mentioned, and such others as the said Georsje Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, from time to time in his or their direction shall find reasonable and necessary for Our service. And We do hereby for Us, Our Heirs and Successors, further grant to him the said George Case, his exe- cutors, administrators and assigns as aforesaid, that it shall and may be lawful to and for the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, to take and receive, for the benefit of himself and all the other proprietors of the said theatre, of such Our sub- jects as shall resort to the said theatre to see or hear such tragedies, plays, operas, and other entertainments of the stage whatsoever, such sum or sums of money as either have been accustomably given and taken in the like kind, or as shall be thought reasonable by the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, in regard of the great expense of building, hiring and fitting up of the said theatre, and of scenes, music and such other decorations as are usual and necessary ; and further, for Us, Our heirs and successors. We do hereby give and grant imto the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, full power to make such allowances out of the money which shall be received by the acting such tragedies, plays, operas or other entertainments of the stage as aforesaid, to the actors and other persons employed in acting, representing, or in any other quality whatsoever, in and about the said theatre or playhouse, as the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, shall think fit ; and that the said company shall be under the sole government and authority of the said George Case, his executors, administrators and assigns, all scandalous or mutinous persons shall from time to time by him or them be ejected or disabled from playing in the said theatre. And for the better attaining Our royal purposes in this behalf. We have thought fit hereby to declare that henceforth no representations be admitted on the stage by virtue or under colour of these ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 245 these Our letters patent, whereby the Christian religion in general, or the Church of Appendix, No. 6. England, may in any manner suffer reproach, strictly inhibiting every degree of abuse or misrepresentation of sacred characters tending to expose religion itself and to brino- it Entry of Paient for into contempt. And that no such character be otherwise introduced or placed in any the Liverpool other light than such as may enhance the just esteem of those who truly answer the end Theatre, of their sacred function, We further enjoin the strictest regard to such representation as any way concerns civil policy or the constitution of Our Government ; that these may con- tribute to the support of Our sacred authority, and the preservation of order and good government. And it being Our Royal will and pleasure that for the future Our theatre may be instrumental to the promotion of virtue and instructive to human life^ We do hereby command and enjoin that no new play, or any old or revived play be acted under the authority hereby granted, containing any passages or expressions offensive to piety and good manners, until the same be corrected and purged by the said governor from all such offen- sive and scadalous passages and expressions. And these our letters patent, or the inrol- ment or exemplification thereof, shall be in and by all thin<);s good, firm, valid, sufficient and effectual in the law, according to the true intent and meaning thereof, any omission, imperfection, defect, matter, cause or thing whatsoever to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding. In witness whereof we have caused these Our letters to be made patent. Witness Ourself at our palace at Westminster this 21st day of February, in the 7th year of Our Reign. By Writ of Privy Seal. Scott. - Appendix, No. 7. A RETURN, specifying the Number and Name; of each Theatre, and the Terms upon which each Theatre has been Licensed annually by the Lord Chamberlain, from the Year 1820. * The King's Theatre. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Thomas Monck Mason, esquire, to have Italian Appendix, No. 7. operas and ballets of action performed at the King's Theatre in St. James's, Haymarket, within the liberties of Westminster, from January to the 29th day of September Number and Name next ; and do not allow any other species of entertainment whatever to be exhibited there, of each Theatre, without application, specifying the nature of such entertainment, being previously made, and Terms on which and permission obtained from me for that purpose. licensed. Given under my hand and seal, this day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain.) The Little Theatre in the Haymarket. I no hereby give leave and licence unto David Edward Morris and James Winston, esquires, to have performed at the Little Theatre in the Haymarket, in the parish of St. Mar- tin-in-the-Fields, within the liberties of Westminster, from the 15th day of June to the I5ih day of October following, and no longer, any such theatrical performances as have hereto- fore been, or that shall hereafter be permitted and allowed to be acted, represented and per- formed on the stage ; and from that period to the 15th day of June the said Theatre shall not be opened for any species of entertainment whatever, without application being first made to the Lord Chamberlain's Office, specifying the nature of such entertainment, and a licence being granted for the same. Given under my hand and seal, this day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain.) Lyceum Theatre. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Samuel James Arnold, esquire, to have per- formed at the Lyceum Theatre in the Strand, within the liberties of Westminster, English operas, ballets of action and musical entertainments, from the 5th day of June to the 5th day of October following; and from that period to the 5th day of June the said Theatre shall not be opened for any species of entertainment whatever, without application being first nuide to the Lord Chamberlain's Office, specityhng the nature of such entertain- ment, and a licence being granted for the same. Given under my hand and seal, this' day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain.) 679. I I 3 246 APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE Olympic Pavilion. Appendix, No. 7. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Mrs. Eliza Lucy Vestris to have performed for her benefit, at the Olympic and Musical Pavilion, in Newcastle-street in the Strand, Number and Name within the liberties of Westminster, the entertainments of music, dancing, burlettas, spec- of each Theatre, tacle, pantomime and horsemanship, from Michaelmas next to Easter ; and from that and Terms on which period to Michaelmas the said Theatre shall not be opened for any species of enter- licensed, tainment whatever, without application being first made to ihe Lord Chamberlain's Office, specifying the nature of such entertainment, and a licence being granted tor the same. Given under my hand and seal, this day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain.) ^delphi Theatre. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Charles Mathews and Frederick Henry Yates, esquires, to have performed for their benefit burlettas, music and dancing, with spectacle and pantomime, at the Adelphi Theatre, situate between Heatlicock Court and Bull Inn Court in the Strand, within the liberties of Westminster, from Michaelmas next to Easter ; and from that period to Michaelmas the said Theatre shall not be opened for any species of entertainment whatever, without application being first made to the Lord Chamberlain's OflSce, specifying the nature of such entertainment, and a licence being granted for the same. Given under my hand and seal, this day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain.) Brighton Theatre. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Messrs. Frederick Vining and Charles Bew to perform at the Theatre Royal Brighton, in the county of Sussex, all such theatrical performances as have heretofore Jbeen or shall hereafter be allowed to be acted, repre- sented and performed on the stage, from the 6th day of July next to the 28th day of February. Given under ray hand and seal, this day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain.) Richmond Theatre. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Mr. Charles Klanert and Company to per- form at the King's Theatre on Richmond Green, in the county of Surrey, all such theatrical performances as have heretofore been or that shall hereafter be permitted and allowed to be acted, represented and performed on the stage, from June to the 30th day of September following. Given under my hand and seal,, this day of in the year of His Majesty reign. (Signed by the Lord Chamberlain..) Windsor Theatre. I DO hereby give leave and licence unto Mr. Charles Knight, in trust for the benefit of himself and the other shareholders, to have performed at Windsor, in the county of Berk- shire, during the vacations at Eton school, and at such other times as the master of the said school may approve, any such theatrical performances as have heretofore been or shall hereafter be permitted and allowed to be acted, represeiued and performed on the stage, for one year. Given under my hand and seal, this day of in the year of His Majesty's reign. (Signed by the Lord Chaniberlain.) ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 247 Appendix, No. 8. The King's Reply and Command, granting Mr. Arnold an Extension of his License for the Lyceum Theatre. Brighton, February 20th, 1831. Appendix, No. 8, ■ The King will not delay acknowledging the receipt of the Lord Chancellor's letter of yesterday, and assuring him of His sense of the close attention and consideration which Extension of the he has o-iven to the memorials of Mr. Arnold, of the patent theatres, and of Mr. Greville, Licence for the and desiring that His Majesty's acknowledjjements may be conveyed to the Vice Chan- Lyceum Theatre. cellor, the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and Mr. Justice James Parke, whose assistance the Lord Chancellor very properly requested upon this occasion. The question has always appeared to the King one of great importance to the public, as embracing considerations connected with the comfort, entertainment and accommodation of all classes, as well as of great importance to the individuals who have embarked their properties in the undertakings, tending to promote those public objects ; but His Majesty's view of the question has always been a general one, wholly unbiassed by feeling or pre- judice in favour of either or any of the parties interested in the discussion. His Majesty therefore rejoices that after so patient a hearing, and such deliberate con- sideration given to the subject by the Lord Chancellor, and the three judges with whom he has confjerred, have come to an unanimous opinion upon the question submitted to them, and above all, that they are satisfied that the power is vested by law in the King, beyond the reach of doubt or question, to make whatever changes he shall think fit in the rights already granted the patent theatres, or to make these grants, or to grant to other parties rights inconsistent with those granted to those patent theatres in former times. Under this view of the question, resting upon such advice, and in consideration of the \\, further observations made by the Lord Chancellor, the King cannot hesitate to act upon his recommendation, that there shall be granted to Mr. Arnold an extension of his licence, so as to include the whole of the months of May and October, (signed) WILLIAM R. Appendix, No. 9. COPY of the original Appointment of the present Examiner of Plays. Stamp £. 25. Whebeas in consequence of an Act of Parliament made in the tenth year of the reign of his late Majesty King George the Second, for the better regulation of the stage, I am empowered to constitute, nominate and appoint an officer to examine all plays, tragedies, comedies, operas, farces, interludes, or any other entertainment of the stage of what denomination soever. These are therefore to require you to swear and admit George Colman, esquire, into the place and quality of Examiner of all and every the above recited plays, tragedies, comedies, operas, farces, interludes, or other entertainments of the stage of what denomination soever, in the room of John Larpent, esquire, deceased, to have, hold, exercise and enjoy the same, together with all salaries, fees and other emoluments to the said office that may arise, or in anywise legally appertain ; and for so doing this shall be your warrant. Given under my hand and seal this igth day of January 1824, in the fourth year of His Majesty's reign. Appendix, No. 9. Original Appoint- ment of Examiner of Plays. To His Majesty's Gentleman Usher, Daily Waiter in Waiting. (signed) Montrose. ( seal. ) These are to certify that I have sworn and admitted George Colman, esquire, conform- ably with the above warrant. (signed) T. B. Mash, Gent. Usher, Daily Waiter to His Majesty. 679. » '3 248 APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE Appendix, No. 10. Oath taken by Examiner of Plays, COPY of the Oath taken by the present Examiner of Plays upon his original Appointment. Appendix, No. 10. You shall swear by the Holy Evangelists, and the contents of that book, to be a true and faithful servant unto our Sovereign Lord George the Fourth, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King. You shall know nothing that may be in anywise hurtful or prejudicial to His Majesty's Royal Person, State, Crown or Dignity, but you shall hinder it ail in your power, and reveal the same to the Lord Chamberlain or one of His Majesty's most Honourable Privy Council. You shall serve the King truly and faithfully in the place and quality of Examiner of all plays, tragedies, comedies, operas, farces, interludes, or any other entertainment of the stage of what denomination soever. You shall be obedient to the Lord Chamberlain of His Majesty's household. So help you GOD. Appendix, No. 11. Particulars of the Deductions from the Salary of the Examiner of all Theatrical Entertainments. Appendix, No. 11. The Examiner's nominal salary is 400/. per annum, to be paid in quarterly payments of 100/ each, and those payments are often in arrear; but the deductions from this salary Deductions from are 31 /. 85. per cent, as thus : Salary of Examiner of Theatrical Entertainments. Land-tax - - _ - Teller's fee - - - - Shilling duty - - - Sixpenny duty - - - Pells Treasury - - - _ Receiver and stamp Total Quarterly Deduction £. £. 16 5 2 4 1 s. 5 15 10 7 17 13 31 8 - Annual quarterly payment Quarterly deductions - Total Quarterly Receipt £. £. 100 31 8 - 68 12 - The above is copied from a statement of Mr. Vernon, of the Treasury, who, till very lately, acted for me in getting my salary from the Exchequer ; but the salary is now paid at the Lord Chamberlain's office, the deductions remaining the same, excepting that in lieu of the half guinea to Mr. Vernon, 1 only pay is. to some person in the office. In respect to the expenses on receiving my appointment, accounts are now before me proving that I paid for stamps, fees, &c. 38/. l6s. 6d. into the Treasury, and 49/. 5s. 2^. into the Lord Chamberlain's office, making together 88Z. is. 8d. There were, besides, further expenses, of which I have no documents. At the commencement of a reign the appointment must be renewed ; but, by a recent regulation, not at so heavy an expense as in the first instance. I repeat, that without the fees the salary is not equal to the drudgery and the confine- ment to London and its vicinities. I have already stated that the fee of two guineas on each licence has been paid, time out of mind, to the Examiner, according to my best knowledge and belief; in addition to which statement, I can positively assert, that during the whole of ray management of the Haymarket Theatre, from the year 1790 to 1819, a period of 29 years, my immediate predecessor, Mr. Larpent, the then Examiner, was always paid two guineas for a licence at that theatre ; and the treasurer of the theatre, the late Mr. Jewell, has repeatedly mentioned to me, as a matter of course, his paying for such licences, at the same rate, during the previous management there, first ot Foote, and then of my father. -22 June 1832. George Colman. ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. 249 Appendix, No. 12. Comparative Dimensions of various Theatres, furnished by Samuel Beazlej/, Archhect. feet. In. Appendix, No. la. Drury Lane - - - - 1 799 1812 1832 Covent Garden - - - Haymarket ._---- Late English Opera House _ . - Pantheon 1791 Italian Opera ------ Olympic ------- Garrick's Theatre, Goodman's Fields - Dublin ------ 1829 Tottenham-street Theatre - . - - From curtain to front box - - 70 o Across the pit - - - - 56 o From' curtain to front box - - 66 o Across the pit - - - - 56 From curtain to front box - - 61 o Across the pit - - - -. 50 From curtain to boxes. - - 63 o Across the pit - - - - 50 From curtain to boxes - - 47 Across the pit - - - - 35 o From curtain to boxes - - ,52 o Across the pit - - - - 35 O From curtain to front box - - 55 o Across the pit - - - - 60 o From curtain to box - - - 90 o Width of pit - - - - 62 o From curtain to box - - - 34 o Width - - - - - 32 o From curtain to front box - - 25 o Width - - - - - 35 o From curtain to front box - - 52 6 Across the pit - - - - 45 o Curtain to front boxes - - 38 o Across the pit - - - - 22 4 Comparative Di- mensions of various Theatres. Appendix, No. 13. RECEIPTS of CovENT Gahden Theatre, in each Season, from 1809-10 to 1831-32. 1809-10 1810-11 1811-12 1812-13 1813-14 1814-15 1815-16 1816-17 1817-18 1818-19 1819-20 l82(.»-21 £.. s. d. 77>575 6 4 1821- -22 98,110 4 8 1822- -23 88,703 19 4 1823- -24 69.929 7 6 1824- -25 83,765 16 6 1825- -26 89>972 17 6 1826- -27 80,091 14 5 1827- -28 70,529 3 3 1828- -29 72,968 7 1 1829- -30 72.115 12 5 1830- -31 53,591 1 10 1831- -32 68,168 13 4 Theatre Royal Covent Garden, 27 June 1832. £. 58,171 52,318 60,496 72,160 58,017 53,032 55,212 41,029 57,431 42,248 43,318 19 11 s. 17 19 17 5 1 2 16 2 12 14 d. 2 6 5 I 2 8 9 1 10 4 Appendix, No. 13. Receipts of Covent Garden Theatre. Appendix, No. 14. STATEMENT of Plays and Afterpieces produced at Covent Garden Theatre, within the last ten Years. Appendix, No. 14. The Law of Java The Irish Tutor Ali Pacha 'J'he Two Galley \ Slaves - -J Maid Marian - The Duel - Nigel Julian Roses and Thorns 697. - Mr. Colman. Lord Glengall. Mr. Howard Payne. - Ditto. Mr. Planch^. - Mr. Peake. Mr. Horace Twiss. Miss Mitford. Mr. Lunn. Clari Cent per Cent Cortez Procida - The Poachers Native Land Orestes -Mr. Planch^. Lord Glengall. - Mr. Planche. Miss Hemans. Mr. Thomson. - Mr. Dimond. - Mrs. Bayley. Pride shall have a Fall, Rev. Geo. Croly Charles the Second, Mr. Howard Payne. My Own Man - - - Mr. Peake. 1 I 4 (continued) Plays and After- pieces produced at Covent Garden Theatre. 260 SELECT COMMiTTEE ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. Appendix, No. 14. Plays and After- pieces produced at Covent Garden Theatre. Der Freischiitz Ravenna - - Messrs The Widow of Cornhill The Frozen Lake Lofty Projects Mr. Livius. Bowes & Clark. - Mr. Planche. - Mr. Planche. Mr. Lunn. Tlie Ramsbottoms at Rheims, Mr. Peake. The Scape Goat - - Mr. Poole. 'Twas I - - Mr. Howard Payne. The Three Strangers - Miss Lee. Love's Victory - - Mr. Hyde. The French Libertine, Mr. Howard Payne. Oberon - - - - Mr. Planche. Woodstock - - - Mr. Pocock. The Green Room - - Mr. Kenney. The White Maid - Mr. Howard Payne. Returned Killed - - Mr. Planche. Foscari . - - - Miss Mitford. A School forGrown Children, Mr. Morton. The£. 100. Note - liOve and Reason Alfred the Great The Seraglio - The Serf The Somnambulist - The Invincibles Tuckitomba Little Offsprings Carron Side Woman's Love Sublime and Beautiful Home, Sweet Home - Mr. Peake. Mr. Lacy. - Mr. Pocock. - Mr. Dimond. - Mr. Talbot. Mr. Moncrieff. - Mr. Morton. - Mr. Pocock. Mr.tPeake. - Mr. Planche. Mr. Wade. - Mr. Morton. - Mr. Pocock. Theatre Royal Covent Garden, ■27th June 183-2. The Maid of Judah - - Mr. Lacy The Battle of Pultawa - Mr. Raymond. The Devil's Elixir - - Mr. Ball. Shakspeare's Early Days, Mr. Somerset, Robber's Wife - - - Mr. Pocock, Hide and Seek - Mr. Westmacott, jun. The Jew of Arragon - Phrenologist Ninetta - - - Romance of a Day - Teddy the Tiler Cinderella The Wigwam - The Blue Anchor The Carnival at Naple; The Chancery Suit - The Omnibus - Napoleon Married Lovers Zemira and Azor Neuha's Cave - The Exquisites Mr. Wade. Ditto. Mr. Bishop. Mr. Planche. Mr. Rodwell. Mr. Lacy. Mr. Peake. Mr. Pocock. Mr. Dimond. Mr. Peake. Mr. Pocock. Mr. Lacy. - Mr. Pocock. - Mr. Dimond. - Mr. Peake. - Don T. deTrueba. The Gipsey Father, The Hon. Mrs. Norton. Fra Diavolo Catherine of Cleves - Wanted a Genius The Irish Ambassador Country Quarters The Fiend Father - Francis the First The Hunchback Mr. Lacy. Lord L. Gower. - Mr. Pocock. - Mr. Kenney. - Mr. Pocock. Mr. Lacy. Miss F. Kemble. - Mr. Knowles. Appendix, No. 15. Appendix, No. 15. I f'tter from Mr. Harris. LETTER from Mr. Harris, one of the Proprietors of Covent Garden Theatre, to the Chairman; dated Wierre au Bois, July 18, 1832. Sir, Undekstanding from Mr. Moore that it is your wish ihat I should verify in writing the statement which he made before your Committee, " That the sum now due upon monies lent and secured upon the patent and property of Covent Garden Theatre amounted to 256,496^.," I beg to assure you that such statement is perfectly correct, and the particulars of such sum are as follows : 65,000/. the amount of sums borrowed at different times by the late Thos. Harris, chiefly for the purpose of improving and ornamenting the theatre, which was consumed by fire in 1808 ; which sums are secured by the mortgage of his -^ shares of the patent and property of Covent Garden Theatre, and have accumulated with a long arrear of interest, which the adverse state of the theatre Jias prevented the possibility of paying : 76,000/. borrowed of the new subscribers to defray in part the enormous expense of building the present Covent Garden Theatre, in shares of 500/., and secured on the whole of the shares in the patent and property of the theatre: 115,496/. the r mount of the debt calculated to be now owing by the proprietary on sums contracted either in the building or in the management of the theatre, and secured chiefly by bonds, or bills of exchange. (Besides this debt there are 11 or 12 private boxes sold for various terms.) All this debt was contracted on the faith of the validity of the patent of Covent Garden Theatre, sanctioned as it had been by the Crown, and recognized by the Legislature of the country for so long a series of years, and it is but too evident, that should this security be destroyed, by taking away the exclusive privileges of the patent theatres, the- whole of this debt would be lost to those numerous individuals who have thus become creditors on the property. I have, &c. To the Chairman of the Hon. Committee Henri/ Harris. ua Dramatic Literature, House of Commons. ANCIENT T^ ClRpU E O KINGS T THE SAME SCALE M I LAN FRAN ^AIS ri c 3S O HAYMARKET [llTlillTTr SCALE. OF FEET \o zo So 4o 5u _J r I \ r— r - loo _J CO BO U PERA r » 14 DAY USE RETUKN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPT. This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subjea to immediate recall. 3 iafl'61BSX 1 -,- — ^ REea-EoH m^ ^964 ^ECID-LB - REC D LD -mn^^^^-^n M TQ'64 Ipi^ SbNIUN I LL JILSIACKS. ■ JUN 3.81964- TCTlTW^ TTzt- U. C. BERKELEY FEB / ' W 08 AUS> '04-1 PH (A9562sl0)476B Geaeral Libtary UniTCrtity of Caliloroi* Berkeley ,,LI,,C_ BERKELEY LIBRARIES CDSfc,07flE73 m.78S±2 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 9b