as strongly indicating that the fum last mentioned was a very confiderable produce on any one representation at the Blackfriars or Globe playhouse. The office-book which I have so often quoted, has fully confirmed my conjecture. 7 The custom of passing a final cenfure on plays at their first exhibition, is as ancient as the time of our author; for no less than three plays of his rival, Ben Jonfon, appear to have been defervedly 7 The custom of expressing difapprobation of a play, and interrupting the drama, by the noise of catcals, or at least by imitating the tones of a cat, is probably as ancient as Shakspeare's time; for Decker in his Guls Hornebook, counsels the gallant, if he wishes to disgrace the poet, " to whew at the children's action, to whistle at the fongs, and meaw at the passionate speeches." See also the induction to The Isle of Gulls, a comedy, 1606: "Either fee it all or none; for 'tis grown into a custom at plays, if any one rife, (especially of any fashionable sort,) about what ferious business foever, the reft, thinking it in diflike of the play, (though he never thinks it,) cry-mew, -by Jesus, vile,' and leave the poor heartless children to speak their epilogue to the empty seats." 8 Sejanus, Catiline, and The New Inn. Of the two former, Jonfon's Ghost is thus made to speak in an epilogue to Every Man in his Humour, written by Lord Buckhurst, about the middle of the Jast century: Hold, and give way, for I myself will speak; "Can you encourage so much infolence, "And add new faults still to the great offence Your ancestors fo rashly did commit, "Against the mighty powers of art and wit, The title-page of The New Inn, is a sufficient proof of its condemnation. Another piece of this writer does not seem to have met with a very favourable reception; for Mr. Drummond of Hawthornden (Jonson's friend) informs us, that "when the play of The Silent Woman was first acted, there were found verses, after, on the ftage, against him, [the author,] concluding, that that play was well named The Silent Woman, because there was never one man to say plaudite to it." Drummond's Works, fol. p. 226. damned; and Fletcher's Faithful Shepherdess, and The Knight of the burning Pestle, written by him and Beaumont, underwent the fame fate. It is not easy to afcertain what were the emoluments of a fuccessful actor in the time of Shakspeare. They had not then annual benefits, as at present.* The clear emoluments of the theatre, after deducting the nightly expences for lights, men occasionally hired for the evening, &c. which in Shakspeare's house was but forty-five fhillings, were divided into shares, of which part belonged to the proprietors, The term, as well as the practice, is ancient. Sce the epilogue to The Unfortunate Lovers, by Sir W. D'Avenant, 1643: Our poet - will never wish to fee us thrive, "If by an humble epilogue we strive "To court from you that privilege to-day, "Which you fo long have had, to damn a play." 2 See in p. 227, (n. 3,) Verses addressed to Fletcher on his Faithful Shepherdess. 3 See the epistle prefixed to the first edition of The Knight of the burning Pestle, in 1613. 4 Cibber fays in his Apology, p. 96, "Mrs. Barry was the first perfon whose merit was distinguished by the indulgence of having an annual benefit-play, which was granted to her alone, if I mistake not, first in King James's time; and which became not common to others, till the division of this company, after the death of King William's queen Mary." But in this as in many other facts he is inaccurate; for it appears from an agreement entered into by Dr. D'Avenant, Charles Hart, Thomas Betterton, and others, dated October 14, 1681, that the actors had then benefits. By this agreement five shillings, apiece, were to be paid to Hart and Kynaston the players, "for every day there shall be any tragedies or comedies or other representations acted at the Duke's theatre in Salisbury-court, or wherever the company shall act, during the respective lives of the faid Charles Hart and Edward Kynafton, excepting the days the young men or young women play for their own profit only." Gildon's Life of Betterton, p. 8. who were called housekeepers, and the remainder was divided among the actors, according to their rank and merit. I suspect that the whole clear receipt was divided into forty shares, of which perhaps the housekeepers or proprietors had fifteen, the actors twenty-two, and three were devoted to the purchase of new plays, dresses, &c. From Ben Jonfon's Poetafter, it should feem that one of the performers had seven shares and a half; but of what integral fum is not mentioned. The perfon alluded to, (if any perfon was alluded to, which is not certain,) must, I think, have been a proprietor, as well as a principal actor. Our poet in his Hamlet speaks of a whole share, as no contemptible emolument; and from the fame play we learn that fome of the performers had only half a share. Others probably had still less. 6 5 "Tucca. Fare thee well, my honest penny-biter: commend me to feven shares and a half, and remember to-morrow. If you lack a service, you shall play in my name, rascals; [alluding to the custom of actors calling themselves the fervants of certain noblemen,] but you shall buy your own cloth, and I'll have two shares for my countenance." Poetafter, 1602. 6 " Would not this, fir, and a forest of feathers, (if the rest of my fortunes turn Turk with me,) with two Provencial roses on my razed fhoes, get me a fellowship in a cry of players, fir? "Hor. Half a share. "Ham. A whole share, I." Hamlet, A& III. fc. ii. In a poem entitled I would and I would not, by B. N. 1614, the writer makes a player utter a wish to poffess five shares in every play; but I do not believe that any performer derived fo great an emolument from the stage, unless he were alfo a proprietor. The fpeaker seems to wish for excellence that was never yet attained, (to be able to act every part that was ever written,) that he might gain an emolument fuperior to any then acquired by the most popular and fuccefsful actor: " I would I were a player, and could act As many partes as came upon a stage, "And in my braine could make a full compact " Of all that passeth betwixt youth and age; It appears from a deed executed by Thomas Killigrew and others, that in the year 1666, the whole profit arising from acting plays, masques, &c. at the king's theatre, was divided into twelve shares and three quarters, of which Mr. Killigrew, the manager, had two shares and three quarters; and if we may trust to the statement in another very "That I might have five shares in every play, The actors were treated with less refpect than at present, being fometimes interrupted during their performance, on account of supposed perfonalities; for the fame author adds "And yet I would not; for then do I feare, "If I should gall fome gorfe-cap with my speech, "And in fome passion or strange agonie On fome occafions application was made by individuals to the Master of the Revels, to reftrain this licentiousness of the stage; as appears from the following note: "Octob. 1633. Exception was taken by Mr. Sewster to the fecond part of The Citty Shuffler, which gave me occafion to stay the play, till the company [of Salisbury Court) hade him fatisfaction; which was done the next day, and under his hande he did certifye mee that he was fatisfyed." MS. Herbert. 7 In an indenture tripartite, dated December 31, 1666, (which I have feen) between Thomas Killigrew and Henry Killigrew, his fon and heir, of the first part, Thomas Porter, Efq. of the second part, and Sir John Sayer and Dame Catharine Sayer, his wife, of the third part, it is recited, (inter alia,) that the profits arifing by acting of plays, masques, &c. then performed by the company of actors called the king and queen's players, were by agreement amongst themselves and Thomas Killigrew, divided into twelve shares and three quarters, and that Thomas Killigrew was to have two full shares and three quarters. And by agreement between Henry and Thomas, Henry was to have four pounds per week, out of the two shares of Thomas, except fuch weeks when the players did not act. In 1682, when the two companies united, the profits of acting, we are told by Colley Cibber, were divided into twenty shares, ten of which went to the proprietors or patentees, and the other moiety to the actors, in different divisions proportioned to their merit, curious paper, inferted below, (which however was probably exaggerated,) each share produced, at the lowest calculation, about 250l.8 per ann. net; and the total clear profits confequently were about 31871. 10s. od. These shares were then distributed among the proprietors of the theatre, who at that time were not actors, the performers, and the dramatick poets, who were retained in the service of the theatre, and received a part of the annual produce as a compenfation for the pieces which they pro duced.9 8 Wright fays in his Historia Histrionica that he had been assured by an old actor, that "for several years next after the Restoration every whole sharer in Mr. Hart's company, [that is, the King's fervants,] got 1000l. per ann. But his informer was undoubtedly mistaken, as is proved by the petition or memorial printed below, (fee n. 9.) and by Sir Henry Herbert's statement of Thomas Killigrew's profits. If every whole sharer had got 1000l. per ann. then the annual receipts must have been near 13000l. In 1743. after Mr. Garrick had appeared, the theatre of Drury-lane did not receive more than 150001. per ann. 9 Gildon in his Laws of Poetry, 8vo. 1721, observes, that " after the Restoration, when the two houses struggled for the favour of the town, the taking poets were fecured to either house by a fort of retaining fee, which feldom or never amounted to more than forty shillings a week, nor was that of any long continuance." He appears to have under-rated their profits; but the fact to which he alludes is inconteftably proved by the following paper, which remained long in the hands of the Killigrew family, and is now in the poffeffion of Mr. Reed of Staple-Inn, by whom it was obligingly communicated to me some years ago. The superscription is loft, but it was probably addressed to the Lord Chamberlain, or the King, about the year 1678: "Whereas upon Mr. Dryden's binding himself to write three playes a yeere, hee the faid Mr. Dryden was admitted and continued as a fharer in the king's playhouse for diverse years, and received for his share and a quarter three or four hundred pounds, communibus annis; but though he received the moneys, we received not the playes, not one in a yeare. After which, the house being burnt, the company in building another, contracted great debts, |