Dramatizations of English Novels on the Nineteenth Century English Stage

Citation preview

ON THF?

^ N T t3 ^ T v E W IiIS H ST A ®

by

Joseph James Irwin

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Department of Fnglish, in the Graduate College of the State TJniversity of Iowa

July, 1942

ProQuest Number: 10831764

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is d e p e n d e n t upon the quality of the copy subm itted. In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u thor did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved, a n o te will ind ica te the deletion.

uest ProQuest 10831764 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C opyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346

Br* Barth©low Vincent Crawford, professor of English, not only suggest act the topi© of this dissertation tut also supervised the work done on It during a period of several years#

Ill

TABLE OF COHKSKFS

I*

XX* XXX* X?* V* VI* VII* VIII*

Introduction

«

*

*

*

*

*

«

#

*

»

*

*

#

*■ . 1

Dramatisations of the fowl® of Sir Walter Scott * * # * * * * * * *

,34

Dreuaatl station# of the Hove Id of Edward Bulwer* Lord Lytton * * * * *

87

Dradtatleatlonfi of the Hovoid of WiXlism Harrison Ainsworth • * * * « 105 Draa&biration* of the Hovels of 'Charles Dickens « * « # * * » * • *

125

Dramatisations of the Hovels of Charles Eoade * • * • » • • * * * «

263

Dramatisations’of the Hovels of Miscellaneous 'Writers * * * * * *

* 882

Conclusion

«.«**,

* * * » * * « * «

368

Footnotes

* » . » * * • * , • , * * * »

361

Bibliography * * , * • * » » » • * * » *

412

1

Chapter I IM'HODUGTIOH "There are some sixty English novels dramatized, and m t one by the author,”

When Charles Reade wrote that

statement for inclusion in The Eighth Commandment* which was published in I860, he thought h© was making a startling, even exaggerated, remark.

He wanted to male© his declaration

as strong as h© cotild, for he was trying to arouse the public against promiscuous dramatisation of novels. was writing a gross understatement.

Actually he

Sixty novels dramatised

between the time when novels on the stag© began to be the vogue In the late eighteenth century and the time when Head© wrote would not have been enough to have kept the theatres and the professional adapters thoroughly busy.

Many more

than sixty different novels were put upon the stag© during those years, many wore the versions of each, and many were the authors of those versions.

But almost never was the

author of a play based on a novel the author of the novel, Rather he was frequently a hack 'writer employed by an enterprising theatre manager who knew that one way to keep his theatre prosperous was to take any materials which were readily available and which would please his audience and to put these materials on the stage.

His two favorite

sources were French melodramas and English novels, both of which offered exactly the sort of thing to suit the pa., ing

public and both of which were unprotected from theatrical thievery. It was melodrama which the English theatregoing public wanted and it was melodrama which the manager of tix© theatres provided,

This predominance of Interest

In the melodrama may have been a cause of the state of decline of the early nineteenth century English d r a m but more than likely it was a result. the deterioration was evident.

Thatover the causes

Ernest Br&dlee Eafcson

Indicates that contemporar3.es assign various causes to various years;

from 1800 to 1810, tho size of the

theatres; from. 1810 to 1820, the lack of good play­ wrights and. managers; from 1820 to 1830, the star s:: ,stem and spectacle; from 1830 to 1840, the patent monopolies! from 1840 to 1850, tho French companies and opera.^ Allardyce Mcoll will have none of this*

He lays the

decline to the fact that the poets of the time, with the exception of Byron, had little connection with the theatre; that men of ability In writing for the theatre aimed at reforming the theatre rather than at writing good plays; that men of ability preferred to writ© in forms other than the drama because dramatic writing earned only poor pay and was limited by the star system; and the audiences preferred and therefore got extravaganzas and melodramas

These "causes® of •'atson and i-llcoll really serve as "la sufisaary of tho state of tihe English drama In the early nineteenth century• The audience was noisy and unruly, did not hesitate to have fighes in the pit rivaling those which it loved to see on the stage, frequently quarreled loudly over whether or not a singer should repeat a song, indulged in whis’ illng, singing, groaning, yelling, as well as throw­ ing things on the stage, liked to see military and moral ©vents imitated on the stag©, enjoyed that sort of drama frequently called "domestic,” appreciated tho sentimental and the spectacular, went wild over infant prodigies, was generally hypocritically moral, made, petty, and Insincere* Until 1843 Drury Lane and Govent Garden retained their patent rights giving them the privilege of producing plays, but the rights were flimsy and of doubtful value, for managers of minor theatres had learned how to evade the law by the us© of music and of the terms of deliberately un­ defined meaning, melodrama and burletta.

Any dramatic work

could be made Into a melodrama or a burletta by the Insertion of a song or two or ©von by having a fiddler scrape a few bars of musical accompaniments * By this means of evasion, the minor theatres were able to produce almost anything they chose and in consequence roe© to a place of considerable signific ane© attracting some of the better playwrights and scene painters*

They attracted the crowds, too, and intro­

duced such pleasing devices as elaborate spectacles,

particularly those employing animals, dogs, horses, monkeys, even elephant®, ostriches, mid bulls#

These had to be

shown against elaborate scenery, and the designers had no foers about showing sooh things as The Great Desert by Twilight, Tho Pyramids, Mount Vesuvius by Moonlight, The Grand Falls of Tivoli, The Destruction of Babylon. Scene changes during plays were many, and managers and authors made extreme demands on scene shifters, who did, however, protect themselves by the easy use of stock flats and wings#

The introduction of gas as a means of

illumination mad© some changes although not as many as might bo expected, for during the first half of the century the auditorium still remained br! H i anti:/ lighted during the performance# developments#

Costume kept pace with scenic

Xn the •late eighteenth century steps had been

taken to clothe Shakespearian plays in a fitting manner, and that beginning was given development in the ‘ nineteenth century when, in spite of the fact that many costumes were still inappropriate, more costumes were designed for a definite purpose, for spectacle, for realism, or for histori ca1 ac curacy, The actors who wore these costumes were both good and bad, with a few names of considerable significance, Kemble, Kean, Maeready*

But there were more which were not

of much Importance, names which will, however, bo repeated again and again later in this discussion, for many of thorn

were well known to contemporaries if not to men of our time# The actors played primarily under a stock system usually with each theatre* s maintaining a star or two to serve as a primary attraction#

And who wrote the plays?

Frederick

Reynolds, Miss Mitford, lames Sheridan Knowles, J*B# Buckstone, M o n Bouclcault among the better ones, and J#R# Blanche, Edward FItaball, Isaac Pocoel-i, Thomas M b din, and many others who will be mentioned later# These playwrights wrote for many theatres, for besides the traditional Drury Lane, Covent Garden, and Iiaymarkot theatres, there were six theatres in London In 1800?

tho Opera Mouse in the Haymarket, Sadler*s Fells,

the Royal Amphitheatre, Tho Royal Circus, the Royalty, and the Sens Soucl*

Sosa© of these were re-built during

the early part of the century, some were closed, some were converted to other uses#

Mew playhouses were bu.iIt and some

of these became as well known as the older ones; the Adelphl, the Marylebons, the Olympic, the Princess* a, the Queen's, the Royal Coburg, the St# James's, the Strand, the Surrey* There war© many other theatres of lessor Importance, and besides many private theatres and, saloons in which plays were occasionally presented* In addition, every notable town outside of London, in the "provinces,fr had a theatre, which sometimes main­ tained Its own stock company and sometimes received visits from a company or an actor from London*

Til© plays to bo soon in these theatres were of every types

in the minors, melodrama, farce, burletta and-

comic opera, burlesque and extravaganza; in the majors, tragedy and drama, and comedy#

Predominant in the minor

theatres was the melodrama, a despised but popular form which made us© of the less desirable traits of romanticism* As the name itself suggests, the melodrama utilised the services of music, not only to evade the law, but to heighten the dramatic affect by supplying musical accompan­ iment appropriate to the ©motion« Frequently, too, songs, appropriate or inappropriate, were Introduced* characters of melodrama were ctoelcj

The

a hero and heroin©, a

humorous confidant for each, a villain.

The action

frequently was mad© up of attempted seductions, wrongful accusations, hidden secrets of a more or less disgraceful nature, lost parentage#

As the form progressed In the

nineteenth century, the action became more and more violent with such effects as explosions mid earthquake© which tumbled down buildings on the stage, the riding on horse­ back up a real waterfall, bedties in a range of noises and ©Ikes, shipwrecks and storms, supernatural, ghostly, and fairy devicea, personal struggles which emphasized the more violent and. showy human emotions•

The themes of the

melodrama varied from the historical to the humanitarian but always there was emphasis on excitement, exaltation of virtue, and poetic justice*

7. Like the melodrama was the farce in its demand for strong action and use of not a great deal of dialogue* which sought only the broadest of effects ana used tho pun to extreme*

The farces were broad and rough and were of

flimsy plot and stock characters ond situations*

Many of

them were sentimental* many used exaggerated and ridiculous disguises, few had any intrinsic merit, but tho successful one® gave the audience a hearty laugh# The tern “burletta* a© used in the nineteenth century lost even the half-definite meaning it had in the eighteenth; It

same to mean simply & play which could

safely be presented at a minor or unlicensed theatre, Originally it probably was a play made safe by the intro-* duct ion of songs and music, and later it became jus!' a short comic piece which contained some songs and music* The name was applied to various types of pieces and was one of several names frequently loosely applied when tho play did not fit into an acceptable category5 comedietta, vaudeville, extravagance, revue#

farcetfca, Tho charac­

teristics of any of these are therefore difficult to express with exactness*

At least, many dx*amatic productions

of several kinds were labeled by each .name# The comic opera, however, vas a little more specific, although it descended pretty definitely to the farcical level and had primarily the characteristics of the farce.

The pieces were slight, using as their favor!re

subjects, gullings, deceits, and equivocal situations. Frequently they were sentimental, sometimes they were

8. slightly rlsqu^, and sometimes they wore written in an exaggerated fantastic style. The burlesques existed alongside the melodrama and. depended for success on an impossible exaggeration and an absurd ridicule of the play being travestied,

There

was something of criticism in the burlesque but more of an absurdity which existed for its own sake,

hot far from

the burlesque was the revue, which treated in a rrlvial manner whatever could be treated in that way*

Sometimes

the subject for a revue was provided by a standard work of dramatic literature, such as one of the plays of Shake­ speare, or sometimes it was a contemporary situation such as the passage- of the Theatres Act of 1843#

The extra-

vagansa was not a ‘great deal different from the revue except that It dealt with mythological or fairy stories# Frequently these were treated, too, in the pantomime, which had developed by 1830 into a theatrical tradition of the Christmas pantomime so that all the theatres in London attempted to produce the most elaborate one possible on December 26#

The pantomime and the extravaganza both

made us© of spectacular display and bold and constant action, 1 M X © all of those illegitimate forms of drama wore being played both in the Illegitimate and in tho leg­ itimate houses, legitimate drama was being played only in the patent theatres#

Joanna Boillie rae writing her

poetic plays frequently on historical subjects, Matthew

9. Gregory Lewis was attempting to write tragedy and was producing something nearer to melodrama, Charles Robert Katurin was also trying to produce tragedy, Lord Byron was writing his dramatic poems.

But James Sheridan Knowles,

■writer of sevex^&l poetic comedies and tragedies, achieved success and ho was followed by Lord Lytton, whose plays were likewise successful.

Kiss Mitford, Thomas Loon

T&lfourd, and Robert Browning were also producing serious legitimate drama, so thou the age was not quite, If almost., dominated by the illegitimate drama*

Comedies were written,

too, by J.R, Planehb, Mrs, Elizabeth Inchbald, Frederick Reynolds, Douglas Jorrold, Dion Boneieault, but

hey were

filled largely with moral sentiments and coarse laughter, A theatre goer in the early years of the « nineteenth century might then see considerable variety in the plays written by his contemporaries. variety and ho got it.

He expected

Play programs were long, begin­

ning at bs3Q or 7 in the evening and lasting until mid­ night or oftor, and the variety might oven b© provided within a single evening,

A typical evening*s program

might b© a long melodrama, a farce, and a pantomime, so that if the patron did not care to come to ;:ho theatre earlier than 9 o*clock, a common custom, he still might see a whole play or perhaps even a short one and a long one. Playwrights had to-keep diemselves well occupied to provide so large a range of fare for so many theatres,

for while a few successful plays might run for months, more plays died after a performance or two*

Because of, the need

for so many plays, the character of the low taste of tho general audience and the resulting lack of demand for a skill ful product, and the poor pay for the playwright, writers fox^ the theatres laid their hands on any dramatic materials which might come their way* greatest helps

Two chief sources offered the

the French drama and the English novel*

The French drama was supplanting the German* There was still some of the Interest in Goethe and Schiller which had 'been evident during the last years of the el '*hteonth century, but .interest in Kotzebue, who had been previously a dominant figure on the .English stage, was almost completely gone*

A few German plays were reworked

and replayed but interest in German, drama was almost entirely confined to German opera*

On the other hand, the French,

drama was in its ascendency with Gullbert de Pixer^court occupying almost the same position Kotzebue had once had* Scribe was likewise Important to the English dramatist but Hugo received no attention at all*

PIx&rfecourfc1s plays

fitted exactly the English taste, or perhaps they helped to make it#

At any rate they provided the type character­

ization, exciting plot, bold contrast between good and evil, and all the other devices of melodrama * English playwrights, knowing that Pikbrecount1s works would please their audiences stole from him all they chose, for he was in no adoqua,e way protected from piracy by dramatists ouvside of Franco. lict

11. only was flx&r&eourt pirated but so were other French dramatists translated, paraphrased, or adapted to each an extent that it is said that half the plays on "he English stage between 1800 and 1850 were suggested by French models ' #Ir or were adapted from French authors*0 But a few English playwrights turned

go

the

Elizabethans* for it was during this period that the works of the minor Elizabethans were being discovered and during this period that the criticism of Coleridge and H&zlitt was re-revealing the qualities of Shakespeare*

The nine-'

teenth century dramatists did not hesitate to make full use of their opportunities*

in consequence the Elizabethans

wore not only revived but were also imitated in plot, characters* and language* One other abundant source of materials was available to the nineteenth century playwright, ; -he English novel* which had become so Important in its own right that it was offering serious competition to the popular theatre.

The novels of Scott, Dickens, Ainsworth,

Mrs* Shelley, Lord X»ytion provided at hand plot, characters, dialogue all ready to be transformed from book to stage* It w&s an easy thing for even a crude dramatist to do and. many crude us well as capable dramatists did it. It is the history of the dramat isat ion a of English novels on the nineteenth century English, s .age that is to be discussed her© at some length*

These drama­

tisations are extensive for they were made from any novel which seemed to supply usable .materials.

FrequentX,v many

is * dran&tinations were made from the sain© novel; oecasionall,/ one playwright would dramatise tlie same novel more .Sian once. Th© novels on the stage were acted not only in London hut all through the provinces#

The reputations of dramatists,

theatre managers, and actors frequently depended on them, Above all the audiences usually liked them.

Apparently th©

only parsons not pleased with th© dr&m&tisations ware the authors of the novels, although some of them did not mint; and were somewhat pleased, soma became accustomed to the idea, but others, like Charles Peade, remained always angry to have their work stolen# The whole phenomenon of the dramatisation of novels was made possible by the peculiar scat© of the English, law which had for some time offered limited prot­ ection of literary property*

The lot of 1709, (8 Ami©,

cap, 19) titled wAn Act for the encouragement of Learning, by vesting the copies of printed book© in the authors or purchasers of such copies, during th© times therein mentioned," provided primarily a machinery by which copyright would be enforced, for, as the Preamble states, many printers had been printing books without the consent of the authors or the proprietors of th- books.

Through th© second half of the

eighteenth century and through th© first half of the nine­ teenth, the chief controversy was tho length of the t o m of copyright*

Th© Act of 1709 provided the author1s period as

fourteen years with a second fourteen years if ho was alive at the ©nci of the first.

Alterations in 1814 (54 ; the Olympic on February 27, 1815* All >t these plays from poems had appeared before lb! 6 and all of these poems as well as others by Scott continued to appear in dramatic form throughout the century* So, since Scott was already familiar with the custom of adaptation and was by no means as adverse to having M s works dramatised as some of the later writers, It is not

particularly surprising that the novelist offered some assist­ ance to Daniel Terry, his friend of many years, when Terry proposed to dramatise Guy Uannoying, the first of the Waverley

novels to appear on ^he stage*

Th© extent to which tcott

actually did assist Terry is not determinable although pass­ ing references throughout .he early volumes of Lockhart* a Life of Scott would Indicate that he contributed some songs and helped somewhat with the dialogue and characterisation* This version, whether helped or hindered by Scott*s drama­ tically Inexpert hand, continued to overshadow all other versions of the work. Opening at Caveat Garden, March 18, 1810, for a. run of eighteen times, this musical pla

in three acts called

Guy Mannerly; or, The Qipaey* s Prophecy was helped to Iramediate success not only by th© music of Sir Henry Bishop but also by an excellent casts

Liston was Dominie ? npson;

Emery, Dandy Dinmonfc; Sinclair, Henry B ?rtram; Abbob, Colonel Manneringi Tokaly, Dirk Hatteraickj Blanchard, Gilbert Glossin; Simmons, Bailie Mucklethrlft; Mrs. Mgerton,

56. Meg Merrllles; Miss Stephens, Lucy Bertram; Miss Matthews,

Julia Maimering; Mrs* Gibbs, Flora; Mrs. Davenport, Mrs. MacCan&lish#

Genest* s comments are a m sings

It Is good enough for a musical piece— the making of Domini© Sampson well skilled In all the ancient languages is very proper, but one wishes the author would explain how he could learn the different dia­ lects of India In Scotl&nd~~Terry makes one quotation and two indecent allusion© to the scriptur©8 **~in these Instances the Licenser might have Interposed iiis authority with peculiar propricty^but according to- Mri* Larpeni, an author may taka what liberties he pleases with th© scriptures, provided he takes non© with the M @ ti .odists. 1 Haslitt*s opinion was a little more favorables

very pleasing r-omantic drama*

wIt Is a

ihe scenes between Miss Stephens,

Miss Matthews, and Mr* Abbott as Lucy, Julia, and Colonel Mannerlng, have a high degree of Interest and eleganoe**^ Twice more before the year m s out the piece reappeared at Covent Garden, for Mr,and Mrs* Liston1© benefit on June 11, 1616, ansi again on September 18, 1816, and was played at Bath, Hovember 28, 1816* During the next several year© the play was performed repeatedly not only In various theatre© in London but through­ out the British Isles and in America*

Although Its first

Edinburgh performance was nearly a year after it© London debut, tho play was still th© first of the Waverley dramas to play at the Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, where It opened on February 85, 181*7, with the following cast;

Meggett played

Colonel Mannering; Janes, Henry Bertram; Russell, Dominie Sampson; Finn, Dundie Dlnmonf; Murray, Dirk Hatte'raiek; Chippendale, Gilbert Glossin; Mason, Bailie Mueklethriffc;

Edwards, Farmer Harrow; Richardson, Farmer Flail; Martin, Sergeant MeCraw; Duff, Jack Jabos; Anderson, Gabriel; Crook, Sebastien; Master Edwards, Franco; Mrs. Cummins, Lucy; Miss Dyke, Julia; Mrs. Maggot, Flora; Mrs. Nicol, Mrs* McCandlieh; Miss ft&nfield, Gipsy Girl, Mrs, H* SIcMons, Meg M e n d lies * This was undoubtedly a weak east, so little wonder the piece only ran some twelve nights during Its first season* Its popularity, however, was greatly increased by th© important alterations that were made In the, east soon a ft©r Its first production* The part of the Dominie, in Mackay* s hands, became a great creation; while Alexander, and afterwards Denham, made much of Darnell©; Benson, the vocalist, was a vast improvement on Jones as Henry Bert rasa, and Mrs# Belaud as Meg Morrill#* was completely successful .*> Liston came to Edinburgh to play his part of th© Domini© from April 2 to April 5, 1817, and Emery played Dandy Dinmojat there on July 25*

Terry* a version probably

reached Glasgow the same year, and its popularity continued In London, for it op nsd

on September 4

at the Haymailco a and

©Ix days later at CoventGarden* The play continued both In London and in Edinburgh through 1818, and on October 7, 1819, it opened at Drury Lane with Oxbemy as Domini© Sampson; Butler, Dandle Dinmont; Brahma, Henry Bertram; S» Fenley, Colonel Mannering; Mrs* Egcrton, Meg Merrill©©,

During the next fifteen years, it

had annual showings In all the theatrical centore, remaining most consistently popular in London, Glasgow, mid Edinburgh* It was revived In Loudon

In 1645, 1854,

1859,1671, 1685; in

Glasgow In 1849, 1852, 1863; In Edinburgh in 1842, 1847, lc48, 1849, 1652, 1853, 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857, 1859, 1866, 1867* Terry* © adaptation follows the general outline of the plot of Guy Mannerlng and uses essentially the same characters but with a great many minor changes*

There is hut

one scans In the plat which approximates a scene in the novel; all others are different although materials from the novel are frequently inserted in a rather hit and miss fashion* Even the seen© which is most similar Is considerably alter­ ed, for Bertram and Dinmont, led by Meg Homilies, not only capture Dirk H&tfceraick in tho cavern but capture Glosein as well, after overhearing a conversation between Dr.Tlf and Gloaaln which supports Meg*a claims for Bertram (Act III, Scene lit)*

Glossln Is not present In the novel at Dirk1 s

capture, and neither is it Guy bannering who c :>mes with troops to take Dirk a way*

The dramatist also makes Meg die

here instead of soon afterwards from the wounds received here, There arc so many divergences in detail that they are difficult- to enumerate« The play begins somewhat late In the novel, for Godfrey Bertram Is already dead and Gloosin is in possession of Ellengowan when the play opens,

ban­

nering is represented a s having been a close friend of God­ frey Bertram rather than a chance acquaintance and as having purchased ivoodbourne House *net sad of merely occupyln - it temporarily* his daughter*

Julia M annoring Is Guy* s sister rather titan Guy falls somewhat in love with Luc.;/ Bert ram,

for Haslewood, Lucy* s lover In the novel, Is emitter iogo.P-or

39, with all that concerns him*

In the play* Dirk does not

plan to capture Bertram at tho instigation of Gloasin but rather desires to da It so that he- may hold Bertram as a threat to Gloss in,

Dirk and Gloasin do not meet violent

deaths but supposedly are punished by law. Many of the scenes In tho play are somewhat related to the novel In that materials taken from rather random places are often used Miscellaneously,

For example* the meeting

between Bertram and Dandle Dlnmont and th© consequent moating with the gypsies (Act XI* Scene II and Scene III) are al­

together different in dots'1 and yet serve their purpose and seem not altogether incongruous with scones in the novel* for here Gabriel recognises Bertram and goes So tell Dirk* and Meg likewise recognises Bertram and talks with M m mysteriously about his unknown heritage.

Both the recog­

nitions by Gabriel anti by Meg take place under other cir­ cumstances In the novel,

This peculiar type of insertion of

materials from the novel Info scenes quite different .n the

play takes place In almost every scene In the play.

Other

of these scenes without any sound foundation whatsoever although th® insertion of materials from the novel make them appoaia sound are;

th© whole of Act 1 whleh takes place in

Mrs, M'Condliah^s Inn and during which the exposition is accomplished "and the Marmorings meet Lucy and Dominio Sampson; tho meeting of Lucy* Julia and Dominie with Meg and the conference between Dominie and Meg (A t III, Seen© I); the coming of the Domini© to toll the news to Hoxmering (Act

Ill, Seen© II}*

The most incongruous of these scenes is that

at th© beginning of Aet II when the Dominie absen t-mlndedly renders Into Julia*a boudoir in his night clothes just after

she has admitted Brown, who has approached hooclbourn© in a boat, as he, in

he novel, had approached the house where

Lucy '-stayed before she cam© to Woodbourne*

The seen© Is one

of exceedingly low comedy quite inharmonious with anything in th© novel* A t m scenes in the play have oven less relation** ship to anything In the novel;

th© first capture of Dirk

by Bertram, and Diriment, who are able not onl;> to take the powerful Dirk but also to ward off his bund of ruffian® after Meg has called off th© gypsy part of tho gang (Act II, Scene V)*

It is true In the novel that Dirk is cap­

tured although the scene of the capture- Is not represented t

and tho captor was MacGuffog, who Is omitted frnmth© play* The two scenes directly.preceding this (Act XI, Scenes III and XV), In which Bertram a nd Plntaont are led through the wilclornest by the gypsy guide, are also without foundation. Some characters omitted from th© play were of some importance In the novel;

th© Hassle-woods, both elder

tod young©!’*, Mr* and Mrs* KacGuffog, Ailio DImont, Counsel­ lor Ploydell, Mr* MacMorlan*

Some new ones have been inserted:

Franco, Sergeant M*Cra©# the Gypsy Girl, Bailie ihicklothrift and Flora*

Hon© of these la important although the Bailie

and Flora ho Ip to provide comedy, Domini© Sampson Is more voluble in the play than h©

as In th© novel and his peculiar-

41.

iilea are exaggerated to such an extent that he becomes a lov/ comedy character.

Meg Merrillea is developed much more

extensively and occupies, with Dominie, the position of dom­ inance,

It is she who controls, more chan before, the work­

ing out of the plot,

Th© other persons are lacking In the

individuality they once had, and Guy Marmering especially Is not so significant * Lucy, however, is less silly than she was in the original but she is presented In the play as somewhat more mature just as her brother (in the novel, her father) Is somewhat younger, With all of these changes, which were made primarlily to shorten and to simplify Scott1 s long and complicated plot, the dramatist has found it necessary to omit on.- scone In particular which should have pleased his thrill-loving audience*- the storming and burning of the jail at Klpylotrlagan.

He mad© up for this deficiency, however, by the

insertion of the gypsy scenes, which w ©r© not developed in the novel, and by the insertion of fourteen songs, which are scattered throughout the play# In making all of these changes he found it Impos­ sible to borrow very many speeches from the novel.

Most of

the dialogue la original with only-an occasional speech being taken from Scott*. But in spit© of all this, it should not be overlooked that the, dramatist used essentially the same plot and essentially the same characters*

It should not be

overlooked either that he greatly simplified the plot for dramatic purposes ar.d that h- did, on the vdiole, take good

advantage of moat of th© dramatic possibilities of the novel* This is indicated by the long popularity of Terry's version* Although several of Scott's more successful novels were available by 1817, The Black, Dwarf was th© second of his novels to b© dramatised*

A version variously called

Th,*'Black Dwarf ep$: flap Wfgardi or, Tho Brown Man of th© Moor by Samuel James Arnold with arusic by C,Ef Born opened at the English Opera.House, July 26, 1817*

Another version

called The Recluse with music by Caraffa, arranged by Horn, was produced in Edinburgh in 1825,

The v;laard of the Moor*

a melodrama, played at the West London Theatre in 'the 1830* s . (Several other versions or what might be versions of The Black Dwarf appeared between 1817 and 1850 but because of the lack of available texts it is impossible to establish definite ly that they were taken from Scott's novels,) Hob Hoy

The sixth of the Wnverley novels, Hob Roy* was th© third to be used for stage purposes but the first two adapt* ations were not particularly successful.

On January 17, 1818,

but eighteen days after the publication of Hob. Roy th© novel, Rob Hoy the play by an unknown author was acted at Co m l ’s Pantheon, fellntrnrgh * Th© Courant, speaking of it after the production, said,-**’The new piece founded on Rob Roy was per* formed here for th© first time on Saturday. The piece comprehends th© most striking features of the novel, and is very ingeniously contrived} ’ the scenery was particularly good* Mr, Munro was very happy in his delineation of --ob Roy, Mr, Lancaster as the B Hie, and ndrew airservice, spoken by

Mr, Ball in the Scotch dialect, were very amusing* Th© house was well attended* Lady Menaies and sev­ eral fashionables graced tho boxes.* It did not A prove a hit and was withdrawn after a few nights ,B iH I'W I'W iW H n #

J iiiiiiiiiiiU w i^nirtw i^

m m m **

at the Surrey, Jaimary 13, 1819*

ifrin i*iW n * < fi> r

in»

The

cam© out

FltzwIUIam played the Laird

of Dumbl@dikes| Watkins, Staunton; Ridgeway, Ratcliff©; T .?. Cooke, Duke of Argyloj Gomery, Reuben Butler; Mrs.

-gerton,

51.

Madge Rlldfire; Mrs. Brooks, Margery Hurdockson and Mrs. Glass; Mrs. DIbdin, Queen Caroline; Miss Taylor, Jeannie Deane; Mrs. Born, Kx'fle Doans. This Melodramatic Bomanc0 , In 3 acts, was compiled by Dibclln* ♦**•»!& a manner much to his creditparticular ly In that part of it which relates to t. © barn, and Jeannia Doans* Interview with the Queen— the house was crowded on the 85th night— Fitswilliam, who played Dmabiedykes, p s a good actor— Mrs. Brooks was excellent In both’her characters*° This version seems to have been played the astonishing number of one hundred seventy times during the first nine months* Certainly it had, too, any number of revivals during Its flrat several years.

It was played with success at Bath,

December 5, 1819, and at the Pantheon, Edinburgh, December 8

, 1819, and it may have been the version produced at the

Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, Fobruar.: 23, 1820, although this la open to some doubt. 3*0

It was first played in Glasgow In

1820 where'It became a favorite.

In the summer of 1821, the

play was transferred to Drury Lane where It wets frequently acted, during the next two years, Within three months of the first performance of DIbdin*s play, Daniel Terry brought out his version at

Covent Garden, April 17, 1819*

In the cast were Liston, who

played the Laird of Dumbiedikes; Macready, who played George Robertson; Emery, who- played Ratcliff; Blanchard, Sh&xrpitlaw; Simmons, saddletree; Egorton, Lord Oakdale; Terr,;, ixvici

Deans; Miss Brunton, Jeanle Deans; Mrs. C .Kemble, Madge wild­ fire; Miss Stephens, Effla Doans; Mrs. '0 venport, Mrs. Bal-

chrlstie*

The piece was acted fifteen ti os*

52. It began well*but on the whole It Is very Inferior to Dibdln* s play— the great fault of It is, the un­ warrantable 1:1b arty taken with the sc ry— Lord Oakdale, who is sent down to Scotland with high authority, proves to be Robertson1 $ facher— the scene lies at Edinburgh and the neighborhood— and everything Is omitted which relates to Jeannie Deans1 journey to Lonuon*^3* Certainly in the preparation of this version, ferry has taken advantage of the privileges of alteraion by oh ng~ Ing details of plot,b y adding scones, by omitting scenes, by changing elmraefcera, by changing but frequently using the novelist1© language. The plot of the play Include© but a little more than half of the plot of the novel, for the play opens withthe Meeting of Qeorge Staunton and Reuben Butler on tho hill out­ side Edinburgh on the morning after the hanging of Port©us and closes with the release of Effle Deans.

Thus the very

dramatic storming of the prison Is omitted and the revelation of what happened to all the character© In their later years of happiness and unhappiness, the reward© f ,-r good and evil living, are omitted.

Many significant seen©© within th©

portion of the novel which is used are likewise left out; for ©maple, Jeanle* b visit to the rectory of Staunton* s father.

But most significant of a 11 is the passing over of

the actual trial of Bffle Dean© and revealing what happened there by put tin.:; the account of It In the mouth of Paddletree and then showing Effi© as she leaves the court (Act XI, Scene V)* But if the dramatist has omitted much, he has

53* likewise added something, too, particularly in tho scene of the arrest of Effio (Act 1, Scene III) and in the scene of the last minute rescue of Bffio with which tho play closes (Act V, Scene IV)*

Both of these are significant additions

from the point of view of making tho play more highly dramatic# Scott passes over tho first lightly, for he does not show It directly and does not describe it in detail through his characters.*

The dramatist must make some essential alter­

ations in order to Insert this scene, for he makes the arrest of iffie take place after the storming of the prison rather than before.

He even weakens his own plot by Inserting the

econo, for there is little point to Staunton1 s sending tho to meet him to tho Baird of Dtuhbie&ike1s statement that he if going to marry the ^aird of LIckpelf *a youngest daughter Instead of Jeanie (Act V, Scone II)*

Very frequently in these scenes of great similarity or of little change, the language Is lifted directly from Scott with only some deletions or some ampllfloatIons to make tho conversation the clearer,

This Is especially truo in the

three scones already referred to as being 'essentially the same as the same scenes in the novel* But considerable change has been made in the play in characterisation and in general tone,

The greates- cl-iange

is probably made In Dmr&iedikes who, while arousing In the

novel, becomes in the play a comic character with little the essential worth he originally had*

f

So Is David Deans

a character of less strength; indeed ha has little part in the play, and Reuben Butler is of almost no consequence at all# Even Jeanie doe® not have the strength of purpose she originally had and becomes little more than a convention­ ality 4

Staunton,, on the other hand, becomes a considerably

more desirable character whose weaknesses are not nearly so serious m

they were In the novel,

It Is these changes in character as well as changes in scene and the use of those scenes which were the most romantic or spectacular, which make the ton© of the play that of the early nineteenth century melodrama*

There

Is none of the seriousness of religous purpose which dominates the novel, none of the restraint in character which would give the play seriousness * Rather there Is an exploitation of scenes that are ©motional and scenes that are spectacular, an adjustment of materials so that the play Is artificially comic and artificially tragic*.

In other words, the story

in the hands of the adapter becomes a melodrama« Since for the most part, critics did not receive Terry1© version very favorably* William Dimond sought to make a version of his own b £y combining the best of Dibtlln and Terry with some new material from the original# This piece was so good, that it is a pity if is not printed— It consisted, of 5 rather long acts-- it was gotten up at considerable expense— 15 now scores were painted, and tho characters were particulary well dressed— it w as very well acted— the first praise Is due to Bedford, especially for his laugh at Meg Murdockson, which was singularly happy and suitsbio to tho

character— Meadows looked and acted vastly well— Hiss Jarman was highly interesting as Jeannie Deans— williams was an Indifferent actor, but he seemed created on purpose to look and act the Duke o.. Argyl©*12 This adaptation played In Edinburgh in November, 1622, when Calc:: aft acted Robert son and Mrs# Henry Siddone, the hovoin©*

This version became almost a standard text for acting. The inconsequential versions of The Heart of Mid­

lothian are many*

On February 1, 1819, there was played at

the Pantheon, Edinburgh, a version by Montague and Jervis; the same year Archibald declarer.* s version called Filial Duty* or. The Heart of Mldlouhlan was published; a version fey an unknown author was played at the Theatre Foyal, Edin­

burgh, beginning, Dec aaber 9, 1819; a version which may have been a modification of Difedin* 8 or, in fact, of most any other extant version, opened at the Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, for a run of thirty-eight nights, February 25, 1820.

W.H# Murray brought out his own version at the Theatre

Foyal, Edinburgh, March

6

, 1824*

The fillstier a or, The Fate

of th© Lily of St. Leonard1 s by George Dlbciin Pit. was played at the Cobufg, January 28, 1855, at Sadler* s Wells, April

8

, 1833, and in Edinburgh as late as 1841#

Also in

1841, a translation of a French version called La Vendeene was played in Edinburgh and was soon in 1847 at the Princess *s In 1863 there was a revival of interest in the novel as dramatic material and Bouclcault produced his version Jeannie Deans, later called The Trial of Effie Doans, at Astley*s, January 26; George Shepherd responded with his

57* at the Surrey on February 7; Colin H* Haalewood published his version In the same year; and Robert B. and William Brough brought out their travesty on Bouclcault* s version. Clrcumstant1al Bffle Deans, at the St, James in March, Aboue this time, too, Thomas H, Lacy brought forth a version, the title page of which Is worth quoting: wThe Heart of Midlothian; or, The Slaters of St, Leonards," 'a DramaTwitlT-unreglstered"""effects)~Tn three acts, adapted from Sir Walter Scott’s admired novel, with Introductions from T, Dibdln*s play, R’, Murray’s alteration of the same, Eugene Scribe* s opera, and Dion Bouciea^lXfc,s conglomeration of the above, Colin Ha&lewood*s adjustment and re­ adjustment , J *B • Johns ton© *s appropr;!atlon, and other equally original v rsions, together with a very small amount of new material by Thomas Hailes Lacy#* The plot of this adaptation of The Heart of Mid­ lothian, Is but a portion of th© plot of the novel, for the part which follows the rescue of Bffle, as well as a great many other significant portions, is omitted entirely#

But there

are many plot alterations which in themselves are more sig­ nificant than these omissions*

The e lef chan e Is made in

the last act (Act III, Scenes III, IV, V) in which tho drama­ tist takes great liberties with his materials.

Irs Scene III,

George Staunton meets Madge Rlldfire carrying a child in her arms*

Rhen she reveals the child is his and Effle1 s, he

snatches if from her and flees.

Jeanie enters the scene and

is stopped by Margery Mur&ockson, who attempts to kill her in order that the pardon she is carrying may never reach Its destination*

In the struggle, Margery kilds her daughter-,

Madge Wildire * Th© next scene serves as dramatic preparation

for tho closing scon© of the play, for in it is revealed that no word has been heard from Jeanie and the execution is ac hand*

Here, too, i:s reconciliation between Effie and her

father*

But in the very short last scene, a mob is storming

the prison after the manner, in the novel, of the storming of the prison to secure Port©us, and Effie is about to bo executed*

The mob breaks through the gates, Jeanie rushes

on with the pardon, and George Staunton rushes on with the baby*

The attack upon Jeanie, the building of the suspense,

the last minute rescue of Effie with the mob’s battering down of the gates, Jeanie1 s pardon, and Staunton’s baby make exceedingly effective dramatic material in the light of the nineteenth century taste for melodrama*

But neither

these materials nor the opening scon© of tho play, which deal© primarily with Effie’s arrest, has any basis in the novel#

The opening seen© of this play is lifted bodily from

Terry*s version, which has already been discussed* ’ The dramatist takes good advantage of the meeting at the cairn between Staunton and Effie and the consequent attempt to arrest Staunton (Act I, Scenes II and III)# (This is likewise taken from Terry’s adaptation*)

But the

Laird of Dumbiedikes Is introduced as spying upon the scene, and It Is he who is caught instead of Staunton* has no place In the scene in the novel#

The Laird

Neither does the

dramatist Ignore the dramatic possibilities of tho trial scene, and so closes M s first act with the pronouncing of the sentone© upon Effie*

Many other scenes remain essentially

59 ♦

as they are In the novel:

Jeanie1 s appeal to Duinble&Iices

Tor money to help her gee to London (Act II, Seen© I); her meeting with the Duke of Argyl®, which takes place in the gardens of the Queen* s palace Instead of at his residence (Act III, Scenel); the meeting immediately afterward with *;he Queen (Act III, Scene I)• In these scenes which bear great similarity to the novel, much of the conversation is almost the same as the speeches in Scott, There a r© also many scenes from the novel which appear in the play considerably altered to suit the better the processes of dramatic condensation but which are, on the whole, the aam© in essence:

David*s mourn ng for Kffie and

Jean1 s telling to f.'euben that she is going to London (Act XI# Seen© X)f the encounter between Jeanie and the robbers (Act If, Scene III) although Jeanie* s ©scape is definitely abettod by Madge Wildfire Instead of more or less accidental and the fleeing girls lock Margery and the robbers In the barn, an addition which must have given pleasure to the ©xidienc®, The characters in the play are made into the usual characters of melodrama with Dumbiodykes transformed Into a strictly comic character v%fho Is, nevertheless, Important the plot*

10

Jeanie lacks the strength she has in the novel but

Is not lacking when action is necessary*#

Some attention Is

given to a development of David Deans bub not enough t-j make him the Scot he was*

Likewise the forgiveness scene (Act III,

Scene XV) is Inharmonious with his character as It was portray­ ed in the novel*

Effie Is nob much more than the undeserving

60 *

victim, and Staunton is greatly modified from the original so that ho seem® not to be the evil man Scott makes M m out but Instead an abused person not wholly If almost deserving

of M s fat©,

Peuben Butler is made very unimportant*

Con**

siderable attention Is given, however, to Madge wildfire, and almost too much depends upon her moments of sanity* Again the dramatist has adjusted the novel which he is snaking Info a play info a good, rousing melodrama. The use of the melodramatic material added for the throe closing scenes In particularly important * fie has also made good choice of material© in the scene at the cairn, the trial scenes, and the outlaw scenes, all of which must have appealed to the nineteenth century audience.

As it was

customary, there is an exploitation of materials highly ©motional or spectacular and a definite neglect of restraint, which make the ton© of the play very different from the ton© of the novel* Besides the plays already mentioned, a play on the subject of .The Heart of Midlothian was written by Gteorge Ham­ ilton and was acted at tho Albion Theatre in 1877 and at the

Marylebone two years later*$ and an opera, Jeanie Deans* by Joseph Bennett with music by Hamish MoCunn was produced at the Edinburgh Lyceum, November IB, 1894*

fflie Byi.de of Lammermo-or From The Bride of Lammermoor comes what is perhaps the only nineteenth century 'dramatisation of a nineteenth century

novel which is still played in the present day theatre, Donizetti *e opera, Lucia di Lagjtie:

rr»

But it was not

among the early adaptations# for it was preceded both on the English and the foreign stage by a number of not part­ icularly affective versions*

The first of these, The Bride

of hwinaeincoofi or, The Sp&etre at. ,^ha Fountain* was by Thomas Dibdln and was produced at the Surrey Theatre, June 5, 1819#

It was followed, a week later, by an

anonymous

version, ■The Bride of hammermilr*- or, The Mermaid* s fell* at tho Royal Amphitheatre«

Neither play achieved see cess *

The Bride of Laaamtemulr was also the name of another1 anony­ mous version licensed for production In Edinburgh, October

27, 1819, ’ The first version which achieved success was by John William Calcraft and was produced at the Theatre Royal# Edinburgh, for one night only on May 1, 1822*

In tho cast

were Cu-lcr&ib himself a© Edgar, Faulkner as Sir William Ashton, Mason as Colonel Ashton, Jones as Frank Hayston# Murray as Craigangelt, M&ckay as Caleb Balderstone, Roberts as Randolph* Buff as Iforman, Bonham as Lockhart, Mrs* H# Sid&ons as Lucy Ashton, Mrs. F-ulkner as Lady Ashton, Mrs* Kleal as lysle, Mrs* Renaud as Alice Cray ,

tf the play w as

not a success at its first performance, it was acted again in the fall with considerable success, was revived at Bath in 182b, in Edinburgh in 1846, and in London at the Marylebone

melodrama in thro© acts, opened at the Royal Brunswick, February 25, 1823, but did not play long, for the roof of the theatre cared in on February 28*

This anonymous version

was probably T£& Petal Prophecy played at the Mew Brunswick in 1835*

Another anonymous version, this time called a

*Drama,f was acted at the Queen's, May 9, 1831* Donizetti* s Lucia di haramermoor first appeared on the English stage at the Kaymarliet, April 5, 1858*.

The

opera* with its libretto by Salvatore 0■ mnavano, had been firs performed in Maples, September 28, 1835, one of a series of French and Italian operas which had been made from the story, which is peculiarly suited to the exacting needs of classical opera*

But it was rather Donizetti*s music which achieved

fame for the opera than the indifferent libretto with its drastic cuts*

The opera has, of course, been performed quite

literally thousands of times in all parts of th© world but Its most notable revivals is England were a b th.© Princess* s In 1843 and 1844, at Drury Lane in 1845 and 1848, and at Covent Garden in 1848 when Sims Reeve© took London by storm before beginning his tours of Ireland, Scotland and America* Th© text of the opera had, of course, a variety, of English translations and revisions, notably the anonymous revision played at the Princess in 1848 and the revision by Georg© Soane* After Lucia's success there were several inconsequon' ial version© a© well as two which achieved success. George Almar produced a version for Sadler* s Wells sometime before

6r. 1865 and Leon Grus mad© an undated adaptation which he based on Ducangef,s play France© de LqgBaermoor* which had appeared in Paris in 1828,

A burlesque by William Qxberry called

buoy of Laima©ivaoor was performed, at the C-trend on February

14*. 1848* and an anonymous operatic version at the Marylebone* October 9* 1848* tooth while Don!setti’s opera \m& enjoying a prosperous season at Drury Lane and Covent Garden, In 1858* in Becember* J* P&lgr&v© Simpson's Master of Bavenewood began an extended x*un at the Lyceum with

Pachter in the leading role end Carlotta Leclerq as Lucy and Emery as Caleb Balder stone» The critics ware most enthusiastic although some of them felt the altered ending was too mechanical*

One* however* did not mind it* for he

wrote* tfTh© acting was fine* the mounting was perfect* and the last scene of all

11

The Kelpie*s Flow by Moonlight1**

where Edgar and Lucy (contrary to the ending of the novel) are swallowed, up In the quicksands, would not have disgraced a management of t o d a y p l a y

was almost immediately

copied and combined with George Alm&r* s old play and prod­ uced at the Olympic in Kew York*

It also brought forth one

of the best of H*J, Byron* s burlesques, Lucia di Lamtaermoor& or, The Laird* the Lover* and the Lady* at the Prince of Wales, September 25* 1885,

Byron announced on the tit&l page

that his work was wfounded on Doniaetti*a popular opera, and consequently very unlike- the romance*w Tw©nty-*five years later, Henry Irving and Ellen Terry acted in Ravenawood

by B*C* Marlvale*

Beginning on

64 *

September 29, 1890, the play was performed for a hundred nights, and Irving was said to have boon at M s best in certain parts of the drama.

One critical comment will

indicate something of the way In. which the play was pro­ duced; The curtain closed on the last scene, but only to be quickly raised ag-ln on a sunset 'cloth, with sea and sandy foreground* Faithful old Caleb Balder stone was discovered picking up the hat and plume: ' all that remained of his unfortunate master* This scene accentuated the misery and fatality of the drama, and was, therefor®, not only a beautiful but a legit­ imate adjunct to the play**4 The last of the adaptations of The Brl.df, of Lagaaarmoor was that by Stephen Phillips which was performed in Glasgow at the King's Theatre, March 2-5, 1908, and with the clMe, The Last.Heir* at tho Adel p M , October

6

, 1908*.

As .DXbdir ^as first with a version of The Heart of Midlothian and The Bride of Lammermoor* so was he first to dramatise The Legend of Montrose, bringing out hie play at the Surrey, July 0, 1819, less than a month after the pub­ lication of the novel*

His play created little Interest and

even less was aroused by the anonymous version called The Children of the Ml at; or, A h©£®n& of Montrose, which opened at the Coburg, eight days later*

Even a third version called

Montrose: or. Second Slflht caused little comment, so little, in fact, that although it was registered on October 27, 1819, there is apparently no record of its production.

Mot quite

the same fate was shared by an anonymous version which played In Glasgow In 1820*

The Scots liked It, but probably because

of some patriotic Interest In tho subject matter, and they again responded favorably when this early play was revived la 1847 and produced as Montrose: or* The gathering of the Clans by a "Gentleman of Glasgow, 11 Isaac Pocock tried his hand at t he novel and produced hie Montrose £ or, The Children of the. Mist at Drury Lane, February 14, 1828*

It played for some twenty nights

without a great deal of success*

Not a great deal more inter­

est was aroused in Edinburgh when it was played there for eleven nights beginning March 13, 1822 • ion was likewise cool.

At Bath the recept­

Yet other versions continued to be

produced*

K*H• Murray brought out his In Edinburgh, May

3, 1823*

A new and anonymous version was produced at 'the

Caledonian in the earn© city, September

8

, 1827*

As late

as 1868 a version by Paisley, The Children of the Mist, appeared in London, on October 26* Within a. month after I.varhoe was published In late December, 1819,.Thomas DIbdin brought out hia dramatic version of the novel, for the fifth time succeeding in being the first to adapt- a new work of bcofct#

His play, Xvanho.ei or, The

Jew1 a 33®qghter* was produced at the Surrey, January 80, 1820, and was not long in being imitated, for six more adaptations from Iwanhoe* either acted or printed, were brought out before the ,ear was over.

Four days after the production of DIbdin*s

version, the anonymous Ivanhoe: or, The Jew of York (which may be by Alfred Bunn) appeared at the Coburg and, on Feb­ ruary 2, another anonymous version, Xvanhoe: or* Tho Saxon

tic •

Chief* was acted at th© Adelphl, March t2 was a memorable Ivanhoe evening, for two separate versions, on© b

Samuel Beazley and one toy George

Soane, opened at Covent Gardena nd Drury Lane,

Beasley's

play ran for fourteen nights with an exceptional cast. Ivanhoe was played toyX* Kemble, Front de Boeuf toy Mac ready, Sir Brian de Pols Gullbert toy Connor, Sir Maurice de Braey toy Duruset, Prior A y m v toy Crompton, Grand Master of the

Templars by Chapman, Cedriek toy Kgerton, Wamtoa toy Liston, Robin Hood toy Taylor, Friar Tuck toy Bstory, Ulrica toy Mrs, Faucit, Rowena toy Miss Stephens, Elgltim toy Mrs. Liston,

Isaac toy W, Farran, Rebecca toy Miss Foote,

Soane's play,

The Hebrew, was less fortunate, for It played tout eight nights although th© cast Included some notables:

Charles

Kean was Isaac: Penley, Xvanhoej Mrs« w, Lost, Rebecca: Oxtoerry, Friar Tuck,

From th© east are missing such

characters as Hewer.a and Ulrica,

Genest calls it "a

very poor play® and adds ®the story Is badly dramatised— Soane has made some alterations and additions, but no Improvements—

th© most material alteration Is, that Ivanhoe

is in love with Rebecca, instead of Iowena—

Soane has very

injudiciously written his play in blank verse,w15 Th© sixth of the 1820 Ivanhoe* s was v#T* Moncrieff* s Ivanhoe: or., The Jewess, which a pparently was n v©r acted. His method of adaptation is, however, an Interesting one, for h© seems merely to have cut up the novel into acts and scenes. H© was confident that his nethod woalb be successful, for, ‘n

07,

preface to til© print ©d edit ion# Iio says i It will soon b© discovered that I have scarcely written fifty lines of this play, and could 1 have performed my task without even -hat a&dit* ion, I would willingly have don© so.. I have a strong suspicion that my Drama will prove the host that may appear on th© -subject, from the circumstances of Its containing less original matter than any other, and the very few im* provements I have attempted on my text. Another version which wae never to be played was that anonymous adaptation called Ivanhoea or, The Jew of York. v

*wia rfw iw mrthinmi i ii i , ttii * *

M a n *'

.i>*M» iiN»i"Wni«' . ~

■■nnninHiiiwimlF

which was published in Birmingham In 18£0• In 182g, lyahhoe was adapted for Hodgson* s Juvenile Drama and apparently was also used, by Plancli4 when he made Maid Marian; or, Th© Huntress of Aril n,gford from Peacock1,a. novel, for the work la described as being on a story of Bob In Hood, with some additions from the

11

romance of ivanhoe, 11

About this time, too, Calc raft

made an adaptation for the Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, but it was evidently so unsuccessful that little Is known of It except that W#H* Murray used it in making his play of Ivanhoe, which oegsm a run of seventeen nights at the Edinburgh Theatre Koyal on November £4, 18*14,

The play was

said to bo ’’made up of detached scenes and speeches from the Covent Garden adaptation of that name, from Kebecca; or, The Jew* s D&nghtor, produced at the Bur ey, and from Calcraf t* a Ivanhoe» It was announced as being licensed for 1

this theatre’ *

Th© music was by Bishop, arranged by Dewar.”I■-

Th© cast was a good one, and the play enjoyed fair success. Ivanhoe now began to appear in opera and, at

Covent Garden* March 7, 1829# Michael Eophino Lacy1s translation of Deschamps and Dev/alily* a adaptation with music by Boss ini was sung*

Scott had seen the original

in France and had been pleased with the theatrical effects but not with the treatment of M s narrative* But Lacy1 & translation apparently mad© a none too good libretto worse and it was played but seventeen times. Another foreign version which appeared in England was John P. Jackson's translation of Bar Templar und die

Juadan- by W*A* Wohlbrueoh with music by Heinrich Marschnei; which was sung at the Princess* s in

1840

and

D m r y Lane in 1841* As the Brough brothers had seen fit to burl­ esque other of th© dr&matlcations from Scott* so they wrote a travesty on Ivanhoe which was produced at the Haymarket in 1850,

On December 26, 1862, H.J* Byron’s

travesty, Ivanhoo in Accordance with the Spirit of the v

n.i w w

w

f

ipMfmtoWMwM

4H4CRkiMrll 7, 1828*

The Brough b others* of

course, made a burlesque, The Talisman* or* King P:1chard Coeur de Lion and the Knight of the Qouchant Leopard, whichw as acted at Drury Lane, March 28, 1883*

Catherine

Swanwick printed a dramatic, version in London in 1884* Ten years later there was rather a revival of interest in The Talisman.for three versions appeared*

B&Ife* s opera,

XI TaHmaano, was sung at Drury Lane, June 11, 1874, and Andrew Halllday* s Richard Coeur do. Lion, was played ar. the same theatre in September but was almost a failure in spite of the Moorish fete that was introduced to give the piece greater interest*

A burlesque on The Talisman

by J«P* MoAr&le was don© at the Liverpool The&tre Royal, August 10, 1874, and another by an unknown author appeared -at the Philharmonic, March 89, 1878* Charles Dib&ln, jr., and Isaac Pocock wore one© more rushing to bring out tho first version of a Scott novel, this time hoods took.*

Dibdln won h. five days, for

his Woodstock^, or, The 6avail©r was produced at the Surrey, Monday, May 15, 1828, and Pocock* s opened at Covent Carden tho following Saturday*

Pocock*a version was a bit more

successful, but, even so, it was acted only six ti.ie*

It

was then taken to Edinburgh where It opened at the Theatre Loyal, June 17, for seven performances * Although several French adaptations were made, only one more English version appeared:

The fhi te Bose* a romantic dr a .a in four acts

by Georg© H* Sims and Robert Buchanan, acted at i.he AcLolphi,

April 23, 1892, In 1828, two more Seott novel© were given their first dramatizations, jg& Two Drovers and The Pair Held of Perth.

H. Goff dramatized The Two Drovers for the Surrey,

February 6, 1828, under the title of Second Sight;,, or. Prediction* A version was produced at the Crledonlan, Edinburgh, July 8, 1827, and on the tenth of November the following year, w, H. Murray* e version wat done in the same city,

Another version or a revision of one of these appeared

in Edinburgh, July 4, 1841, and a version with the subtitle, The Prophet.©©^ of the Glen* was acted at the Surrey, Sept­ ember 24, 1849. Probably the best dramatic material of all the later novels of Scott, The Pair Maid of Perth, reached the stage the year of publication.

H*M* Milner and Thomas

H* Lacy* s play v.-ae played at Hie Coburg, June 83, 1820, with the title The P&lj? Hfeid of FerfchS or, The Battle of jh© Inch although tho title, St * Valentine*,s Eve; or, The Fair Maid of Perth was sometimes applied to this version.

Tb© Charles

Baas company played a version, probably by Bass himself, in Perth, Dundee, and Edinburgh in 1828 and 1829.

Charles

■"'ebb* a adaptation of the same novel was acted at tho Surrey, May 26, 1845, and Hal o* the hind, based on The Fair maid of Perth appeared at the Standard Theatre, London, September 14, 1874#

At least two French adaptations wore made of this work. Probably the last of the Scott works to bo dramatized

was one of M s shorter pieces, The Highland Fldow. which v/rs

acted nine times In Edinburgh beginning September 20, 1C36. Another version, also anonymous, called Pougal the Piper played in the same city in January, 1852# Of the remaining fiction that might have been dramatized, only Anne, of Oeierstein ever was adapted for stage representation, but that not in England but In America* The others, The Betrothed*- TheSnrgeon1e Daughter., Castle. Dangerous * and Count Robert of Paris, if they did reach the theatre, have 'left no obvious record.

DRAMATIZATIONS OF THE NOVELS OF EDKARD BULWSR, LORD LYTTOH It is curious to note that in spite of the great interest of Edward Bulwer, Lord Lytton, in matters pertain­ ing to the theatre, namely the theatrical monopoly and the copyright laws, and In spite of his great success as a popular playwright, he did not prepare any of his own novels for stage presentation*

This is the more curious In that his

earlier novels were written while dramatic adaptation of popular novels was the accepted thing and In that other playwrights saw good dramatic possibilities in the novels. It may have been. In part, the success of these dramatists with his materials which caused Lytton to write his first acceptable play. The Duchess de la Valllere* during 183d, after he had written half a dozen successful novels in the preceding year©* It Is true that Bulwer-Lytton had tried his hand at pl&ywritlng before and had struggled to writ© Cromwell for Macready and had given it up and, what is of more sig­ nificance hor-, had even earlier attempted to write a play on the subject of Eugene Aratn, his first novel to

e adapted

for stage use* Before the completion of the novel Bulwer pub­ lished In The Hew Monthly the sketch of a drama on the same subject. Although he says in the original preface to the novel that the design of the drama was abandoned when more ban half completed, it appears from one of lira* Ed ard Bulwer1s letters, which describes Its representa­ tion, it was actually performed at one of the London theatres previous to the production of the novel#1

If BuIw©p-Ly11on1s play actually was performed before the publication of the novel late in 1851 or early in 1852, record of the performance is unavailable*

Mrs, Bulwer

Bight readily have been referring to any one of the several versions produced in London in the first months of 1852* Just why Eugene Aram was the first Bulwer-*Lyvton novel to be given ©tag© presentation when his earlier novels had already made him famous is not clear*

Perhaps

it was because public interest in crime and criminals was high and perhaps it was because Thomas Hood* © poem on the subject, published three years before, had already aroused significant public interest in Aram and M s crime,

A:- any

rate, william Thoxaas Monoriefffs threa^ar.f drama, Bu^ene Aram* or St * Hobert1© Cave was prepared for and produced at the Surrey on ’.vednesday, February'8, 18-32 In the play* Moncrleff used the same methods as those who, before him, had appropriated Scott, Cooper, and other novelists to their purposes. Ho employed the actual words of the novel and selected only those parts in which the emphasis was placed on the exciting and the horrible * Music and songs were added and the Surrey Theatre was the scene of the initial p e r f o r m a n c e #3 Other Eugene Arams followed in rapid succession both in London and in the provinces.

On the Monday follow­

ing the Surrey version, February 13, 1852, another version was produced at the hoyal Pavilion; one month lauer, a version was acted in Edinburgh; on Hay 14, a version opened at Sadler* s Wells#4

A July 30 production at the AdolphI,

Edinburgh, "proved decidedly successful*"'"

A Noveuoer

21 performance at Brighton had in the cast Mars ton as Ara--,

89. Munroe as Houseman, Vining as Lester, Mrs* Vining as Eleanor* and Mrs* V,-ingrove as Made line.e

The play was

still popular in Brighton in 3.847, for it was acted there that year on December 4*

7

and was again revived there Sept­

ember 10* 1855* with Court© as Houseman, Mead as Aram, Cooke as Dealtry, and the Misses Mayland and Oliver as Madeline and Eleanor»b But the most significant dramat isat ion was to com© later when W, a, Wills prepared a version differing considerably from the novel, which was produced April 19, 1873, at the Lyceum under the title Tho Fate of Eugene A r m ,® The plot of Mr* Wills differed widely from that of BuXwer-Lytton1's novel* Hare Eugene (Mr* Irving) falls In love with Laith Medowa (Miss Isabel Bateman}, the daughter of the Vicar of Knavesborough (Mr* • *11 .Stephens), is taxed by Houseman (Mr* Edgar), in the vicar1a parlour, with the murder of Clarice, confesses his guilt to Kuth in the Church­ yard of Kuaveaborough and dies In her arm® *3*^ Clement Scott, in reviewing the production, also speaks of difference® from the original and makes enlighten­

ing comment on the play* It is not, perhaps, a play that will please the multitude* It Is no ad capfandum suecession of surprises, s1 bnations,r'"an5 trial scenes* Eugene Aram is not tried for hie life# We have no barristers, mid courts, and; judges, and docks| we have no forensic eloquence, with Mr., So-and-so in a wig and gown* we have no ghastly gibbet,, with Eugene Arm hanging in chains on Knav© sborough Heath*

90, Thor© Is little for the posters* but much* very natch* for the imagination* ?'© have here photographed the mind of Eugene Aram* the mind of a man who has murdered another fourteen years ago* the mind of a poor devil who is flung once more amongst rosea and love; and just as he is smelling the ©acquis ife© flower* it falls to pieces in his hand* In many quartera I anticipate there will be adverse criticisms* It wlllbe said the play is horrible beyond endurance *.*.Mr # V/ills has executed a difficult task* In mp humble opinion, remarkably noil.*1 ■Dutton Cook, who likewise saw the play, feels that m i s

in constructing his three-act, blank vers© play*

1ms t'o obviously been moved by Henry Irving’s playing; of burgomaster in L© ffuif Polonais by Erekmann-Chatr1an and has 'set out to create for the actor a corresponding part with the result that his play is Inferior to and results

in unfavorable comparisons with L© Jtilf Polonais* He likewise criticises both Villa and Lytton for ignoring

the fact that when the real Eugene Aram died at the aga of 55, he left behind a family of three sons and three daughters* ••••The dramatist, with even less adherence to the truth than the novelist, has dispensed with tho trial and execution of the criminal hero, and permitted him to escape at last almost un­ punished and undisgraced# The fat© of Eugene Aram is throughout ex­ cellently written, and contains numerous nobly poetic and eloquent passages« But- it is com­ paratively expressive and Ineffective In perfor­ mance, and is in truth lose a drama than a pro­ longed and monotonous recitation; while there Is unwholesomeness In the anchor1s persistent en­ deavour to win commiseration for hie hero, and. to find excuse far his base conduct in the ex­ alted nature of his sentiments* io Invest the part of Aram with an air of force, the other

dpmnatjg peraoaae. are so subdued and enfeebled that they become'the merest shadows; yet it is impossible to respect the murderer’& penitence from its larger leavening of fear for his own personal safety, nor can. much interest b© ex­ tended to his love for lath Meadows, seeing how greatly he is preo ccup fed 'by’'Fh’ o memory of his crime commit feed on account of a former mis* tress* Moreover there Is something most rep­ ulsive In M s final met of selfishness, and his selection of the innocent daughter of the cler­ gyman to be the recipient of his frightful re­ velation of gin and suffering* The great lit­ erary merits of the ploy will probably be acc­ epted, however, as compensation for Its grave defects as a work of art, Its morbid gloom and Its offenses against good taste* ^ If non© .of the critics was very enthusiastic about the play, they all were enthusiastic about Hensv Irving’a Interpretation of the part*

Cook says of this,

The part of .Eugene Aram is sustained by Mr* Irving with a force"™and intelligence rarely exhibited on the m o d e m at age* The closing scene perhaps suffers from its protraction • and over*©laboratlon| but the actor* s selfabandonment to the passion of the situation, his powerful display of anguish and despair, are hisfronic achievements of real note* Hr» Irving* s very arduous efforts obtained^ well-deserved and long-continued applause*x3 Scott stated that Irving’s task in the part was Herculean but that the actor had triumphed;1^ Michael ivilliams said that **the part was exactly fitted to the idiosyncrasy of Irving, who was seen to the greatest advantage111'^, Edvard Stirling said that, **In ’'Eugene Aram,’ the actor’s pec­ uliarities of form, voice, and expression told in his favor. The remarkable criminal lived again In all the horrors of repentant remorse and mental suffering*1^ ; and H* Barton Baker stated that, in spite of the fact that the play v&s

not very successful, ’’Irving has done few things m o m s^rik-

ing than the first scone with Houseman; the sudden transition from the calm, poetical scholar to tho fierce, determined man revealed the whole psychology of the character by a single flash*111*7 With this kind of reputation for his performance,

It Is not astonishing that when the not-too-successful play was revived at the Lyceum/ .Tune 6, 1879, Irving again played Eugene Aram#

In this cast Q * Cooper was Parson Meadows'#

Forrester was Klchard Houseman; Johnson, Jewell; Miss F, Harwood, Joey; and'Miss E3 len Terry, Hutli Meadows*1®

But

Edgar Pemberton, Ellen Terry’s biographer, complains that 11Eugene Aram Is a one-part..play, and affords few chances for an actress*wl® A little more than a month after this revival, a

new version was produced, a version called Eugene Aram* which played at the Standard for six nights only after having opened on July SI, wMr* A* Franques being responsible for the drama, a few of the materials of which were his own supplying, the rest being furnished by Bulwer-Lytton’ s celebrated n o v e l , Adaptations of the novel continued

even into the twentieth century, for on July 4, 1901, a Eu^en© Aram In prologue and three acts, by T.C, McGuire, played at the Margate Theatre Hoyal •''1 Quite a different sort of account of a Eugene Aram is given by John Coleman, who describes the closing of a performance of an unidentified version playing in ‘.'orceeter:

95* Tho after-piece was Eugene Aram* Terry had an especial weakness for nis cieatn scenes, and he never 11shuffled off his mortal coil11 in less than a quarter of an hour* 'Provided with his quietus In the shape of a phial of poison, he leisurely comaonced operations, when, lo* the clock struck eleven* At that moment the bold Bennett with a black cloak thrown over M s every-lay costume» ’Mi# mj dear Aram,’ he exclaimed in his airiest tones, ’don’t trouble to poison yoursoIfI The Home Secretary has sent a reprieve, and Madeline is waiting to be married* Edwards (to leader of orchestra) , strike.up ’’Troubles o’er, Joys in Store•0 Ring down1 *’ and down came the curtain, to the disgust ofAram and delight of the amdlence’;92 Although the publication of Paul Clifford had preceded the publication of Eugene Aram by two years. Ita first dramatisation succeeded the first of Eugene Aram by a month and four days*

On Monday, March 12, 1852,

Benjamin N# rebster’s version (for which Webster is ©aid to have received five pounds) called Paul Clifford* tho Blghv/ayman of 1770; or*. Crime and Ambition was produced at the Coburg*^

It may have been this same Paul Clifford

which played a t the Victoria during the same year, for the Victoria Paul Clifford was also written by Webster*^ Edward Fitshall brought out his version at Covent Garden, Wednesday, October 28, 1855,

a urnsleal burletta entitled

Paul Clif£qrd* founded on Bulwer-Lytton*s popular novel, and introducing a real stage-coach and horses.1 a success, and the receipts .©gan to rise again*"

This proved Henry

Saxe V?ydhem explains that the receipts at Covent Garden had fallen off and that Osbaldistone, the manager, had attempted to got back M s patronage, and did get If back, with Paul

94#

Clifford*

Alfred Bunn, manager of Drury Lane, had produced

Othello the sane night, had Been disgusted with M s own receipts, and had remarked that the receipts at Govent Garden were probably half as much again, ttTo see Paul Clifojtr ford* or some such disgusting trash*”* 00 Evidently adaptations were sound investment# Paul G Ilfford; or, The Highwayman of 1764 was acted at Sadler1© Wells, Monday, April 4, 1856, but the Identity of the author is unknown unless it b© Fitssball*^ B.M* Pitt1© four-act drama, Paul Cliffords or, the Highwayman of Life, was performed a t the Victoria, July 2, 1870,87 and twelve years later, on April 8, 1882, Robert Buchanan1s four* act version called Lucy Brandon was played at the Imperial. wTh© play was badly constructed, the dialogue was feeble, and the work was devoid of dramatic I n t e r e s t I n the cast of this first performance were-s

James Elmore as Sir

William Brandon; Mrs* Chippendale as Lady Pelham, Miss Harriett Joy. as Lucy Brandon; David Fisher as Lord M&nleverer, Lin Boyne as Smootheon, Parnell as Beau Bright, William Rignold as Paul Clifford, Thomas F* Bye as Ned Pepper, S.J* Odell as Augustus Tomlinson, Somerset as Bagshot, Percy Bell a© Bummi© D&nnaker, Miss Amy Trevelyan -as Jenny, Tresehar a© Turnkey, Daniel© m Servant#^

N&bbem, and Jones a© the

The not very illustrious stage career of Paul

Clifford closed as Fat©1a usegee* a drama in a prologue and five tableaus by H*W* Williamson, played as Gangers Amphitheatre, September 17, 1883#°°

S B Lasfc PaVs 91 jftmpeli, Lytton* s works which, immediately followed Eugene Aram did not interest the adapters, hut when The Last Days of Pompeii, with its opportunity for spectacle in the des­ truction of Pompeii and its appeal to sentimentalism in the character of the blind lydla, was published in 1854, both J*B* Buckstone and Edward Fitsball immediately wrote stag© versions*

Just which version cam# first cannot be

definitely determined but both were produced in December, 1854,

Fltsball* a 'Last Days of Pompeii was played at the

Victoria^! and J#B* Buokstono1s Last Days of Pompeii; or Seventeen Hundred Years Ago was played at the Adelphi, Monday, December 15, 1854*52

However, the text of the

play was first performed on January 5, 1835, and the title page calls the play !*A Dramatic Spectacle, In Three Acts, f ken from Bulwer1s Selebraced love! of the 5am# Title*H Buckstone has taken a great many liberties with the text of Bulwer-Lytton in the name of condensation and brevity*

But some of the liberties, while they may serve

to condense, only serve to complicate the workings of the plot*

For instance, instead of Lydon1s being s gladiator

who merely s erv©s a© part of the background, Bucks ton# makes Lydon the brother of By&ia and her protector and thus Hedon becomes her father*

This enables the playwright to

let Arbaces make his first assault upon Glaucue by telling Lydon that Glaucus is the paramour of Ilydia.

Lydon is

only saved th# duty of the honorable killing of Glaucus by

96. Kydia* s tearful pleading at a fittingly dramatic moment. Buckatons also 1ms no time to build up the Witch1s hatred of Grl&ucus, so he makes Glauous the son of the Witches "hated rival."

There are other simplifications?

the Christi

Ians have no part whatsoever in the play, the incident of the Witch* s potion isahich makes Grl&ucus temporarily insane is omitted, the long Christian discourses and the long philos­ ophical rumblings of Arbaces are omitted, many characters (the most important of which is Julia, lone* e rival) are omitted, the play ends at the

eruption and earthquake so

that all the following episode is omitted and it is dif­ ficult to tell the fate of the characters unless all of them die in the catastrophe* Backstone also doe© a great deal of combining of scenes and incidents*

The play opens In a street scene in

Pompeii in which the gladiators are introduced, the Pomp­ eiians come to make their bets, Kydia* s love for Slaucus is established, the relationship between Calenus and Arbaces is brought out, and Arbaces excites Lydon to kill al&ucus, whom Arbaces hates because lone loves him*

All of this,

even with the added material, takes very little time while, In the novel, these revelations took many incidents to develop, for, when the novol begins, Glaucus has but seen Ion© and his love for her M s hot yet reached any high point*

Another example of Buckstone*s condensation Is the

seen© (Act II, Scone III) In which the murder of Apacldes Is accomplished.

This takes place in Arbaces* garden the

first time Ion© has com© to M s house*

Apacides comes

to her rescue and is killed;' Olaucus comes to her rescue a moment later and to accused*

This occupies at least

two scenes in the novel* for there Glaucus and Apaeides rescue lone and Arb&coo is injured; Apaeides is killed later as he is to meat Olinthus, a Christian, and dlaucus Is accused while he is under the influence of the Witch1s potion*

BuckstQne combines the several scenes of revelry

in the novel into one,, the scene of the entertainment of lone (Act II, Been© III); h© simplifies the whole of the gladitorlal combat and alters It so that Lydon wins the prlaee before he dies; he lessors the importance of Nydla

and reduces the significance of lone; ho makes Burba into a comic character which may have boon more humorous in th© playing than It Is in the reading and makes him the guard of Hydia when she is Imprisoned in Arbaces1 house* ©sides all of these alterations, Buckstone makes some outright’additions.

H@ has Apaeides give to Glaucus and

lone a latter to a hermit on th© mountainside (Act I, Scone III)* This letter instructs the hermit to marry Glououo and lone*

But C alenus sees th© letter and informs

Arbaees of Its contents to that Arbaces urges tho Witch to kill llaucus (Act I, Scone V) • By seeking the hermit, GKLaucus and Iona find tlo Witch and draw her curse upon Glaucus as well as promote an actual combat between Glaucus

and Arbaees.

The other significant addition comes in tho

last seen© of all (Aet III, Soon© VI)* brought into the arena with the lion.

Glaucus Is not Insteam Arbac^ i-

mad© to make the accusation against Glaucus before the Goddes of Truth*

As the curtain is pulled from t he Goddess, Lydia

Is revealed standing on the pedestal*

She makes the accus­

ation against Arb&ees; it is supported by C Menus; Arbaces establishes its truth by rushing on Calenus; the volcano erupts*

Other additions have to do primarily with tho change

of position of Lydon.

There is the incident where h© Is

incited against Glaucus (Act I, Scene I), a scene in which Lydon accuses Lydia of evil with Glaucus (Act I, Scene II}, a scene In which he learns the truth and forgives her (Act II, Scenel), a heart-rending scene between Lydon and iiedon just as Lydon Is to enter the arena (Act III, Scene I)* Buckstone has thus felt free to pick and choose from the novel to make the Incidents of the story suit his own ends*

He has condensed, ’ rearranged, and added to*

He

has not, however, don© as many adapters had don© In lifting language from the novel*

H© recasts almost everything into

his own words although now and again he uses Lytton1s words. This altering Is most notable in the songs*

Both novel and

play contain many songs, but tho songs in the play are not those In the novel. The dramatist has also attempted in other ways to talc© an advantage theatrically of the material*

The many

street scenes gave opportunity for elaborate scenery, but the scone in the Temple of Isis (Act I, Scene III) can

do

even more elaborate with its demands for an idol whose eyes will light up*

The scene on the mountainside (Act I, Scene V)

also made

demands

on tho seen© designer, for it must have a

cave which will open and close amid thunder and lightning as Arbacee demands.

It is Arbaces’ garden which needs the

most elaborate scenery of all (Act II, Scene II), directions say, wMusI.c —

The stag©

The moving: grove draws off, and

discovers a banquet-hall and a group of Dancing-glrls,” When this scene is over, it closes as Arbaees ©ays, ”YanlshtH A moment later, Hiaus,ic

The scene changes and discovers

a beautiful Moonlight scene.

On the L,H«, ^ bank on which.

is a female form, dressed the same as Ion©, deeping/1 The dungeon® below the house of Arbaees (Act III, Seen© II), the tfRnin above the Oscan Arche a** (Act III, Scone III), the Amphitheatre (Act III, Scon© VI) must also have called for elaborate scenery.

The last stag© direction in tho play is,

5,At this moment the fire breaks forth from the mountain, and the wails of arena fall, I>wmu\v+ ,n i

quake

mnw»>.nn7w»r|ii«*iw

M.»Ww ■

........ i

mini

i»

Everybody cries. wIh© Earth^ ii |iii>wnw Fox made The Last Days of Pompeii 3nfco a flvo-aot opera, Bydia* the Blind Girl of Pompeii which was produced at the Crystal Palace, May 10, 1892*°°

103,

Several of the rest of Bulwer-Lytton1s novels came in for a dramatisation or two,

Hone was dramatized

extensively and non© of the dramatizations was particularly successful* Blon&l followed The hast Days of Pompeii by a year,

and as J.B, Buckaton© had immediately dramatized that novel, so he soon wrote a play liimzii or, The hast of the Tribunes which was performed at the A&elphi* Kedne©day ,February 3,

1836

Although not an English work, a more famous drama­

tization of Hieng 1 was Richard Wagner* s first opera Rlenzi,

which the composer assured Bulw©>-Ly1ton*s son was the direct outcome of the novel, in Dresden in 1888,^®

Tho opera was first performed

The hast of the Barons * published in

1843, was dramatised as The Last of the BaronsI or, Warwick ifee M m

M2®£ W &

B.&fctlo of Barnet«

It was acted at

the Royal Amphitheatre, Monday, November 10, 1845.^

In

1872 it was burlesqued by L«H* Du Terreaux, at the Strand, on

April 18*^® Concerning a performance of Blight arid Homing (1841),

John Coleman, without bothering to mention when or where, writes, At this time Bulwer-Lytfcon* s story of Bight and Homing was at the height of its popularity, Charios Dillon had dramatized it for his ovn use, and I went to s©e it, Tho most vivid recollection I retain of this play is Sawtrey (John Douglas::, the coiner) breaking out of the roof of a house, while the hero on the eminence opposite threw a rope over, which Oawtrey made fast to the chimney stack behind. Then, clinging to It, he worked himself hand over fist across the i|iddy height till ho reached a place of safety,*^

104.

Other plays which are difficult to connect with the novel except that they carry the same title were written by 33* Falconer and performed at Drury Lane, January 9, 1884; by Dion Boueicault and performed at the Manchester Prince’s, September 7, 1 71, and at the Gaiety, November 19, 1871, and May 4, 1872$ by P. Linds and performed at Salford, Brine© of Males, January 21, 1901, and at the Stratford Theatre Royal, February 4, 1901,44

Wfaftt will, he do with it? {1859) was not dramatized until 1871 when it was made into a farce by a Mr* Light foot and performed at V&uxhall on July ll.45

Ernest Majfcravors

had been published in 1837, but It was not until 1874 that Hose Medina made it into a three-act drama for performance at the Britannia of September 28

A dramatization of

Harold* the Last of the Sa^on Kings (1848) was done In Portsmouth, March 29, 1875,4 ' and a five-act play called Harold, the laxon by J*W* Boulding, was acted at the Leicester Royal Opera Bouse, October 81, 1897 The last of Lytton* s novels to be published during his life, Tho Coming: Hace (1871), was made into a play In ■prologue and throe acts by David Christie Murray and Kevll M&shelyne# 1905*49*

It was performed at St* George Hall, January 2,

105 .

Chapter IV. DRAMATIZATIONS OP THE HOVELS OP WILLIAM HARRISOd AIHSHOHTH In spite of the fact that the rage for drama­ tisations of novels was at its height at the time of the publication of William Harrison Ainsworth1e first novel, Sir loim Chiverton (1826), it apparently did not appear on the stage.

Rather it was Rookwoodp published in 1834, which

was Ainsworth’s first to be made Into theatrical material. Certainly the novel must have been suitable for the melo­ drama, for it uses to advantage the materials of the chron­

icles of roguery as well as a whole supply of Gothic devices to add interest to the very stale plot (the heir In possess** ton versus the hair termed illigitimate) • Dick Turpin*e ride to York and the death of Turpin* s mare after she has saved her master are excltin • stage materials. Ainsworth, in a letter dated May 31, 1834, wrote to Lady Blesslngton that Ducrow was about to produce Turpin1s Hide at Astley*s Amphitheatre.3* Evidently this was done, for S.IiU Ellis in his William Harrison Ainsworth and His. Friends (1911) says, ”Ducrow produced the famous equestrian drama, Turpin* s Ride to York, which is often revived in O circus and music hall to this day in condensed versions Kills also mentions that Rookwood was dramatised at Astley* s Temple of Thespis and Hfor tho Aaelphi and other theatres.”"' He also states in a note, wAs recently a3 1905, Dick Turpin* s pistol was discovered

this pistol was used in a revival

of tho equestrian drana, Pick Turpin1s Hide to York — founded on Rookwood,”^ George Dibden Pitt was the author of a melodrama, Rookwood; or, The Legend of the Old Lime Tree, which was produced at Sadler’s Tells on Monday, February 24, 1840,° John Forster wrote to Ainsworth in Octoberf 1845, that be, Dickens, and Maelis© had seen a version by Pitt at the Victoria Theatre,® Two versions also appeared at a m\eh later time, Rookwood, a drama by G, Roberts was acted at the Liverpool Shakespeare on

April 15, 1895,*? and -The King* m .Highway, a

drama in four acts, by George Roberts and Prank Gerald, said to be adapted from Rookwood, was played at the West London, August 24, 1896#® Ainsworth* s next novel Crichton (1857) was also dramatised immediately, for its efforts at historical pageantry should have pleased the theatre-goer.

But It

seems not to have been quits as successful as Rookwood, Supposedly a version was made for the Adelphl by Edward Fitsiball and one for the Royal Amphitheatre by Ducrow, The former was called The Admirable Crichton and It is probably the latter which is titled Crichton; or, The Royql Bull Fight and the Dark Days of C therine do Medici and performed July 3, 1837#^

A burletta entitled Crichton

was registered November 15, lt39,i^ and a burlesque by R, Harley Edgar and probably founded on the novel was performed a,t Charing Cross, August 30, 1871,^

J a c k S h e p p a rd

107*

If thee© two novels were but moderately success­ ful on the stage, Ainsworth1s next, Jack Sheppard {1640}, was tremendously successful,

Ainsworth himself wrote to

Gross ley that Jack Sheppard was being played in half the theatres in London* The climax of Ainsworth1s success was reached in the theatres, when no less than eight dramatic versions of M s Jack Sheppard were produced almost sImultaneousTy In the autumn of 1839j and Cruikshank*s inimitable designs, elaborated Into scenery, became familiar to the populace In all quarters of London. The theatrical managers mad© Immense profits, but most unfairly, owing to the faulty laws of copyright, end the author whose ideas coined the wealdi did not benefit by it *3.3 Ainsworth had taken advantage of his society* s morbid interest in the underworld to bring clever Jack Sheppard, loath** some Jonathan Wild, Blueskln, Mgeworth Bess, and Foil Maggot to life.

To these characters and a few historical

facts such a© the ©torn which swept London in 1703, he added an unlikely plot which relies on extreme coincidence 'and rank sentimentalism and achieved a novel which had almost unlimited appeal as a melodrama. Flay© on Jack Sheppard aroused adverse criticism on moral grounds, which probably added to their popularity. This much may foe admitted* if, as some writers stated, every errand-boy was ambitious to become a "burglar owing to Jack Sheppard, It w as tho fault of the theatrical versions, for, It may be as mtied, the said errand-boy could not afford the h 1.55 for the book, or even the shillings monthly as it appeared, in Bentley1s Miscellany; there were no cheap editions in those days.b* Forster and Thackeray were among those who criticised the

work adversely.

The popularity was so great and the

criticisms so severe that The chadbands were again up in arras, advertising by their invectives the thing they condemned; the press took up a severely moral tone and so much pressure was brought to bear upon the Lord Chamberlain that by«*and-foy the piece was inter­ dicted. 3.6 Srroll Sherson in his London* s Lost Theatres of the Nineteenth Century summarises the critic!sms and career Sheppard on the stag©; One very popular blood-and-thunder piece was founded on the exploits of Jack Sheppard which up to the sixties was allowed by the censor without remark, Then a virtuous period seems to have set in at the Lord Chamberlain*a office and when the housebreaking play was brought out at the Queen* s it was in the form of a camou­ flaged edition and called Old London — with Henrietta Hodson as Jack. At the Surrey Jonathan Wild was played by the handsome John Neville, father of Henry Neville. At the Adolphi in 1839 Mrs. Keeley was again the Jack. At the Haymarket In 1852 Mrs* Keeley was the Jack with 0* Smith as Jonathan Wild, At the Surrey In 1856, Paul Bedford was the Blueskln and Mrs. Billlngton also In the cast #.♦, The latest Jack Sheppard that occurs to mind Is the famous burlesque at the Gtaiety in 1885 — one of the best produced in the light of "The Sacred Lamp."16 It was before Jack Sheppard had beon published In the conventional three-volume form and while it was still run' ning in Bentley* e Miscellany that the early adaptations which gave both play and novel tremendous vogue began to appear, October 21, 1839, and the week following must have been an exciting day for Ainsworth for no less than four versions Sheppard appeared in as many theatres In London. On Monday, October 21, two versions oponod;

Moncrieff* s

109. Jack Sheppard; or, The Progress of Grime at the Victoria-^ and John Thomas Haines1 Jack Sheppard at the Surrey.IS

On

the following Monday, October 28, appeared Thomas Green­ wood* s Jack Sheppard; or. The Housebreaker of the hast Cent­ ury at Sadler*s Wells,3$ and the most famous version of all, J.B. Buckstone1s Jack Sheppard at the AdelphI. The versions of October 21 are somewhat odd in the history of early nineteenth century dramatisations, for both of them evidently were produced with the approval cf the author of the novel.

The Rev* R.H. Barham, author of

the Ingoldsby Legends* entered in his diary under October X?* Went with W» Harrison Ainsworth to call on Mr, Moncrleff, author of the forthcoming version of Jack Sheppard for the Victoria Theatre, Moncrleff wae~quite blind, but remarkably cheerful* He gave us in detail the outline of the plot as he had arranged It, all except the conclusion, which Ainsworth promised to send him. Moncrleff, In a very extraordinary manner, went through what he had'done, without having occasion to refer bo any book or person, singing the songs Introduced, and reciting all the material points of the dialogue In Moncrleff* a version **th© hero was played by a real man named Harding, while Jonathan Wild was impersonated by Mr. Hicks, a melodramatic comedian of the good old.

school

."^X

Ainsworth likewise was familiar with Haines' version, for he wrote a letter to G-.B. Davidge which was used in the newspaper advertisements for the piece: October 18th, 1839. Sir, — Having, In compliance with your request, wit­ nessed your Rehearsal, and perused the Drama founded on Jack Sheppard, in preparation at the Surrey Theatre,

110.

I am satisfied it will furnish a complete represent­ ation of the Principal Scenes of tho Romance; and have, therefore, no hesitation in giving my entire sanation to the performance* The fact of the v/holo of the scenery having been superintended by Mr, George Crulkahank, must be sufficient guarantee to the Public for its excellonce and accuracy, I remain, Sir, Your obedient servant, OO W*E&rrison Ainsworth *-** To 0,B, Davidge, Esq, What was even more unusual about this play than the fact that Ainsworth ^approved of it was the fact that Davidge sent him h 20, presumably in payment for use of the novel, a court­ esy seldom extended to the novelists whose plays were adapted,—

In this version John. Seville played Jonathan

Wild and 35#F* Saville, Jack,®® Of the versions produced a week later the vogue of Greenwood's was not great#

"Mrs, Hormor was the Jack which

naturally gave rise to a Cockney joke having reference to the proverbial "Honor among Thieves,® and Mr, Hall was tho thieftaker#-”24 It was J*B, Buckstone’s version which opened &t the AdelphI tho same day, October 28, 1830, which was to exceed all versions of Jack Sheppard in popularity.

It became the

popular eraza and crowded the Adelphi for months #S5

f,It

was in the bills till quite the end of the year, or- the beg­ inning of the next, and at Christmas It was put to as a first piece to a seasonable extravaganza#”2^ Throughout the first t wo acts of this adaptation of Jack Sheppard, Buckstone follows very closely the first two epochs of Ainsworth1s novel*

He omit3 the visit of the re-

Ill * \

formed Mrs, Sheppard to the house of the Woods, the robbery which Jack attempts to commit In the church before the eyes of M s mother, the first arrest and escape of the boy Jack, All other alterations are very minor and consist primarily' of condensing scenes and shifting the settings to make the scenes more convenient for dramatic presentations * The last epoch, which Bucketone makes into hie last

two acts, he alter© considerably, attempting to preserve those scenes which might arouse greatest interest in stage presentation and to simplify the rather complicated action* Thus h© rnades Mrs, Wood die in the Interim between the second and third act© and eliminates the complication caused by her murder. He makes Mrs, Sheppard die much earlier than she did in the novel and eliminates the scenes of Jack's visit to her in the madhouse and liar Imprisonment by Jon­ athan Wild and attempted rescue by Jack,

This greatly sim­

plifies the plot by leaving out wild' a attempt to secure the

Trancherd fortune by marrying Mrs. ’Wood,

The dramatist

leaves out fch© incident of the Thames* capture and imprison­ ment by Wild and release by Jack, numerous escapes of Jack to two; presented I n ‘action#

He also cuts down the one told about and one

Jonathan Wild does not ©scape his

accidental imprisonment In the ’ #©11 but dies there when the house Is burned by the mob — is secured#

thus a sort of poetic justice

Often to make the necessary simplification Buck-

stone puts incident© and speeches from various episodes in the novel into a ©ingle seen© and rearranges the order of

112, ©vents.

All of these changes, however, do not destroy the

plotting of Alnaworth but rather make that plotting more amenable to dramatic use, Buckstone also takes full advantage of all the melo­ dramatic possibilities of the novel and does not hesitate at all to us© incidents which must have been exceedingly dif­ ficult to stag© but which must have given great pleasure to the audience,

Th© two most exciting of these are the

scene (Act I, Scene V) in which Wood climbs onto the starling of London Bridge after his boat has been caps!sod in the river by the great storm* takes the baby from the hands of the sinking Darrell, endures the fall of the stack of chimneys, and then climbs up the ladder to safety, and the scene (Ac© IV, Scene XX) in which the mob b u m s down the house of Wild while Slid and Mendee cry for help out the window and Jack Sheppard is arrested for the last time. Other seen©©, too, take advantage of the audience*s love for rapid action and excitement;

the conflict between

Wood and Tranchnrd1s party and Wood and the mob from the mint (Act I, Scene!}| the fight between Jack and hi® wouldbe arresters in the Cross Shovels (Act III, Scene I)? the struggle on the bridge over the well-Eole (Act III, Scene VIII), That which is humorous Is not neglected in the scenes of the taking of Kneebone by Wild and Blue skin at the house of the Woods (Act II, Scene II) and of the supper at Knesbonslb when an attempt is made to arrest Jack (Act III, Scene V)• There are several scenes which contain sentimental incidents but on© scon© is almost wholly sent-

■1i* o ^

Imental — * that in which Jack lies on the grave of his mother and weeps only to be arrested in the midst of his sorrov/s (Act IV, Scene I).

Add to these appeals the interest

of the underworld characters and setting, the black villainy of Jonathan Wild, the plotting to deprive Thames of his rightful position and inheritance, the romance of the secret of Thames’ background, the love affair between Thames and tinny, and the Interest of the character

03

? Jack and his

adventures and it is not difficult to understand why the play was exceedingly popular, Buckstone has preserved much of Ainsworth1s language and has made no attempt to develop characters more fully than Ainsworth did.

ing action.

His play Is concerned with excit­

It is highly dramatic, that is, it has a great

deal of stage appeal both in the plotting and in the drama­ tic devices.

It does not violate the ton© and intent of

the novel although there are some differences in detail

between them. In the cast of this wb©st and most successful version of Jack .Sh.ep.pard .... which crowded the Adelphi theatre nightly for months1* were Mrs, Keeley as Jack Shep­ pard, Paul Bedford as Blue skin, Lyon as Jonathan V IM, ViIkinson as Owen Wood, B*K, Butler as Thames Darrell, Maynard as Sir Rowland, -H* Beverly as Kneebone, Yates as Abraham Mendes, Mrs, Fosbroke as Mrs* ’food,

Vls._ Allison

as Winifred Wood, Miss M, Lee as Mrs* Sheppard, Mrs. Mailer as Poll Maggot, and Miss Campbell as Edgeworth Becs.’ ^

114 •

Apparently It was Mrs* Keeley and Paul Bedford who made this version successful quite as much as J#B#Buctesfcone and W* Harrison Ainsworth*

The critics were extravagant in

their praises of Mrs* Keeley, Nothing could be more exquisite than Mrs* Keeley’s acting; the naivety, the assurance, the humour and the boldness of Sheppard her© excellently delineated; and slang was given without th© least admixture of vulgarity, while In many passages, especially at the tomb of his mother and the scene with Thames Darrell, the pathos was almost touching* Welldld she merit the general c^ll for her appearance at the fall of the curtains**®

The same unnamed critic describes the appearance of Mrs* Keeley whose Jack: Sheppard was said to have been pre­ ferred by Ainsworth*^ There stood Mrs* Keeley, dressed in the best style of Hogarth1s apprentice, with apron rolled up, large flapping drab wtfstcoat, high heeled, highquartered shoes, and a red neek-handkerchlef loose­ ly tied; and there hung on the walls those orthodox ornaments of a carpenter*s shop — the ballad, the almanac, the seven golden candlesticks, and the history of the ©hast© Susannah**50 Further interesting comment on the performance was made by Mrs, Keeley herself who was very proud of the fact that she made an effort to demonstr ate Jack Sheppard* s skill as a carpenter by doing some planing# *Yes, I really did it ,i she used to say; 1and tho stag© carpenters used to help me by lending their best tool®, and keeping the edges well sharpened ©very night* They took a peculiar pleasure in doing this, and the public liked to see me planing on the stage — so you so© theyvy/ere realistic In 1859 — and gave me an [extra round* for it# It was hard work, though.1^ Mrs. Keeley, indeed, attempted to bring the "realism of 1859" to her part*

She visited Newgate to see the prisoners; she

wore real locked handcuffs in the scene of Jack1s escape and had considerable difficulty squeezing her hand© out of them; she planed real shavings in the scenes In tho work©hop; she played her part

00

hard that after the scene of the

escape from Newgate she staggered from tho stage and fell exhausted Into the arms of a man stationed in tho wing© to catch her# *It was the most trying character of any that I attempted,* Mrs# Keeley stated# What wonder, then, with such realistic acting that the and.lances ?followed her* every movement with rapt attention| that fyoung ©yes sparked at Jack carved hi© name on the cross-beam,1 and broke his fetters and escaped from the prison so daringly; th was always u sly encored,^ Paul Bedford .a© Blt\Cskin, while no© as sensational

m % a # Seeley, was highly successful* Henry Neville, after saying that Mrs ♦Seeley1 s ndr&m&tic power and pathos were

marvelously convincing,1* adds ''Paul Bedford was a great power and dominated all tho scones ho played tn$ M s marked individuality woo firm, keen, and most delightful*”^5' It became almost as popular as Six my dolly* pals » famous ”flash song” from Kookwood which had been interpolated into the stage version of Jack Sheppard* Both songs had been set to music by $*E* Hodwell, composer who wa© a member of the staff of the Adelphi*.• and both songs ware vary popular#

Nix my

dojiy*. pal© was sung by hr®, Keeley and Paul Bedford, and towards the and of the fourth verse they used to dance to tho time with Mrs* Mailer and Mis© Campbell (the imper­ sonator© of ”foil Magott” and "Edgeworth Bess”) just as we see them In tho .... sketch which Crulkshank

1X6 *

drew from life one night at the Adelphi* Kix m dolly, pals created a furore, and was the song of the day, Sir Theodore Martin records that the song was heard every­ where in England and

cot land*

It was played by organ-

grinders in the streets and by the bells of ft. Giles and of Edinburgh Cathedral; it was sung by guttersnipes and by ladies in the drawing rooms« The furore was almost as great when Buckstone*& play was revived at the Haymarket on September 6, 1852, with almost the same oast as had ployed in the original version at the Adelphi except that 0, Smith wraa Jonathan Wild* Sam Emery, Mendez* and Miss Laura Honey and Miss E* Chapin "played the two principal female characters,ff Mrs* Keeley

again played Jack Sheppard in spit© of the fact that she had fallen at a rehearsal on July 11, 1852, and had injured her ankle so severely that the opening had long been delayed. A critic wrote of her performance, It is a piece of personation that no other actress could approach# She is indeed a finished artist, and every characteristic of the audacious, spirited, spoiled, daring young criminal was admirably rend­ ered* Much that in other hands would have been stagey and theatrical was rendered with the truest feeling and the nicest nature* we are not surprised at the pertinacity with which the lady lias pursued her resolution to assist at this revival, for it shows her extraordinary abilities in a very prominent manner. It was probably this version, too, which had further revivals* at Sadler1a Wells in 1855* at the Surrey in 1858 with Paul Bedford as Blueskin and Mrs. John Bellington as Jack*®**

117*

In spite of the tremendous success of Buckstono*s version some unknown author was willing to brave tho competition and another Jack Sheppard was produced at the Hull, December 12, 1839,37 anc$ it must have been during tho last part of 1839,Jtoo, that a Jack Sheppard was produced at the Queen* s Tottenham Street, with Miss Rogers In the title role*®8

It is likewise of significance to note that on Kovember 26, 1839, but a month after the early version,

Jack Sheppard had already spread to the provinces, for it opened on that date In Bx*Ighton with Mrs* Hill as Jack, .’“alter as Kneebone, and Hill a® Blue skin

fbo play re­

mained consistently popular in Brighton, for on September 13, 1852, it opened again with Miss Howard as Jack* Elmore as nil&i Hye as Kneebonej Farren as Blueskinj Hay as Owen

Hood| It was played agrixi, November 2o» 1852; February 28, 1854| October 24, 1857* it was burlesqued there July 31, 1871, with Rose Massey as Jack and J#N# Blllew as Crackribj and finally perforated there July 19, 1886*^®

At Bath, too,

the play was early performed, for during the 1840 season, Mrs* ^eeley, Tates, and Paul Bedford, members of the Adelphi company, and King of Drury Ban© cam© down to play Jack

S h e p p a r d On February 17, 1840, a version "specially arranged for this theatre” was acted at the Theatre Royal, Edinburgh*

This was written by the,manager, H.H, Murray,

and was successful enough to run thirty-six nights.

In the

cast were Crisp as Jack, Lloyd as Blueskin, Ryder as dir Rowland, Murray as Hogarth the painter (evidently the prologue) and llackay as Six'* James Thornhill**^ 2

118,

The rest of the history of Jack Sheppard1© stage career consists of at least nine or ten versions or mor-o find many revivals*

James C# Stanfield was the author of the

dramatization which was titled Jonathan Hi Id and which was played at the Queen1a, September 9, 1 8 4 8 , Mrs, H* Young borrowed Stanfield1s title and appended to it the descrip­ tion of one of the famous se nes In the novel and ©o called her play, Jonathon Wildi or, The S t e m on the Thames, This four act drama' opened at the East London Theatre, July IS, 1868,44 The fara© of Jack Sheppard had.spread to France where a version called he© Chevaliers du Broulllard was performed at the Forte St# Martin Theatre where Ainsworth

had seen the play with Madame Marie Laurent in the title 45 role * This adaptation was in turn made Into a "romantic drama In five acts® and titled Old London by its author, P, Boyle# ■This play was acted at the Queen’s, Long Acre, February 8, 1878, although It supposedly'had boon performed in the Bristol New Theatre Royal in 3.873,40

This may also

be the same play which had appeared at the Queen’s, London, In 1872, ’’Old London* a new version of Jack Sheppard * in which Miss Bodson played Jaok*w4^ By 1885, B,P* Stephens and VT, Yard ley reduced Jack Sheppard to the fato which overtook many adaptations at about that time and wrote it Into a burlesque for the Gaiety where it opened August 26# Jack Sheppard,

They called their play Little

In the cast were Nelly Farren as Jack* Fred

119.

Leslie as Jonathan Wild; David Jones as Binaskin; Odell as Sir Roland; Marian Hood as Winifred Wood; Tilly Wa&rnan as Thames Darrell; Harriet Coveney as Mrs# Wood#

It was said

to he one of the best burlesques in the Gaiety’s repertoire*48 But serious versions, continued to appear, for the very next year, on November 27, 1886, Henry Young* a five act drama, Jonathan Wild, was played at the Elephant and Castl©#4®

Old London* a drama In prologue and three acts.

by 0. Shirley and W*M* Tilson appeared at the Manchester Queen’s, July 26, 1891, and at the Marylabone, August 29, 1892.50

01,d London Bridge in the Days of Jack Sheppard

was played at the standard, March 12, 1894;S3, Joseph Hatton’s Jack Sheppard, a four act drama, was played at the Pavilion, April 9, 1898;®® and an undated version called Japk Sheppard; or. the iMrgiary of the Grange with -music by A* Voyce was acted at tho Bow Palace of Varieties*3® The Tower of London Ainsworth* s next novel The Tower . the FiciOTicklans* was actually third in a aeries of many versions*

Dickens may have been angered particularly

by Moncrleff, who was certainly not the prolific adapter "the literary gentleman” was, because of the advertisement printed in his play, published soon after the first per­ formance at the Strand, July 10, 1837* It is almost needless to observe that this drama is founded on the vei^y original, graphic, and clever Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club, written by Mr* Dickens, better known through his familiar cognomen as "Bos.” It will be quit© superrogatory to point out the numerous in­ stance® In which I have been obliged, for the purposes of the stage, to depart from my origin­ al, as the Papers are In everybody*s hands, and the deviations speak for themselves; it may be sufficient to say, that I have In no Instance, I trust, departed from the spirit of my prototype, however greatly X may have been compelled to vary their form and bearing; and that I have endeavoured to make the quantity of original matter I was necessitated to write, amalgamate, not unworthily, X trust, with the materials I have borrowed from Mr* Dickens* It would have been a much raor-e easy and gonial task for me to have written an entirely

original work; especially# labouring as I have bean# for some time past# under the calamity of, I hope only temporary, blindness; but I was rather piqued than otherwise to do the work* The Papers have been pronounced to be v/holly undramatic; two very talented gentlemen, to use a newspaper term, had both attempted the task and failed— the on© from sticking too closely to his original, the other through departing too widely from It . It struck me they were to be mad©' dramatic* I knew well their author nover contemplated them in drama­ tic shape or he would have formed a regular plot, and given a continuity to his work, which alone is wanting to rank it with the finest comic fiction of any age or country. The success of my undertaking' has justified my judgment. Some apology Is due Mr, Dickens, for the liberty taken with him In finishing the work before its time; but th© great increase in popularity It must have received from my putting it on the stage, will, 1 think, more than excuse a step to which I was urged rather by circumstance than desire. Some injudic­ ious friends of Mr. Dickens* among his brethren of the press (Heaven preserve me from such friends, say I— of course I do not allude to the many, fair dealing critics of the Dally ‘ Press* to which 1 am under the greatest obligations? have chosen to display a soreness at the complete manner in which I have triumphed over all th© difficulties I had to surmount in my undertaking* Every wretched mongrel can, I am aware, dramatise the "Pickwick Papers" now that I have shown thorn how, by closely copy­ ing all that X have done; as is the case with a low minor theatre* In the purlieus of Londonone© respectable; but ©von the original author wTIT admit that he had never contemplated his matter could have bean so compressed and his Incidents put In 3 0 connected a form as they assume in "3&m Keller", a character, by the by, which I should think was only an after conception of Its creator, and not formed as part of his original projection. Mr. Dickens has, by far, too much genius to nourish any of the petty f©©lings evinced by his fostering friends, whose articles being those of th© ’high intellectual1 Sunday school of criticism, are greatly too genteel and abstruse for everyday reading, but must be kopt for the Lord1 s day

129,

examination only* Thy these gentlemen should object to my having dramatised Mr* Dickens, I cannot conceive* Sir Walter Scott, a name I humbly submit, of sufficient merit to be .mentioned in the same page with the writer of nTh© Piokwiek Club% always looked upon Mr, Pocock4e and Mr* To.rry4s stage versions of those iworfcal fictions nBob Koyn and "Ivanhoe44 rather as a compliment than otherwise; and I have xm&oubted precedent for what I did in the instance of the first dramatic writer of all Shakespeare, who has scarcely a play that Is not founded on. some previous dram, history, chronicle, popular talc, or story* What then means the twaddle of these 4high Intellectuals4 in so pathetically condoling with Mr, Dickens on the penalties he pays for his popularity In being put on the stage? Let these 1high. Intellectuals* speak to hr. Dickens4 publishers, and they will learn it has rendered them by Increasing their sal® th© most fortunate of chapmen and dealers* It is wasting time to show th© absurdity of these addle-pated persons, for their 4blow hot and blow cold* articles are as incomprehen­ sible to themselves as they are to everybody ©lee. tn on© of them, I am, first of all, abused for having sacrilegiously meddled with any of Mr* Dickens* matter; and then abused for not having meddled with It enough. The reader is told that everybody Is pleased with mj piece, and Is then informed that nobody should be pleased with it# Two or three low scenes between Sam and his father, taken from th© original work, are lauded as ’written In a fine spirit of humanity*; while some rathor polite dialogues that I have introduced between th© ladles are blackguarded by this high intel­ lectual as vulgar#s Thus does Monoid ©ff outline the quarrelb©t een himself and Dickons and Dickens4 friends, bat also he states very clearly th® opinion of th© typical adaptor and his assumed rights and privileges with another author* e works*

Th© quarrel is brought pretty much to a head in

Nicholas Hickleby where the characterisation of "the literary gentleman44 had such an effect on Moncrieff that

1

he felt it necessary to write, Juno 5, 1339, a letter tfTo the Public Press" in which he defends himself.

He

says in part, I could wish it were generally agreed that no original Hovel, Romance, or Tale should be me.de use of for dramatic purposes* without the original author having an interest in such appropriation, but as such is not the case, and the works of the novelists, etc., have aft all times been considered fair game to che dramatist, without any complaint~ from their authors, X do not perceive why I should be expected to become a solitary exception, and be debarred an advantage al­ lowed to others* X never dramatised but five novels in my life — Mrs. Opie*a Beautiful *Father and Daughter,* Sir Walter Scott’s matchless •ivanhoe,4 Sir Edward Bulwer* s mastex'ly and complete *Eugene Aram,*' the 1Pickwick Miscellany,1 and last­ ly Mr, Dickens* very clever ’Nicholas Hickleby.13 Thus closed th© quarrel between Dickens and Moncrieff over th© adaptation of Pickwick Papers. but the only satisfaction which Dickens may have had from it was ✓ that while Moncrieff continued to write, for the theatre until 1349, h© dramatised no mow© novels,^ Dickens continued bob e distressed, not only by Moncrieff, but also b y other adapters who borrowed his novels throughout his career. disturbed by M s own lack at the very

Perhaps he was somewhat

of dramatic success, for It was

time when his dramatized Pickwick wasbeing

played that he tided to write some plays of his own, none of which was very successful*

The. Strange Gentleman, a

comic burletta in two acts, was performed at th© St. James* s on Thursday, September T9, 1636; The Village Coquettes was cIso performed at the 't, Caries1s in InoG;

131.

Is She His Fife? or, Somethin- rinqular (1837} was probably not publicly performed; and The Lamplighter {1838) was written for Macreacly but was withdrawn and later revised and published as Dickens* contribution to the Pic Hie Papers M M Im w i.iiii

ill

and entitled The Lamplighter* s Story. Dickens was not to achieve success as a writer for the stage until he col­ laborated with Wilkie Collins in a dramatisation of Mo Thoxmirhfar© thix^ty years later*® nevertheless h© thought he ought to be able to succeed, and partly because of this idea and partly because he wished to forstall to some extent other adapters, he twice proposed that he would himself adapt Oliver Twist, first for Frederick Yates and then for William Mac ready, Th© offer to Yates of th© Adelphi Theatre was contained in a letter which Edmund Yates, the actor’s son, quoted in his "recollections*" Bo date is given but It bears internal evidence of having been written before October, 1838, and run® as follows:— "Supposing v/e arrange prelim­ inaries for our mutual satisfaction* I propose to dramatise *Olivex^ Twist* for the first night of the season* 1 have never seen Mrs* Homier to the best of my recollection! but from the mere circumstance of her being a Mrs, I should say at one© that she Is *a many sizes too big1 for Oliver Twist, If It be played by a female, it should be a very sharp girl of thirteen or four­ teen, not more, or th© character would be an absurdity* I don’t see any possibility of any other house doing it before your next opening night. If they do It must be done in a very extraordinary manner, as the story, unlike that of Pickwick Is an involved and complicated one, I am quite certain that no one can have heard what I am going to do with the different characters in th© end, inasmuch, as at the present, I don’t quit© know myself, so we are tolerably safe on that hand. I am quite sure that your name as the Jew, and mine as the author, would knock any other attempts quit© out of the fleld*^

Evidently Yates did not accept the offer, and on Ilovemoer 8, 1838, Macready records in his diary that John Forster proposed to him on the part of Dickens a dramatisation of Oliver T^ist by Dickens*

11No thing can be kinder than

this generous intention of Dickens, ** records Mac read;;, ttbut I fear it is not acceptable«H

The next day Forster

sant him a copy of Oliver Twist which he examined, but when Forster and Dickens came to see M m on November 10, he f,told them of the titter Impracticability of Oliver Twist for any dramatic purpose «w^

Mac ready was soon to

be proved to be wrong, but Dickens mad© no dramatisation of M s novel# Other men did, however, and when Dickens went to see a performance of ftliver Twist in December, 1838, at the Surrey Theatre, he was so distressed at what Georg© Aimer had done to his novel that 11In the middle of the first scene he laid himself down on the floor In a com e r of the box and never rose from it until' the drop-scene fall.’1® B® continued to be disturbed all through M s career by th© adaptations of his works which appeared at almost ©very theatre in London#

Since he was unprotected by the law,

he could do nothing but submit until in later days he discovered, that at least he could to some extent forestall dramatists by arranging for approved adaptations*

Thus

th© Christmas hooks were dramatised by Albert Smith from proof sheets supplied by Dickens, and the plays were per­ formed simultaneously with th© publication of the stories«

Later Dickens helped with Tom Taylor* s version of fho WaX© of Tvvo cities and still later collaborated with v.iikie Collins on ifo B£E2Hs2i£S$S*9

fhe Blekwiek Papers

■WKWWWM*

HH1iWiriL'>* ^iB-Npf

»t W rtBromnwiil liliWif '

Dickens* works were adapted for the stag© pretty much In tho order in which they pore issued} for example fhe FleSswick Fagers was the first to ha draasatised*

‘Villiam

Leman Bed©, a dramatist employed by Frederick Tates to provide plays for the Melphi from time to time, was th© author of the burlefcfca, fhe Peregrinations of Pje.karicki»

or*

According to S*jf« Adair PIfcs>G-eral&, the

play was acted at the A&elphl in October* 1836* six months after th© first of the twenty monthly parts, which had begun appearing in April* had been published*

As might

be expected the play differed considerably from th© original* for in consideration of the date* it would net have been founded on more than eight parts-*

Songs are I traduced} c Wallace*© ®K1 Harney* is sung in'Aefc I|- the curtain comes down at th© end of th© play on a fat© at Old Warded1s with a country dans© wDer©mony of Mistletoe11 and a vers© of fl3t* Patrick1© Day,** with ell the company joining In on the chorus*

liven a. new character* Clutchloy, 13

Introduced and th© play opens with Clutchloy* s counting hie money and Snodgrass* coming to borrow some at the ray© of

twenty *soven percent interest*

/in advertisement to th©

published version of th© play says;

134 *

It may be necessary to explain that this piece was originally written with the episode of the Queer Client worked into it as a serious plot; In this the talents of Mrs* Tates and Mr* 0* Smith and others were employed* The consequence of this introduction was that the drama was ren­ dered an hour* too long* After the twentieth night th© serious scenes were cut out, and the piece was played as a farce In the shape In which It now appears In print. The unfitness of the Papers for the purposes of the drama I believedere 1 began this task, and know now* This version was written when only the eighth number of the Papers was published* At the Adelphi* and in Liverpool, Manchester, etc»* this adaptation has boon favorably received, a circumstance entirely attributable to the fact that Messrs, Tates, Buckasono* Reeves} and Mrs* Pit&tTQilliem played the principal characters* In the cast were some of the best actors of the days 0*Smith was Clutohley} Tates, Pickwick} Sterling* Snodgrass} Isuae*

Tnpman} Backstone, Jingle} Rove* Sam Weller} Dunn* Jo©} Jones* Parker} Sanders, Old Weller} Gifford* Dr* Slammer} Gullanford* w- rdle} Morris* Bant (a steward)| Young* Walter}

Smith* Hostler} Mrs, Fit&-i7111iam* Borah} Mrs, Young* Aunt Rachel*

There were also a Cabman* A Beadle* Dancers*

Emily* Bella* and other numerous supernumeraries * The play* which was published by w> Strange with a frontispiece ^Designed from a Drawing taken in the Theatre** and showing

Sam Weller* Pickwick* Snodgrass* and Tupraan in the inn yard, was again played at th© Adelphi in April* 1 8 3 7 . ^

It is

this later* production on Monday, April 3* that is usually referred to as th© first production*^

A few weeks later a version of Pickwick* this time by Edward Stirling* served as opening piece for bho now City

135,

of London Theatre in Sfforfeon^Folgate, BIshopsgate-sbreet* Stirling refora to his burletia, The Pickwick Club; or,

The Age We Live La whichv; as perfomod on Easter Monday, April 27, as wth© original adaptation of the 1Pickwick Papers.1,1 W,H* Williams was Pickwick} Maearthy or Fitz* patrick, Jingle| Wilkinson, Sam Weller} Tully, the Fat Boy* The cast also Included Wrench and Miss Rivers, Sam Wellers or, The Pickwickian© by w*T, Moncrieff, the adaptation which probably mox>© than the others aroused th© wrath of Dickens, was a cted at the strand beginning Monday, July ,10, 1837, and seems to have pleased th© public if not Dickens,

It had an unusually extensive cast.

A*

Young© was Pickwick} Melville, Snodgrass} E, Burton, Tupm&n;

Roberts* Winkle; G* Cooke, Mr, ’Jardle} Chickeley, G, Hxipkins; Mcholson,

Leo Hunter} J# Lee, Jingle; W, Hammond,

Si® Wollarj S, Hall, -Jellor, Sr*| Atwood, Job Trotter; A* Richardson, Master Joseph Dumpling,

Among th© other

actors were Dearlove, Burton Searle, Chapman, who played some of the miscellaneous roles: ,Simon Slumkey, Horatio Fitskin, Kaclcstraw, Dogsfleeh, Canteen, Alley-campain, Drunken Liberal, Ballad Singer, Match Seller, Turnkey, drummer*

Mrs* Johnson played Miss Rachel V-ardle; Mrs.

Hsxmaonft* Miss Isabella w&r&l©} lisa Daly, Miss Emily W&rdle; Mrs* Melville, Mrs, Bard©11; Miss E* Hamilton, Mrs* Leo Hunter; Mrs. H. Hall, Miss Tabby; Hiss Petifer, Mary Summers*; Miss Brookes, Miss Lucretia Kifcehenert There'wore also minor

female roles; Mrs* B relay, Boarders, Visitors, Servants, Th© parodies In the play included nYlve le Roi,tT "UIcg Young

136»

Maidens,"

"Fallow the Dram," "Jim Crow," "How Rest ye

Merry Gentlemen#" "we Won’t go Home 1til Morning,"

"Five Old English Gentlemen," -"Tramp., Tramp, the Boys are Marching," "There’s na© Luck about th© House," "Hurrah fox*- tiie Road," "Hurrah for th© Red, whit© and Blue," "Tonjours Gal," "Oh dear, What Gan th© Matter Be," and "we1r© a’1 Hoddin’ ,"!®*

Pemberton describes th© peculiar

closing m e m of th© play#*"* •.the last seen© of ,;8am Weller* shows London on the Accession of the Queen# where th© populace In holiday clothes listen to some dialogue between Mr* Pickwick and Sam; and then join all th© characters in a loyal chorus to the air, Auber1 s *God Save th© King, Gustavus,9 during the singing of which ’Procession of Heralds, Beefeaters, Guardsetc*, are seen passing through Tempi© Bar to proclaim th© Accession of Her Majesty Queen Victoria, and the.piece concludes, amidst general shouts of joy and congratulations, with a ’Grand Tableau*9 3*4

Perhaps it Is not to be wondered at that Diokens was die* turbed#

Pickwick* a popularity soon spread to the provinces so that T«H* Lacy’s rearrangement of Moncrieff1s play, The Pickwickiansi or, Th© Peregrinations of Sam Weller was per-

>»i>Ni)i»wi* i w»i Li»- w * ;«wniniww,>».ui>ini^ >*iifMii*iMR^

*■ *< **» ?

mtU-iMfeM*

■*mwh'i,hw i

"

•)•+ *•**

n n f c w i* *

\

formed at th© Belfast# Cork, and Uorwich theatres In 1837, Th© introduction to the printed version Is worth noting, not only for its Information on the contents of the play, but also for its references to Piore© Egan*s Tom and Jerry, which gave Dickens some hints for Pickwick» Every age hath its 1form and pressure,* and since the days of ’Tom and Jerry* nothing has appeared in the vast field of literature like the ’Pickwick Club*9 The adventures of the above celebrated diameters abound with Fun, Incidents, Bustle, Love, Elopements, Song, and dance, embracing all

th© varieties of Life in a most conspicuous and intone sting point of view** exhibiting the rich, humor of Cervantes united with the pathos of Sterne* The whole has been put into dramatic shape, to give a **local habitation* on the stage to the talented efforts of Hr* Bos, in which the following heroes are seen to advantage— Mr* Pickwick relates his exploits with infinite zest, booking all his 1litl© dodges1 with the accuracy of a Cyclopedia| not only for tie benefit of the present generation, but for Posterity** Jingle also, a rich portrait of human nature— **very R— claims peculiar attention, showing most decidedly that the 1proper study of mankind is man*1'** Sam feller, Lotts at an iim, a fin© fellow for jokes and wit, according to M e notions of society, calculated to make M s %isits p: ea&ant'*j yet with M s heart in the right place— the Fleet'Prison, to wit*— -Old teller, the dragsman, *great cigar1 either ggx or off M s box*** The hove Feast** the Shepherd and M s Flocks** United with his feelings of teaching the *young idea how to shoot* Rich bote for an animal** the sleeping boy Joe— a nod Is as good as a wink to a blind horse % yet *wide awake* at times** the peculiar talents of the GXubs a fine display of eloquence! Bard©11 yersug Pickwick— delicious burst of oratory** the Mi&tXeWebbugk j or* the pleasures of Chaste Salutes— public break­ fast— the advantages of notoriety-* the Masquerade£ or this life is hike,.a country dance* wLo Sage entenc-. a deal aofc*,,x& ~ Versions of Pickwick began appearing in other cities* On Movenfber 27, 1857, at th© Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, the first of the Dickons adaptations to b a played in Edinburgh opened for a run of eighteen nights*

It was called ”a

mcl%**drEmatic cx&ravaganm, comprising scraps from |lPickwick*1tt Pickwick was played by Haekay, Jingle by Montague Stanley, Sam Weller by Lloyd, Mrs* BardeXl by Mrs* Turnbull,^7 At the Brighton Theatre* on Bo comber XI, the PiokMo ktonions.; m*

Sam Weller was acted*iS

At Bath, on Boxing Day, 1857,

W«J* Hasimond from Covent Garden and pro or1©tor of the Strand

Theatre, Loudon, ployed Sam Weller in a pioco founded on The Pickwick Pagers

Xn Morwleh on May 8, 1838, a corned,. -

138.

drama, Pickwick; or, Jhe flfi&agft

MffiS. ££ ^SSS M

M

was performed Two more productions of th# play were given in London before the long period during which no new Pickwicks appeared at all*

At the lew Strand, in 1839, there- was a

version called 8,am Weller* ^ and again at the Strand another prs version appeared in 1840. But by this time London theatres were too busy with other Dickens novels and so Pickwick was neglected until its very popular revival in 1871, On fueeday, January 84, 1871, a matinee performance of a play based on the Ffpkwick Papers was given at the Gaiety Theatre, Strand, for the benefit of the Royal Dramatic College Fund,

Th© program stated that th# play, Bardell

X* Fiokwlok* The Trial Scene from Pftokwifiir was *Arranged for th# Stage by Mr* John Hollingahead, from th© late Charles Dickon!* Special Reading Copy* ®by the kind per** mission of Messrs* Chapman and Hall*n23

The east for this

performance was th© same as that of th© play when It had its formal opening thro© days later, January 84, at the sam© theatre*

J*L* Toole was Serjeant Buzfus; H* Vaughn,

Serjeant Meekj J*X>* St ayle, Judge Stareleigh; Gros smith, Pickwickf. Robert Scutar* Winkl#| Miss B* Farren, Sam waller; Fish, Hsh©r| Miss Emily Muir, Mrs, Bardell| Mrs, H. Leigh, Mrs. Clupplnsj J* Maclean, Old Weller.2^ famous as Serjeant Bu&fuz*

Toole became

He wappeared in th© proper wig

and gown which were lent to him by Serjeant Ballantine; and aftezwai’ds th© articles were presented to him— he greatly appreciated.

a gift

This work became a stock piece

with Mr* Toole* and It was a feature with many Dickens’s revivals at th© Gaiety* the Globe, and M s own little theatre in King rilllam Street, Strand*”

Evidently it

was his perfori.'tanoe which gave popularity to Bardell v. fflo.kyio,k,g5

Toole, as well m

several others of th© Gaiety

company, was in the cast of a play called Bardell v f Picawick* a copy of which was in the possession of S* J* Adair Fits-Geraid but which he was unable to date*

In the cast

were Toole, Stanislaus, Cplhaem, Walter Joyce, David Fisher, R, Scute?, Miss Farren, Philip Beck, Mrs* Mellon, and Miss Coveney*^ BardeH v * Pickwick was mad© a success by an actor, so the next version, this time called Pickwick* was also made a success by an actor, Henry Irving, whoplayed Jingle in James Albery*1a four-act play which opened at th© Bycmim, October 2®, 18*71*^

Comments on th© play rang©

from "But it was no good’ * It would not do*,”^

to ’’Pick-

wlok#**was a aucec, as d1©atime but there was no money in it,1* but agree uniformly that the success of the play was due not to the play but to Irving, For obvious reasons, the *Pickwick Papers1 will never make a really satisfactory acting play, and yet for the sake of one marvelous impersonation its stage representation will always be welcome and memorable to the playgoers of today* Of course we allude to the Jingle of Ur * Henry Irving* This splendid piece of character acting would no doubt have excited the admiration of Dickens himself, The impudent strolling player Is personified to the life, and the creation of Dickens stamped with the hall marks of the act­ ing genius of Irving Is a t M n g once seen to be ever remembered *

14-0* In th© oast besides Irving were E* Addison as Pickwick, George Belmor© as Sam 'voiler, S*.J* Odell as Job Trotter, J# Boysbon as The Fat Boy, H. Crellln as Sm&grasr., E* Dyss as Tupman, V/*L* Br&nscomb© as V/lnklo, Collet as Old derdle, Miss Marian Hill as Emily Hupkins, and Hiss Minnie Sidney as Arabella.^

Albery later revived th© play as

Jiiy.il©a farcical comedy, at th® Zycmm» July 8, 1878, and again, at the same theatre, In April, 18E7*SS John Bolllngflhead, not to be outdone, produced Serjeant, ffugfuz*. a farce, at the Gaiety, November 23, 1871 but comments on th© production are so limited as to Indicate that th© play was no rival for the lye ©urn production* But The Pickwick Papers were to have many other revivals.

In March, 1879 or 1880, a threa*&ct play, Gabriel

Grubjby Charles Furt&do was presented at the Masonic Theatre, hincoXn,3^

This may have, been th# same play vdiMi George B*

Fox set to misI© as a ttGanta Beria Buffa,w for his work is also called Gabriel.Grub* ^ Other theatre mailers evidently thought the time ' was good for more Pickwick, for the arrangement of the trial scene from Pickwick*, now. said on th© program to be by John Bollingshead and Charles Dickens, was produced at th© Lyceum Theatre, December 10, 1879, for the benefit of William Belford. This play, Th© ffri&.l ffrom Biekwlok* m y b© a revision of Bol­ ling shead’s earlier effort, B&rdeli v. Pickwick. or It may be a new play*

Th© oast was an unusual one.

J, Fernandez was

Sergeant Busfuzf H*F* uacklin, Mr* Skimpin; Horace Wigan, Mr* Phunkeyi Arthur Cecil, Justice St&releigh, Clifford Cooper,

141,

Mr. Pickwick* G> Grossxaith, Jr#, Mr. Winkle* G*W* Anson, Mr* Tupraan# Kendal, Mr# Snodgrass* J*G* Taylor, Sum Weller# W,J* Hill, Old Weller# F*?J,Irish, Mr. Porker* A*W, Pinero, Mr* Dodson# J# Maclean, Mr* Fogg* K# Soutar, Howten* A* Malbby and H, Westland, Ushers# Master Grattan, Master Bardellj Mrs# Bancroft, Mrs* Glupplns* Miss Bve;mrd, Mrs* Bardell* Mrs* Leigh, Mrs* S unders*

On th© jury were

Bancroft, H*.J, Byron, Berman Vezin, George Honey, Lytton Bothern, B*B* Conway, J.H* Barnes, Charles Harcourt, Wilson Barrett, Barton Me (Jackin, Rutland Barrington, and J# Bell** ington*®® Two and a half months later in the same dramatic season, February 23* I860, the Trial from Pickwick was played at Covent Garden for the benefit of BVB*. Chatter ton* Many of th© members of the oast are th© same m

those who

played at the Lyce\im« _J*L* Tool© was Serjeant Buzfuz# John Blllington, Skimpin; Horace Wigan, Mr* Pbunkey; E*. Soutar, Mr* Winkle; J*G* Toy lor, Justice Starelelgh# 0* Cooper, Mr* Pickwick# G*W. Anson, Mr* Tupman# I*< Lablanehe, Mr* Snodgrass# Miss E* Farren, Sam Wellerj Frank Hall,' Old waller# P#W# Irish, Mr* Parker# A*"V- Pinero# Ur*. Dodson; J* Maolean, Mr* Fogg# T* Squire, Lowten# A* Maltby, and G*L# Gordon, Ushers# Master H. Grattan, Master Bardell# Mrs* Alfred Mellon, Mrs* Clupplns# Miss Sfverard, Mrs* Bardell# H a s Leigh, Mrs* Saunders*

On th© jury were

K.J* Byron, John S* Clarke, Terriss, Charles Harcourt, J* Ryder, Lytton So them, James Albery, Bronson Howard, B.L* FarJeon, Charles Kelly, Howard Paul, and J* Fernandez*^7

Two musical versions of Pickwick followed. Bardell versus Pickwick# "versified and diversified by songs and elioruses,” was played at Leamington in 1881 # T#K* Gf©m wrote the words and Frank Spinney* the music# The Great Pickwick case, a comic operetta, with songs by Robert Pellett and music arranged by Thomas Hawson was performed in Manchester in 1884*^® Bards.!! X* Pickwick was acted at the Avenue Theatre, June 18, 1888, for the benefit of Arthur Roberts, who played Judge Gt&releigh*

Edward Terry was Serjeant

Bu8 fus;:B*J* Codell, Mr# Skimping Tom Squire, Mr# Snubbing J*J* Dallas, Mr# Phunkeyg. Edward Righton, Pickwick j Arthur Williams, Sam teller; George Barrett, Tupman; Harry Monk*

house, Snodgrass| Alfred Maltby, Usherg Charles Colette, Crier5 Mrs# Alfred Mellon, Mrs# Bardell; Miss M#A* Victor, Mrs# Clupplnsg Mis::. Bessie Bellwood, Mrs# Sounders; Charley Rosa, Master Bardell*®® F# G « Bimmnd wrote th© words and Edward Solomon the music for Pickwick# a dramatic cantata In ono act, which was acted at th© Comedy Theatre, February 7, 1889, and at the Trafalgar, December 15, 1893*

There were only four characters#

In the Comedy production, Arthur Cecil was Samuel Pickwickj .Rutland Barrington, the Bakerg Miss Lottie Venn©, Mrs# Bardell; and Master Arthur Knight, Toassy*^® There are also several miscellaneous versions s Flos I*H# Pagan’s Mr# F&nkl©* s Mooing, a short play published by Dent; Frank E* Enlson1 s The Weller Family# a one act co £ Kate* b serving as companion to Mrs# ^ititterley and her difficulties with Sir Mulberry Hawk, or of lalph Mickleby* s schemes of villainy involving Madeline Bray, t h e r i s no mention* While'there la similarity, there Is also condensat­ ion of material In the novel*

This is most noticeable In th©

schoolroom scene at Do-the-boys Hall (Act I, Scene V) ♦ .After Mrs, $quo©re* ©lass in philosophy and English spelling, there is the incident of lileholaa1 championship of the cause of Smike and the ensuing fight with Squeers, with no indication of th# passage of time as there is in the novel# fhs changes In plot com© at th© ©rid of th© play* hh&t Stirling has don® (Act II, Scene V) is to transform th© scene-In which Kate Nlokleby Is the guest at lalph Iliokloby’s dinner so that it becomes th© climax of the play*

Hare Alfred M&ntalini# rather than Sir Mulberry Hawk, makea unwelcome advances tower,d Kate, and in the tradition

of melodrama, her brother, Nicholas, arrives just in tine to resciia he r* Kate• Unhand me, sir, this instant**--lineleI He Ip I Help** (They struggle a minute or two, when Nicholas rushes in C ♦, and Ralph and Mrs* Mickleby enter 0*., following Nicholas) (Kate ruches to her mother***} lie* (Knocking Manta U n i down) Scoundrel! (Ralph stands astonished at seeing Nicholas)* At the end of the seen®, Newman %>ggs provides a fitting

close to the play toy arriving with a will which Ralph Nlokleby had accident.ally dropped on the floor of his

office in the previous scene (Act IX, Scene IV}*— a will bequeathing a fortune to Smlke#

Then follows Nicholas**

aecnisatlon of Ralph (fox' hi© villainy in attempting to

cause the death of Sraike)* Hot only in this melodramatic adding does the play nave stage appeal*

There is pathos In the ill-treatment of

the schoolboys| there is excitement in the good rousing fight between Nicholas and the bullying Squeersj there is farce In Fanny £queer s’ tea party.

Finally, there Is a

direct appeal to the audience in the last speech of the play (Act II, Scene V)j

”SmIke. . I only want to live and die

with you, my kind* my only friend*-*-No, not my only friend—

I hope that we have been fortunate enough to secure the good wishes and approbation of a numex*ou® circle of friends (Point

ing to audience) who, by their generous sympathy and support* will insure the future career of -1mike and Nicholas Hickloby*

162*

In the oast of the early performances at th©

Adelphi were, besides th© well-known actor© mentioned by Dickens, Cullenford as K&Xph Hiekleby, John Webster as Nicholas Mickloby, H* Beverly as John Browdie, Mias 0*Hell as Mrs* HlekXoby, Miss Ootfceril as Kate Hlekleby, Miss Shaw

as Madam© Mantallni, Miss George as Mrs* Knagg, Misi. Gower as Mias $queers, lias Grove as Miss Price, and Mrs* Fosbruks as Mrs# Squeers*®1^ CO'imsants on th© play and Its performance are many and are almost uniformly enthusiastic, Indicating that th© play la performance was pleasing to its audience*

!Io

less a person than Thackeray* writing on a French version of HIchoirs Bickleby at the Amtoigue-Coffilqu©, Paris, In Praaex** s Magazine * March, 1842, retain!aces about performance® of Stirling*s version,

Who d a m mti remember th© pathetic acting of Mrs* Keeley in the part of Smile© as performed at the Adelphi.! th© obstinate good-humor of Mr* Wilkinson, who having to represent "th© brutal Squeors, was, according to his nature, so chuckling, oily, and kind-hearted, that little boys must have thought it m good joke to be flogged by kim| finally,'the acting of th© admirable Tates in the kindred part of Mantallni? Can Prance, I thought, produce a fop equal to fetes? Is there any vulgarity and- assurance in th© Boulevard that can be compared to that of which, In th© character of Mantalini, h& gives a copy so wonderfully close to n a t u r e 8 Very peculiarly, at th# opening performance of Stirling*s version, the audience laughed at Mrs* Keeley as Smlke#

Perhaps this is understandable in consideration of

the fact that Mrs, Keeley wcs primarily known as a player of comic roles, but not understandable in that surely, since Dickens was very popular, roost of the audience had road tie

lo3«

available portions of Nicholas fflckloby or at least knew about it or had soon the playbills of Mrs* Keeley as the pathetic Ss&ke*90

Mrs* Keeley herself describes the sit*

nation; MI couldn11 make it out* I had to rise from where 1 was and crawl my way down to the footlights with­ out speaking* The gloom at the back of the stage was so dens© that I don* t think the audience had seen me at first * As I came stealthily forward, they did not quite understand the situation* My costume was certainly very odd, and as 1 recent­ ly had been playing in comic parts, I suppose they expected something fumy from me. The house evidently fcbcmr#*t that the seen© was intended to he comic rather than pathetic, and there were roars of laughter. But I had" mover before lost my presence of mind on the stage, and X dldn*t mean to' do it now* So I stood it out* But it mis th© most difficult task I ever had* However, when I spoke th© first lines of my part the laugh­ ter ceased, and there was a dead silence* Then a stifled sob reached my ear, and presently I could see that there raa scarcely a dry eye in the house* After that I felt the character**100 In noticing Mrs* Keeley*s Smike when she enacted it for the first time In 1858, a dramatic critic of the day remarkeds

It was on Mrs* Keeley1© shoulders that the weight of the piece for dramatic effect was principally thrown* Her ©mall and pretty figure did not suit well for th© representation of the overgrown boy of 19, but bar dress was perfect, her look in­ expressibly wretched, and hex1 voice and manners tfuly heart-rending. Nothing could be more natural or moving than th© boy1s shudder when Squeers amounced in answer to his timid inquiry whether he had any news for him, that nobody asked about him. Then, again, the joyous expression with which he dwelt upon his childish notions of liberty, con­ trasted with the desponding tones In which he pictured th© approach of gloomy death, without even the safel©faction of beholding the friendly faces of home, which th© diseased imagination of another boy* * his caeapanion— had conjured up around his bed before his decease, hushed the house Into complete stillness, which was only broken by the most rapturous plaudits.3'03*

104,

The emotional effect lira* Keele- had as Pmik© must have been groat, for again and again it w&c spoken of by the critics of the day and the reminiseers of later

clays*

Or#

Monville Penn recalls having soon Mrs* Keeley* s

Smlke when he was but a youngster and mentions the pathos

of th' cha -actor• But ho was also able to recall other scenes which had an effects

th© breaking up of the

school with the revolt of th© boys and the thrashing of £queer©# th© departure of Smitee from the school, and Nich­ olas and Smtke* & encounter with the Yorkshirem&n* John

Browdie#3,0^ On February 15# 1839# Stirling* ® Nicholas Blckleby was acted at th© Surrey Theatre with some revisions and with Smith,. Wilkinson, Beverly, and Mrs# Keeley coming over from

the A&elphl to play their familiar roles *

The other actor©

in th© Surrey performance, which, was acted with George Almarts

offensive Oliver ffwlst.* were Bee lop as E&lph Nickleby#

Courtney as Nicholas, bright as Mant&lint# Wilson a® Sir Mulberry Hawk, Miss Lewis as Mrs* Nlo&leby# Miss Chartley as Kate, Hit* Martin as Madam® Mant&lini, Mrs. w* Daley as Mrs# Squeers, Miss Sharpe as Miss Knogga# Miss Gower as Mis© Squears# end Miss Young as *Tilda Price Stirling’s play was, as usual, taken to the provinces, It was acted at the Edinburgh Theatre Royal for the first time on January £1, 1859# and was acted for twenty-seven times that season but remained an ISdihburgh favorite for year© •

Murray played Newman Hoggs*. Suafeon# Mantalini# Miss Julia

105.

Cxuise, Smite®* Miss Nleol, Madam© M&ntalinlj Mrs, Griffiths, Mrs. Squeers* Sherrett, Squeersj Lloyd, John Brodie; and Crlsp, Hicho las . Stirling himself relates an interesting experience when, in 1843, th© play was to be given In h'orthing* Sussex* For my benefit, Hieliola© Niokleby was announced. Without the 1Dotheboy1s-Ball* scholars, this performance could not, however, take place. And here was the awkward dilemma* Worthing mothers of the poorer elaas did not countenance play acting, believing Old Hick to be in some way connected with it# A local Figaro helped me out Of my difficulty* This professor of the ratordid a bit of most things at his odd -and leisure moments# He was a performer on the French horn, a Mrd-Y&heler, news vendor, corn~cutt©r— heaven knows what besides— a regular CalebQuobem, in short, ’1*1: get you fifty, sir, never fear*’ And he was ms good as his word:# Lured from th® by-at roots and alleys by his horn, like the children In the ’'Fled Piper of Hamelin, the .small fry followed him to the theatre yard* once there, Figaro closed th© gates upon Mr, Squeers1 pupils* Amidst crying and moaning they were placed on the stage, sitting on benches and kept In order by Flg&xors cane— poor children completely be­ wildered* th© treacle was administered most of them cried* This delimited the audience, thinking It so natural (so If was)* At nine o’clock, the act over, our cruel barber threw open th© gate©, driving hia flock out, with a pleasant intimation of what, they would catch when'they arrived home* Mothers, fathers, sisters, in wild disorder, had been scouring the town for their runaways, and the police were completely puaaled, and at their wits1' end, at such whole­ sale kidnapping* Figaro wae nearly to pa to pieces when the ruse was discovered*3-00 Stirling followed his first adaptation from Nicholas Hfckleby with another, Th© Fortxmes of Smike; or, A Sequel to, Nicholas WleUletey, first performed at the Adolphi, March 2, 1840, some months after th© book had been finished. This version Includes scene© of necessity omitted from the

early work, but many members of the cast were the oa .o. Cullonford, Yates, Beverly,'Mllkinson, Mrs* Keeley, Mrs* Fosbroke# and Miss 0* Hell played, respectively, talph Sickleby, ManfcalinI* John Browdle, Squeers, Siaike, Madame Mantalinl, and Mrs# Mckldby, parts they had played successfully In the old version*

Miss George changed

parts; she had formerly been Misc Kn&gg and now was Mrs# Browdie. New actors played some of the old roles; Nicholas was acted by $avllle, Bowman Hoggs by Bucksfcone, and Kate by Miss Lee* now parts;

The revision mad© necessary some

Maynard was Brook©r| Butler, Bnawley; King,

Arthur Gride;

Bedford, Crustles; Holmes, Johnson, and

Freeborn, Charles, Ned, and Frank Cheeryble; Master Brunton, Whackford Squ©em| and Shaw, Executioner#*0^ Versions of Nicholas hickleb? soon appeared outside of London*

At the Theatre Royal, %11, tta

purely local adaptation1’ was performed on December 12, 1858, In which Mr# and Mrs# H* Mellon appeared#*0^- On January 18# 1839, Nicholas Nlcteleby was in Brighton where Mrs*

Charles Hill acted Smlke; Bradford, fqueers; Marshall, New­ man Hoggs| Hill, Mantallnij Mrs# V/atson, Kate Blckleby; and Mrs* Barnett, Madame Mantalinl* The play vms revived •}ftf! In Brighton# February 4, 1888, and October 22, 1G6B. Monday, May 20, 1839, when Dickens’ book had yet five months to g© before its final issue was to appear, was a noteworthy day, for two versions of the novel, both by unknown'authors opened at two London Theatres.

The drama,

107

Mioholas Blckleby and foor Szaikoi or, fho Viotin of the Yorkshire School, played at the Strand^9 and the burlefcba, Poor Smikes or, Dothehoy* s Hall, played at the Victoria*-^0 In November, X840, ”Quite a different version” came out at th© City of Xiondon Theatre*

In the cast were

James as Ralph Hiekleby, Seaman as Mlcholas, Miss Vincent as Smlko, '"eiton a® Oherryfele# Dibdan Pitt as Squeers, Miss hi iton a© Master Squeers , Dunn as Bawmn Hoggs, Gardner as Crummies, Master Cecil Pitt as Master Crummies, Henry Howard as Brookes, Williams as Benvillo, J* Howard as Kabo, Mrs* Moulds as Mrs* Squeera, anci i'&rs* v;ilton as Mrs* Crummies* By 1843, a French Torsion of Hieliolas Nickleby had been produced, at the Ambiqu© Comiqu© Theatre, Paris, on Jan­ uary B9*

William Makepeace Thakoray saw it and reviewed it in

Fraser1a Magagjns for March where he expresssod hie. dislike for out amusement In the alterations the French adapter had made In Biekens* But after Stirling1s version and the others which followed soon after, there was a lull in the dramatic intorest in Hi choice llekleby,« probably because there wero too many other Biokems1 books to adapt# was later revived#

However, interest in the work

In 1855, John 5# Clarke, American comedian,

presented a dramatic fragment (the author called it wnr epis­ odic sketch”) taken from the book In which, he himself gavo What ,.115 H was said to be a ^wonderfully clever impersonation of Bowman Hoggs• A Klohol&s Kickieb;' was done two years lator, in March, 1857, at the Victoria Theatre, in which the parts

were played by Henderson, W*H*Fitb, '% warlow, A* Seville, J. Bredehaw, Fred Syefield* OU Pearce, F.B, Henry, Miss Young, Mrs « barlow, Miss Bailey, Miss Edgar, Mrs* Burrowcliff, and Mrs* Kelson*

The characters of Mis,- squeers

and/ T&lcta Price did not appear In this version,

boat and Found by Walter Baynham, a dr0221a founded on Hioho las Hlclflebv* was produced at the Dunlop street The­ atre, Glasgow, the last of -June, 1861, and enjoyed a rather favourable run*

This version omitted the characters of

Mantalinl and of John Browdie and ended with the death of Smlke*

In the performance Price played Nicholas* Lloyd,

-squeers j Hamblin, Fulph Nicklebyj Fifcsroy, Newiaan ’ Hoggsj Mrs. Scnnefct, Mrs* Eieklebyj Mias Laurence, &&te$ and

Mrs* Baynham, s-mlke♦^3,s In 1864, W*B*C* Nelson did a version at Isfcley1 and on December 08, 1871, J* Daly Besemere* s three-act'drama,

potheboy* a H^lljwas acted at the Court*

In this version,

Edward Rlghton was cast as 8queers, W *J • Hill as John Browdie Alfred Bishop as Nicholas Hickloby, H* Leigh as Sn&wley, Miss S&nton as Smlke, Mrs* Stephens as Mrs♦ Squeer©, Miss Maggie Brennan as Mies squeers, and Miss Bos© Coghlan as.

1Tilda Price *3^? As the novel continued In popularity so did version of the play*

Andrew Balli&ay* g three*>uct Nicholas N.ickleby

opened on March 00, 1878, at the Adelphl where Stirling1s version had been popular years before.

And as Stirling’s

play had been successful so was Belliday*s In spit© of the foot that M&nt&lini was omitted*

The most Imp res;, ive ccone

was the great "realistic" feature of th© starting of the Yorkshire coach from the Saracen* e Head*

In the cast were

w. Reprise- as Hicholae Bickleby, James Fernandes* as Ralph Hickleby, John Clarke as Squeers, Georg© Belmore as Norman Hoggs, Saza Emery m John Brow&Ie, J#G* Shore as Brooker, S*J. Smith as Snawley, Lydia Foote as Smlko, Harriet Coveney as Mrs. Rqueers, Mrs* Alfred Mellon as Miss Squeers, Miss Hudspeth as *Tilda Price, Mrs*- Addle as Mrs* NIekleby, and Edith Stuart as Kate *3.18

s same version was revived at

the & m & theatre October 50> 1879* with Fernandes, Mis© Foote, Miss Ooveney, and Mrs* Mollon in the roles they had played earlier hut with E*H* Brooks as Nicholas, J»G* T- ylor as

queer®,Hermann ¥&$!n as Bowman Boggs, Henry Neville as

John Browdle, R* F&teman as Brooker, P*W, Irish as Snawley, Emma Heffer as Mrs* Nickleby, Emily Duncan as Kate, and Clara Jock© a© ’Tilda Price With the first appearance of Holliday1b version at the Adelphl, versions of Nicholas Hlekleby were revived in the provinces*

An American Xsqportation by an unannounced

author was acted at the Royal Amphitheatre, Liverpool, on August 28, 1 8 7 5 Sometime during the same year, H. Simms* four**act Iloholas.M c kie b y was performed in Brighton, and the next year, on May 15, was again acted, there with Prank Cooper as Squeers**^

On June 10, 1878, an "excellent pro**

ductIon" of a Nicholas Klekiehy by an unannounced author was given at the Queen1s, Edinburgh. and Mrs* J*B* Howard

V . Morgan was Squeors

as Mrs. Squeers.

170.

On September 10, 1888, a Nicholas Hlckleby, f,an episodic sketch in three tableau;*;" was acted at the Strand.

John s. Clarke, who had been Squesrs in the early

performances of Halli&ay* e version, w--s now Kewman Hogge, who evidently because the chief interest in this version.

The play, whose author is unknown, was spoken of very scathingly in Th© Era, which adds that the adaptation "is understood to have boon previously played in. th© United States,*

But even Th© Era says, "it serves a© an excuse

for some acting which la by no means to be condemned*" In the cast, other than Clarke, were Richard Pur&on as 8qu©©re,B*R* TWesdale as Ralph Blekleby, Crestoa. Clarke as lioholaa, C, Wilfred as John, Master Horton as Jenkins,

P.R, M&©n&mr& as Waiter, Marie Hudspeth as Ssaike, Miss 0, Ewell as Mrs* kqueers, and Grace Arnold as Kate Uicfcleby*^:::0 Clement Scott writes interestingly of this sketch* Dickens in a dramatic nutshell* ' This I© surely the correct description■of the vivid and powerful little sketch which profesees to skim the cream of the famous novel of Nicholas Blckleby, and to present it*—* all @plsode,'""incident, and situation-*' in the short space of an hour# It is all 'but the veriest trifle, the merest bagatelle, a summer thistledown of humour, a quick lightning flash of serious Interest; and yet how many dramas of greater pretense lack this on© strong element of humanity, which the episodic sketch In three tableaux unquestionably contains?

It says much for th© unknown dramatist, and much more for th© soundly dramatic Dickens, that it is possible to move an audience quickly and suddenly to laughter and applause by th© power of this unfinished sketch* Yet we get th© laugh­ ter and feel the interest* Th© cruel avarice of Squeersi the heartrending misery of th© children entrusted to M s earei the bold, heroic, manly front of Nicholas when he wrest© the cane from

171#

the oppressor’s hand, and thrashes him in the prosono© of his s c h o l a r s ; the pathetic isolation of Ssiike and the ever presence of the avenger, poor broken**&own sea&~lnefcriafce& Newman Hoggs are felt, and acutely felt, by all who witnessed the little play, which may be a heresy in the eyes of the admirers of Diehens, but is at any rate a leaflet well illustrated, and dictated to a true, honest and wholesome cause# Mr# John S* Clarke has evidently made a careful study of the inner nature of Newman Hoggs# H© is no buffoon, the central figure of an impassible and Incomprehensible play, a mere vehicle for get­ ting a laugh at any cost and at all hassards* Par otherwise* It is in its way one of the most ser­ ious things that this curiously versatile comedian has hitherto attempted.. Hewm&n Hoggs comas upon the stage the wretched wreck of a good man, the palsied counterfeit of M s former self. Th& twitching of his fingers, the nervous Irritability patent In his frame, the muscular contortions of M s wo ©-begone face, show the disaster that drink has caused. But the brain is not y t gone# There Is a light still left in this darkened cottage of the soul; we who watched the wreck feel that there is hope. It Is in the denunciation of his old oppressor, kalph Nlokleby, that Mr, Clarke most thoroughly gets' at the sympathies of h".s audience# Thor© has not been time to tell all that poor Hoggs has endured, but fcbo actor has conveyed much In a marvelous short space; and, taken as a whole, it Is an all too brief, but very interesting performance, pitched in the right key, and with no false notes to jar upon the moat sensitive ear#^ ^ Mearly two years later, in May, 1887, Fred Leslie played Newman Hoggs at a matinee In the Gaiety Theatre, The play was given for the benefit of Nelly Farren who played Sialk© nso exquisitely as to draw tears from a crowded house, and to receive the praise of Mrs. Keeley, the ’creator'1 of the part.,T3*£5 Versions of Nicholas Nickleby seemed thereafter not to be of much interest, but on December 19, 1906, there was produced at the Cripplegrte Institute, on the some pro ;;ra:.i

as J.W.T. Ley^s Bardellv * Pickwick* Miss I,M* Pagan’s ’ The Next Bouse, taken from kickolas. Kick*l ‘ 1**111 Gentleman In the 0 —

« - i* i

.i m wi i f

irmrmm m

iii-.l«.nrir. jr. :~ j--r

"

-

"

■

l6by,l£d A HlQholaa Nfekloby, a drama in eight tableaux, 1°7 was performed at the kehearsal, July 4, 1909* the ©Id Cur^oisl^r Shop tn Aprilp 1840f the eighty^eight weekly parts of Master Humphrey* s 01o-ck» which was to contain The Old Our** losity Sho-p- and Burnaby Bud^e, began to appear * Late in May, Frederick Fox Cooper had a version of Mas car Humph* re?1 s Clock, ®A Domes tie Drama in Two Acts* Founded on the first story in the work of Charles Dickens,” on the stage at the Victoria-*

Harding was Master Humphreyj 0*

Border, Jo© Tod&yleigh; Hicks,- Gilbert Gr&yj D*le, Master H&rgreeve Hartley| Barton, Simon Tra&elove; Handers, Chris­ topirn1 Curious; Courtney,. Dyke of the Fer-y; Morton, Jasper; Hutchinson, Marten; Mrs* Howard, Elinor; and Miss Cooke, •Alice The first acting version of The Old Curiosity Shop itself was by Edward Stirling, and it was- played at the Adelphi, November 9, 1840, before the book was completed. The day bills described the play as ®& Burletta in Two Acts; founded on the celebrated, widely circulated and universally admired papers by Bos,” but the printed play merely calls it a nd v m m in two acts” and gives it a sub*tltle, One Hour from Master Humphrey1a Clock.

The cast is a notable one.

Maynard was Master Humphrey; Thomas Lyon, the Grandfather; Wilkinson, Kit; Mrs* Keeley, Little Hell; J.F. Seville, Fred Trent; E* Wright, Dick :viveller; Frederick Yates, Quilp;

173.

Griffin, Bras®; Paul Bedford, Tom Codling hieland, Short Trotters; Master Thomas, Boy; Cuilenford, Mr. Garland; Mrs* Pears©, Mrs. Garland; Miss Lee, Mrs* Quilp; Miss 0*Neill, Mrs* Sissmottds| Mrs. Gower* Mrs, George; Miss Sidney, Mrs, Hob so law; and. Mrs* Feebrooke, Mrs* Jinwin*

The play was an

immediate success with Yates receiving much praise" but with George Wieland, Paul Bedford* and Mrs* Keeley also getting a share *

Mrs* Eeeley said that Yates was ”so horribly

real that X thought every moment he was going to pinch me*”3'30 Yates was pleased with his own work, too, for he wrote to Stirling, ’’Qjullp* ® up in the public estimation; Hell* s down*

I’ll keep her there,512*$^ ?&xen the Bath Theatre open­

ed for the season on April IS, 1841, under the management of Newcombe and Bedford, Stirling* & play was among the sev­

eral popular Adelphi performances which were produced by special arrangements with Yates, who had become the proprietor of the M#lphi*

In the oast of The Old Curiosity Shop were

several who played in the original performance: Mr.and Mrs# Yates, Bedford, Wright, Wieland, and Lyon*3-32* The next version was not performed until some years later when a dramatisation by an unknown author was done by W.T# Smith at Drury Lane, October 4, 1B53.3-33 It was not until 1870, however, that the £>lay on The Old Curiosity Shoo which was to begin a series of adapt­ ations finally appeared*

On November 19, Andrew Halliday*s

Hell; or. The Old Curiosity Shop was played at the Olympic with such success that T* Edgar Pemberton called it ”one of

174.

the beat adaptations from Dickens that has boon seen in the theatre*1 and John Forster, in speaking of the play, said ^EaXliday was the best adapter of Dickens to the stag©*” The performance was highly satisfactory, too# The late John Clarke was a wonderful Qullp* In make-up and in dress, he perfectly realised the well-known illustrations of •Phis,* and the iinfortraxi&t© lameness which somewhat- Liarred the majority of M s late performances, in this part only added to its elfish grotesqueness * and ghoulish power# It was a marvellous reproduct­ ion of the combined conception of artist and author# In the same excellent version* ♦*#George Bolmora displayed both force and pathos as the Grandfather and almost all the characters were satisfactory ly played**. Florence ferry# sister of Ellen Terry, was in the cast as Little Hell# ho one who saw It (the play) will forget the exquisite pathos and tenderness with, which she endowed the character of the sorely tried, yet always g©nfcle~©oul©d and trusting child*##.do doubt she was helped by the deeply impressive and affecting port'* rayal by George Belmor© of the weak-minded but affectionate old grandfather* The two made a perfect picture* The Qnilp of the cast, in the person of clever John Clark, Is a thing that, In its effective, savage, grotesque, and always true realism, haunts the memory**^ Among the other member© of the cast were Dsvid Fisher a© Dick Swlveller, D* Blakely as Sampson Brass, George Billot as Kit, H* St* Maur as Fred Trent, E*W, Garden as Short, Builev as Codlia, E* E'ewbOund as Jowl, H* Jordan av Tom Scott, Char­ lotte Saunders as lira* Jarley, Mrs# Poynfcer as Sally Brass, 211 aa Johnstone as The Marchioness, Mrs. Joseph living as Mrs* Quilp, Miss Biwell as Mrs* Jinlwin, Mis:. Sutherland a© * |.

Mrs* George, Mias Ashton as Mrs# Simraonds• H&lliday*a play led to others, especially in the

provinces#

A drama called Grand fath er1a

LI111o Cell

war

played at the Theatre Royal# Bristol, December 3# 1-370»

1 ay

Two days later, on December 5# a play founded on The Old Curiosify Shop was acted In Brighton, Charles Connell1s four-act drama# Dick Swiveller,, Fennels hlms.-lf, wa clever but eccentric actor#11 probably played tho leading role,^5^ Plays called Little Hell were acted In Brighton# October 20, 1871 # and August 15# 1872*3.*^ The. -Old Curio© 1.tv Shop; or* The. Life end .Death of Idttie Hell* a drama by R* Sidney# w performed at the Norwich Theatre loyal# February 6, 1871,^° and Gentle Holly* a drama# was acted at the Bradford Theatre Royal# April 8# 1871

At ‘the Prince of Wales’s Theatre,

WoIverhampton, on April 10, 1871, Qu IIp i or* The Wanderings of Little Dell,by ?,C3> Paulton'was p e r f o r m e d Poor Hell* by Edward Price was given at the Aberdeen Theatre Royal, November IB, 1872,^® and at the Liverpool Theatre Royal, May 1, 1878*^^

.During tho season of 1873-1874, John

Clarke and his wife, hiss Furb&do, acted in Birmingham, at the Theatre Royal, in an adaptation of The Old Curiosity J|oo£*

' nMr, Clarke, as Qnllp, seemed to have stepped out of

the story on to the stage,®-^^

George Lander gave The Old

Curiosity Shop. at the Theatre Royal, York, on May 14, 1877, in which Katie Logan doubled the parts of the Marchioness and Little Hell»

Supporting her were Miss E* Miller, Miss

Oliph Webb, and Dunean Campbell# whit Hogerson, C*H. Stevens, T*W, F.ogereon, and Jessie St# G l a i r , I n March, 1331, Fred J* Stimson toured the provinces commencing at Liverpool with a version of The Old Curiosity Shop prepared by Josoph lu&ckay and Horace Leraiard

176.

In the midst of all of theso provincial performances,

a few versions appeared in London,

Murray Wood1c four-act

drama, Little Nolly, was written for M s wife, Virginia Black­ wood, who first played it at the Surrey, November 83, 1072, as one of a series of plays based on Dickens1 works,

himself played the Grandfather -and Dick Sv/iveller,

'food In 1877,

Miss Blackwood revived,the play at the Koy&l lark Theatre, Westiains ter .~‘ *Q

'During 1S73, Mrs. Jarley* s Far-Paired Vjf-x-

works by (KB* Bartlett was also given in London,^9 Charles Dickens, junior, tried M s hand at writing a version of M b father* s novel, which was given at the Opera Gomlcju©, January 12, IBM, with considerable sue cos;: ,160 The author himself was not too pleased, however, for he says that his work “was deprived of any merit It may have possess­ ed by the interpolation by the American lady for whom I wrote the piece (she doubled Nell and the Marchioness) of a preposterous act from a ridiculous version by Mr. John 151 Brougham, which she had been accustomed to play In the States,” The Aatarlaan Actress, Lott a (Crabtree), was variously praised and criticised for her double performance.

Mrs* Keoley went

to see her twice and was apparently well pleased.

The first

time the originator of the part of Little Loll commented on Lotts,. wShe is a genuine artist*

But 1 like her best as the

Marchioness, and I laughed immoderately at It. Nell was also fairly good. or ‘dual* parts in plays*

Hor Little

But I don* t approve of 1doubles* 12 ?

They never answer on the stage.”

T* Edgar Pemberton did not care for doubling -Ithem, for “the result has always been disastrous to one or o thor of

177, tho two characters, and sometimes to both*

Poor Hell,

however, has generally boon the greator sufferer.*

He

©specially did not eeom to car© for Lotta* s doubling, but ho did like Frank Wyatt as Dick Swlveller* of the cast wares

Other members

Robert Pat©roan as Qullp, Howard Russell

as Brass, 5'banislaus Calfcaeia as Grandfather, Cecil Tu?yn© as Fred Trent, T. Merridew as Mr* Witherdesoi, Henry as Jowl, James as Mat, J * Phipps as Slum, Charles Coot© as Kit# Fanny Coleman as Sally Brass, Miss I1. Laris as Mrs* Jarley, and Bella Howard as Mrs* Quilp*!^ Ho more nineteenth century versions of The Old Curiosity Shop appeared, but several were written early in the twentieth century.

Little Hell, a play in four acts,

by X>. James, was acted at St* Leonard1s Pier Pavilion, January 20, 1902,155

Alfred M* Dalor*s domestic drama.

An Angel on Bartha founded on The Old Curiosity Shop, was played at the St, Helen* s Theatre Royal, Feb m a n y 12, 1902, and again on September I , 1 **6

L|ttl© Hall, a four-act. play

by 0. Brand, was performed at the Grand, February 23, 1903$*^ Ifffya Little Msirolilon.ess. a sketch adapted by B* Soane Roby, was at the Liverpool Olympia, October 2, 1906, and at the Shepherd’s Bush Empire, November

6

, 19055

The Old Cur*

tostty Shop In a four*act arrangement was given at the Crip-

plegate Institute# April 12, 1906 Of the versions not readily dated are that by Charles Rice $hyt©*^® and that found in the first volume of *Peter Parley1'e Ferny Library,11 edited by Samuel Good­ rich under th© pseudonym of Peter Parley*

Farley* s work

consisted priuuarily of 11a number of selections from the novel in the form of dialogues to be recited and given as scenes and small plays#

Dickens naturally was greatly

incensed at this wholesale piracy and said so, which had the result of giving him considerable satisfaction*1’^ ^

As with all of the Dickens novels already dis­ cussed, Ba.rnaby Fuda® was put on the stag® before all the novel had yet appeared in print * The first adaptation was written by men who had not previously dramatized any Dickens novel, or any other novel for -that matter, and war* not to do any other than this one In spit® of the fact that one of th© collaborators, Charles lelby, wrs n prolific play­ wright#

Charles Melville was co-author*

The drama, some­

times described as lf& musical entertainment,* Burnaby Budge was acted at th© English Opera Hons© (Lyceum), Juno 28, 1841, with some success.

In this performance Hobson w*a Geoffrey

H&rodalej Selby, Mr# Chester$&ve®n, Edward Chester^ Moore, Feakeri Tumour, John Willetj T» Green, Joe Billotj Thompson, Solomon Daisy! King,, Phil Farteesf Fleimrdng, Tom Cobb; -Granby, Gabflel Varden| S# Smith, Black Kugh| Searlo, Simon T&pperfcit; Miss Fortescue, Barnaby’Fudgo, Snlfcer, The stranger* Mrs, Granby, Mrs# Vardan* Mrs, Harris, Higgs* Miss FitsJames, Dolly Varden|. Mis,, Granby,Mim Mrs# Budget

Haredale* and Mrs* Selby,

Both Dickons himself, and. Mac ready were apparent 1

pleased with Miss Forteseue* & interpretation of Barnaby*^^

179*

The history of tho other early versions of the novel is? somewhat confused,. toy George Alrnar at the Su*

FifcsGeralct speaks of a version but no other mention of an

AXiu&r play on the s'uhject was found and it is not included in the list of Almar1s plays given toy Kicoll*^*

Flts-Gei’ald

also indicates that a version of Barnaby fouflgo played at the Strand in August, 1841 a was toy Monerieff #185

no adapt­

ation of Burnaby hatl^o is found in the list of Moncrleff*a plays,^^ iso other mention has been found of such a play toy him, and indeed it is doubtful that he adapted any more novels after his 11 oho las liokletoy* a circumstance previously men­ tioned in this chapter.

She Bamabv Budge at the Strand on

August 8, 1841, is sometimes afctritaited to Edward Stirling, and it might toe toy Stirling since he was likely to toe among the first to adapt a new Dickens novel*

But he did not usual­

ly write for tk© Strand and apparently is the author of the Barnajtoy p&d^e given under Tate* s management at the Adelphl, December 20* 1841*

It is somewhat more likely that this

is Stirling* s version, for lie commonly wrote for the Adolphus and, unless the Strand version is also toy M m or Is the same play as that given toy 'Tates* company, the author of the Strand version is unknown In the Adelpfcl play, Hiss Chaplin was Burnaby Budge, Wilkinson wa&.-John Willefe, Paul Bedford was Gabriel Varden, 0* Smith was Maypole Hugh, and Edward Wxdght was Simon Tapperttt *

Sir .John Chester and Higgs were at first doubled

toy Frederick Tatos, but after a few weeks Higgs was acted toy Miss Chester and Sir John Oho ©ter toy Hr* Gullenford*

180 * Mrs. Yates played Dolly Vo. ■-am. production:

The Mra said of this

"This Is, we believe, tho fourth dramatic *

version but this adapter had the advantage of referring to the complete work* in eonsocutIvene® s•

The present adaptation is wanting The piece was much applauded during

Its progress, and continued In the hill for somo If the statement in The Bra is correct, that the Adelplii play Is the fourth adaptation, perhaps the editors included the play, Sarnab-y Kudge.; or, The Fatal, 19th of March, which ran for nineteen night® at the Aclelphi, Edin­ burgh, from September IS, 1841, to the close of the season, October 28.

In this play, Mrs. Toilet was B & m & b y # ^ ®

The

only other performances of a Burnaby Fudge outside of London 171 were those at Brighton, August 14-19, 1848* Other early versions of Burnaby Fudge also offer pussies*

Charles Dillon was evidently the author of a

dramatisation 1b which he played the title role and which was given at the Olympic and & t the Queen* s Theatre about 1884#

In the erst were H* Yiddleomb, Wilkins, Manders,

Harwood, Mrs* Cambell, Mrs# 1* Parry, and Mrs# Lrighbson#*^2 .Another dramatisation which cannot bo surely dated or assigned a theatre is the thre©*act drama, Barn&by Ihjt&ge: or, ‘ The Murder at the T-rren* by Thomae Higgle.

In this play, Mr*

Geoffrey HarMaiewas acted by Fltsroy, Mr# Chester by Higgle, Edward Chester by W*B* Sterling, The Stranger by Chamberlain, •Bamaby Budge by Mrs* Tr&ylett, Gabriel Varden by Tilbury, Simon Tappertit by E* Wi&dlcomb, John Millet by Gordon, Joe Fillet by Davis, Maypole Hugh by Craven, Solomon Daisy by

131, Bsgera, Short ‘Tom Cr&bb by Fiiiber, Long Phil Paries by Richardson, Mrs# Rudge by Mrs. Gordon, Ihnma Har-e&ale by Hiss Brown, Mrs* Warden by Mrs* Higgle, Miggs by Miss Plunkett, Dolly Vardan by Mrs* R*M» Raymond, and Peaker by Mr* Doughty*

Fit a-Gerald says he has % o t been able

to discover when or whore this play 7/as produced/1 but indicated that Thomas Hailes Lacy owned the copyright and that the British Museum date stamp is June 5, 1856* He surmise© that it may hay© been performed at tho Old Strand or tho Surrey*^® Henry Visaing and Watts Phillips were the authors

of a four* act Barnabv Bucfoe which was acted at the- Princess % Theatre, November 12, 1865, with but poor success*

Katherine

Rogers was B&maby Fudge; Charles Boreman, Maypole Hugh* . Stanislaus Calhaem, Simon Tapperfcit; G.H* Fenton, Joe Fillet; J,0, Shore, Sir John Chester; Henry Forrester, Mr* Haredal©;

Frederick Vtlller®, The Strangerj E* shepherd, Gabriel Vardan; E* Mellon, John Wlllefc; W,R* Robins, Tom Cobb; R* Chapman, Parkes; Mrs, Horsman, Mrs* V&rden; Mrs* John

V/ood, Higgs; Mrs* fit* Vinlng, Mrs, Budge; end Augusta Thompson, Dolly

Vardan

Mrs* Wood played Miggs %ith a great deal

of spirit but not in the spirit of Dickons, for she made a

regular Yankee girl of it, accent and all***1175 Clement Scott makes an interesting comment on the play and on Mrs* Wood. How curious are the first memories of actresses who have since become famous* My first recollection of Mrs* John Wood is a pair of black legs sticking out of a barrel1 * She was playing Miss Miggs in a ver­ sion of Barnaby Budge at the Princess1s— and a dread­ ful failure it was; but failure or not, X have a vivid recollection of the black legs sticking out of the barrel, like pigeons in a pie* 176

182.

On April 291 1872, Murray Food8s Dolly Varden, a drama in four acts, was clone at tho Bradford Theatre Koyal, and on October 8* it opened at the Surrey*

Edward

Chester was acted by B*T# Tempest; Gabriel Warden, by S. Heed; Sir John Chester by Henry Lee; Geoffrey Earedale, by Charles Cecil; Solomon Daisy, by H* Jay©; John Fillet, by W, cfcacey; Joe AllXeb, by Clark© Nicholson; Simon Tapperfclt, by Harry Cornwall; The Stranger, by W.P* Gresham; Dolly Warden and Miss Higgs, by Virginia Blackwood; Mrs. V&rden, by &?&, A.H, Lacy; Mrs. Budge, by Blanch© Marlborough; Emma Haredsle, by Miss Eversfleld; and Bamaby Fudge, by Rachel Mellor * When the play « as revived at Astley1s, April 30, 1878, Reed, Cornwall, Blanche Marlborough, and Virginia Blackwood acted their old parts, but with them wore H.S* Granville a© Mr. Chester, F* B&thtaurst m

Edward Chester,

S&ward Cbas&srl&ln as Geoffrey Hared&le, B.H. Bingham a© The Stranger, Bailie Blackwood as B'.rn&by Fudge, H. Williams as John WHlet, Frank

as Joe willot, 3VW* Robertson

as Maypole Hugh, J*B, Johnston© as Solomon Daisy, H, Crich­ ton as Tom Cobb, P* Anstead as the Warden, Miss S* Pyne as Easma Haredalc, and Fanny Wright as Mrs.

m e n *3-1717

The proprietor of the Karylobone, Joseph Arnold Cave, produced M s own four-act drama, Burnaby Fudge» on November 11, 1876*^^

Dolly Varden; or. Tho Riots of fSO,

a 81comedy opera-" in two acts, written and composed by B* Cympson, w m done at the Brighton Aquarium, November 4, ldBQ.1*7^ nj q q

Another opera on th© subject was given at the Opera Comique,

0

183 +

and still another, this on© by Stanislaus Strange, at the Avenue,, October 3., 1903+

This two*-act comic opera had

originally been played in America#**

At least two .core

derivations of Burnaby Budge were given*

Dolly* s Birthday*

a drama with musical episodes, written and composed by Willie Bonn was placed at the Camberwell Empire, July 15, 19071 and Dolly Warden + a comedy in three acts by W, Dexter, was acted at the Bmm&rsmXth* a King* a, December IB, 1007 A Christmas parol After the first productions of The Old Curiosity '-hop and Bam&by lhr%e+ there was a lull in the appearance of new works to- adapt, for Dickens was making M s tour of America and writing hie American Ifc.fc.es*. But in 1843 he began the aerie® of five Christmas books which wore, of course, seised upon by the adapters* The first of these, A .Christmas Carol# had four versions made of it in February, 1844.,

At least two and

possibly three dramatisations opened in London theatres on the same day, Monday,- February 5, 3.®® so that this time Stirling was not the first to write the new Dickens play but almost the first*

At least he had sought and received

Dickens* pa remission to dramatis© the story, so that the playbills announced that it was wthe only dramatic version Sanctioned by 0* Dickens, Ksqre +11 Be also invited Dickens to attend some rehearsals and records, Dickens attended several rehearsals, furnishing valuable suggestions# Thinking to make Tiny Tim (a pretty child) usere effective, X ordered a set of iron© and bandages for his supposed weak log# When Dickons saw this tried on the child, ho took

184 *

me aside; 1Ho, Stirling, no; this won’t doV re­ member how painful, it would he to many of the audience having crippled children*’ Even though he may have made some suggestions, Dickens was evidently not too happy about Stirling* b Adelphi version and its performance« He wrote to John Ferater, nt saw the C rol last night*

Better than usual, and Fright soeais

to enjoy Bob Crat chit, but beart-bx^eaklng to me*

Qh Heaven1 #

if any forecast of this was ever in my mind1 * Yet 0, Smith was drearily better than I expected.

It is a great comfort

to have that kind of meat over-done; and his face Is quite perfect*”^®5

Evidently when Dickens consented to the drama**

tlsatlon he did not anticipate what seemed' to M m to be a poor perfonuance*

Instead of being divided Into five ^Staves” as the story la, the play has hub three, corresponding to acts*

The cast is extensive with some members appearing

In all ”Staves” and with some doubling from, on© to the other*

In "Stave the Firsts* The First of Three Spirits,”

0* Smith was Ebeneser Scroogei Wright was Bob 0ratchit; S*Smith, Feseiwigf Johnson, Dllworfch; Master Bightfoot, Master Scroogei Braid and Leslie, Young Scrooge and Dick Wilkins|. Honey, Post Boyj Shaw, Fiddler; Master Mouncer, The Dirty Little Boy from Over tho Fay; Mrs# Wooledge, Mrs# Feaslwigi Mias Fbolgar, Bella Morion; Miss E* chaplain, The Ghost of Christmas; Miss Mott, Little Pen; and, of course, there were other characterss

Mary, the Tenant;

Sally, the Cook; Friends and neighbors.

In "Stave the

Second-** The Second of the Three Spirits,” 0. Smith and

185*

Fright continued as Scrooge and Crafcchifc*

Maynard was

Xfophew Fred; Mae tors Brunt on and Scott wore Master Peter and Master Tom; Jones was Sea Captain; Miss Maynard was Tiny Tim; Crane, Vision of Doom; Holmes, W-nfc; Mrs# F# Matthews, Mrs* Bob Cratchifc; Mies Lee, Martha; Miss 0* Hicks, Belinda; Miss Johnson, S:?.lly; Foimmn, The Ghost of Christmas Present*

Bough and Bains were Mariners and a

host of others were Butchers, Grocer®, Ballad Singers, Passengers, Waterman, Small Purchaser®, Visitors, and tho Ilk©*

In "Stave the Third—

The Last of bh

Spirits,"

0. Smith, Fright, Maynard, Master Brunfcen, Miss Maynard, Mrs# P# Matthews, and ilies Lee appear in the

i m

roles

they have had In either or both of the other "Staves." Several actor© change roles and several new ones a re Introduced* $ under© Is Old Joe, Aldridge and Freeborn are Mr, Topper and Mr* Floss, Honey is Blink, Mrs# Wool-

edge is Mrs* Dlbler, Miss Butler is Mrs# Ford, Miss Wil#* "Icv:

shir® Is Snlby, ami M?A» D# Lee Is The Spirit of the Future* It m m probably Stirling’s play which?/as acted at the Theatre Keyal, Edinburgh, beginning February 26, 1844, and running eleven nl :hts; for Stirling had m n t a copy to Murray, the manager of the Edinburgh Theatre, who wrote to Stirling M e and his company’ s tearful pleasure in tho adapt­ ation*

In the perfonaanc.ee, Murray played Scrooge and Lloyd,

Bob Crafcchits*18? Stirling’s version was revived at the A&elphI, ■January 14, I860, under the management of Benjamin Lobster* and with J.L. Toole as Bob Gratebit, Tool© was "a hit® but the

*

286. children eating goose and pudding at the performances made such a hit with him that lie not only enjoyed himself but wrote elaborate descriptions of the sc -ne.3-®& C«2.« Barnett, w ho had previously done some dream**

tlsing of 'Dickens, was the author of A Christmas Carol a or, fffee Miser* a Warning, which was acted at the Surrey the same day Stirling* s opened at the Melpfcl, Monday, February 5, 1 8 4 4 The east is less elaborate than that at the Adelpiri*

B* Honnar wr.s Scrooge^ J»T, Johnson, Frank Freeheart; Haw* kins, Mr* Cheerly^ Green, Mr. ‘ Heart lyj Vale, Bob Cratehltj

Stilt, Dark Sam| Lawler, Buston* Dixie,Mr* Fessiwigf Cold** smith, O M

Joe# Morrison, The Ghost of Jacob Marl© f Lewis,

the Ghost of Christmas Fasti Hoelop, the Ghost of dhrlstms Present| (name not given), the Ghost of Christmas to Come# Miss Daly, Feter* Master Brady, Tiny Tlm$ Miss Hicks, Mfs*

Freebearft# Mrs* H, Hughes, Ellen ji and Mr©., Daly, Mrs* Cratchi Barnett wrote in the preface to his printed versions This Dramatic Sketch is adapted from Mr, Charles Dickens* a very charming *Christmas Carol** pub* 11 shad by Messrs, Chapman and Hall, Strand, The extreme necessity*-(the consequence of its high and deserved popularity) «-that so imperatively called for ita representation #pon tho Stage,: has also demanded its publication as a Drama,\ •which it is the Adapter* & sincere wish, as it Is M s conviction, will considerably augment the sale of the original lovely and human!zing creation upon which it was founded.1^1 Was Barnett attempting to assuage any possible wrath on the part of Dickens** wrath such as tied been vented on Mon rieff--

becauee his play had not been given the sanction of Dickons as Stirling1 s had?

187* It Is possible that another version of A Christmas Carol was being acted at the Sadler*s Wells on February 8, 1844* a version in which Henry Karston was playing Scroogei9^ Bat at least another version appeared in London only a weak after Stirling*s and Barnett1s versions. oi> jk hream of the

A Christmas Csrolj

Fresenfc. and Future* a drama by an

unnamed author* opened at the Strand* Monday* February 12* 1844,198*

For some years no new drsraafcigabions of Jk Olirl straas C m l are listed* but at Christmastime* 1859* an extravaganza on the subject was given at the Melphi*^9^

An undated

version* ji Chris tjet&a Carol»

Ghost Stpry in Four Staves*

was arranged by J* Edward Parrott*

It was primarily for

amateur performance and had. introduced into its dialogue various Christmas hymns and earola,^95

A Christmas Carol

has also appeared in dramatic form in languages other than English* A Japanese version and an Esperanto version have been written*

The Esperanto play Is fljCristnaska Sonoracios

Krlatnaska Rakenta do la Glora Angla Autora Charles Dickens Esperantigit® do Martyn \*reebcofcfc*wi$6 An early twentieth century adaptation was written t>y J*C * Bucks tone and performed at the Vaudeville Theatre, October 3* 1001*

In this one*act play* Samuel Hicks was

Scrooge Wumeron® other dramatizations must have appeared* for the story was an exceedingly likely subject especially for amateur adapters and actors.

Martin Chugslew!t The adapter© of Martin Chugglewlt,. although several of them had previously adapted novels of Dickens, were more patient than usual* for although the novel had begun to appear In monthly parts in January* 1845* and was completed in July* 1844, no adaptation appeared until the month the novel was finished* within the month*

And then four were shown

A:;, was frequently true, Stirling* s

version was first* on July 8, 1844* but two others appeared on July IB and the fourth on July 89*

So Martin, Chusglewifc

could have been seen in at least four London theatres* in version® by four different playwrights* all within the month when the last double issue of the novel was circulated Perhaps the delay in adapting the novel may be accounted for in that there seemed to be something less wultable for the stage in it than in Dickens* previous works* Even the Its©leys* who haci already made reputations for them­ selves as interpreters of Dickens on the stage, were fearful of it« In answer to a letter suggesting that he would write a Martin Chugglewit for performance at the Lyceum Theatre* which Robert and Mary lie©ley were no?/ managing* Stirling received the following from Robert Keeleys

"Mary and I

have redd carefully Dickens* s work; we cannot see our way in a piece from it.

But if you like to go on* do.

You have

done so much with Dickens*s works* try again.11 Stirling then says* **I went on* luckily for the keeleys. 880 nights, clearing £ 8000,*198

The piece ran

'Martin Chuzgjewifc, in

189, spite of doubts, was definitely a success* It was evidently dramatised for the Lyceum with Dickens* .permission, for Keeley wrote to Dickens asking him to write a prologue for the play,

Dickens* reply Indicates

something of his feelings about adaptations, about the Koelsys, mid about Martin thinsslew It on the stage, I cannot, consistently with the opinion I hold and ■always have hold in reference to the principle of adapting novels for the stage, give you a prologue to Chueglewlt# But, believe me to fee quite sincere in saying that if 1 felt I could reasonably do such, a thing for anyone I could do It for you, I start to Italy on Monday, but if you have a piece on the stage, and rehearse on Friday, I will gladly come down at any time you may appoint In that morning, and go through it with you all..* I presume Mrs* K#©loy will do Euth Pinch* If so, 1 feel sure about her, and of your Mrs* Gamp,I am certain but a queer sensation begins in ray legs, and comes up to my forehead when I think of Tom Pinch *109 When Dickens attended that rehearsal, he must have been a little disappointed to find that Mrs* he©ley was not Ruth Pinch (a Miss Groves played the role) but not disap­ pointed in Eeeley1© interpretation of Mrs* Sairey Gamp, a part for which Keeley feecane famous*

But perhaps Dickens

did not see ■ICeeley In rehearsal* Mr* Augustus TouXoin, an old playgoer and Intimate friend of the Keeleye, tells me that ho was present at the opening night of Martin Chuggjewit at the Frlncees*s {ale), when Keeley appeared for the first time in M s famous part of Mrs# Gamp, and that his fellow-players were so amused at his make-up for the part, which they had not yet seen, that they were seized with an uncontrollable fit of daughter, and the curtain had to fee lowered till they had sufficiently recovered for the piece to fee continued. But Keeley never moved a muscle, or budged an inc., and seemed utterly unconscious of the cause of their merriment

190* Mrs* Keeley also writes of the success of her husband as Mr s. Gamp . But h5*s greatest creation was undoubtedly Sairey Gamp, a M nothing like it was ever done before, or has been since*# As my husband played It, there was no Indication of the man, either in dress, speech, or looks* It was the character drawn by Dickens, though without carlcatvu*e or the least sign of exaggeration*^9^ When this much praised three-act drama opened at the Lyceum# July 8, 1 8 4 4 , it had am extensive east which helped, of course, to give It Its success*

Pu Youngs

was Old Martin Ohuzslewitj F* Vining, •Young Martin Chuzslewit| Sam Emery, Jonas Cirazzlewit# P* Matthews, Pecksniff* A* Wigan, Montague Tigg# Meadows, Tom Pinch* Staunton, Lewsowe# Kinlo-ck, John Westlock* Sanders, Mark T&pley# Turner, ladget* Yarnold# Jenkins* Clifton, Hobble| Freeborn, Gander* King* Wilson* Mrs. Keeley, Master Bailey; Andrews, Bullamy| Miss Forfceecue, Mary Graham# Miss Woolgar, Mercy* Mrs* A* Wigan, Charity* Miss Groves, Ruth Pinch* Mrs, Usher, Mrs* Lupin* Mrs* Woolldge, Mrs. Todgers* and J*W* Collier, Betsey Prigg(jJxi •Mrs* Harris—

The program lists

a fiction-- by nobody11 and Passengers, Bell-

Stickers, Newsvendors, Porters, Cabmen, Watermen-- by Everybody and Every tsaing *fi This version of Martini Obngglowlt went to the AdelphI, Edinburgh , as Stirling1'• version© of Dickons had gone before. The play opened there August 28, 1844.

Jonas was acted by

Glover# Pecksniff by Kay# Montague T1 :g by W . Howard; Mark Tapley by Melrose* Snirey damp by Lloyd, and Betsey Pi’Igg by Miss Bicol,

®Th© Salrey Gamp of Lloyd was an Immense succei9';,,

101. One of the versions of Martin Cbuaslowit given on July 15 may have been by Thorns Higgle and Thoms Hallos Lacy,^^

’ The ono at the Victoria had in Its cast J * Dal©,

Osto&ldiston, Maynard, Seaman, J* Vining, Miss Vincont, Mrs* Garrick, Mrs. G-* Lee, and Mias Hamilton*

Mrs* Gamp.2^

J» Herbert played

Charles Webb was the author of the play given

at the Strand on the same day*^0^

Of this version 'diirunel

writes that he recalls 11a clever, jolly-looking man named H* Hall, who doubled the character® of Pecksniff and Mrs*

Gamp, and one Roberts, who made an excellent Tigg*lr In the company were also AyIlff© as Old Martin Chussalewit, W* Searle as Anthony C&uz&lswit, Attwood a© Jonas, Ranoe as Martin, Conway a® Chuffy, Cockril as Bailey, Mi ss FItzjamas as Mercy, Mrs* C. Melville as Charity, and Mrs* Smythe as Mrs* Lapkin.

Later Mrs* Montgomery played Mercy

The Martin Chug,slewit which opened at the Queens’, July 89, 1844, m y also be toy Thomas Higgle and Thoms Halloa Laey,£G9

In the cast at the Queens’ were Royer a® Peck­

sniff, Johnson as Anthony, C* Williams as Jonas, Horton as Martin Chuzzlowit, J. Reynold® as Tom Pinch., Gray ae Mark Tapley, J* Parry as Montague Tlgg, Edwards as Chuffey, Hr®* brighten as Bailey, Manders as Mrs. Gamp, Mies Stokor as Mary Graham, Miss Gough as Charity, Mies Rogers as Mercy,

and Mrs* Menders a® hupkin.^-0 Martin Chugglewlt began to appear in the provinces In 1844.

On August 51, at the Brighton Theatre, David ;o was

Pecksniff* Buckingham, Tom Pinch* Hoskins, Tigsf Munyard, Jonas * and Horncastle, PaXrey Gamp •

In Glasgow at tho

Strand sometime between 1846•*-1849, Alexander produced a version, playing Montagu© Tigg himself and Importing H o m y Hall to double the parts of Pecksniff and Sairey .-Samp as he had previously don© in London*®^*5 At the Royal, Birming­ ham, during the season of 1669-70, John Clark© and his wife Miss Furt&do, played a repertory of pieces which included a Sforfcin Ctmgglewifc with Clark© as Salrey Oaap.

Clarke had

previously played Satrey in London and would play her again many times both in London and the provinces and always with great success*

A commentator says, BClarke presented a

Mrs* Gamp with whom Dickens himself, in spite of his wallknown horror of the adaptations of M s novels, would have been content#*^®

a four-act drama on Martin Chussldv/lt

was written for the Theatre Royal, Oxford, by Harry Simms and was played there on Easter Monday (April 29.,} 1878* This play vra© acted in other provincial cities bat did not come to London,2^

A play BMrs* Gamp1s Party® was

sometime performed at Manchester* In London, playwrights were giving their attentions to the dramatic possibilities of Sairey Gamp*

Edward Stirling

who had already written a full-length adaptation of Martin Qhugglewlt» wrote a one-act farce, Mrs, Harris, vliich was acted at the Lyceum, Thursday, October 22, 1846, with John O’! Clarke as Sairey, a part he mad© fatuous* Benjamin Lobster was not to be outdone and so wrote another ono-act farce, Mrs * Sarah Gamp1s Tea and Turn-out, which was played at the Adelphi, Monday, October 26, four days after Stirling1s wss

195, done at the Lyceum*

In the cast Cullenforcl played Magnus

Mufff Worrell, Charley Muff j Kednon Ky&n, Patrick Moriarity; Wright, Sarah Gamp* Munyard, Betay Pidggi Pllen Chaplin, Selina Gamp} and Miss M* Taylor, Mrs* Moriarlty*83-7After a lapse of some years, a new adaptation of Martin Gfauzalwlt appeared in London*

This one, acted March

23 1868, at the Olympic tap by Horace Wigan,

In the cast

war© H, Vaughan as Martin Chusglewit, John Maclean as Anthony, Horace Wigan as Jonas, Addison as Pecksniff, J.CJ* Taylor as Tom Pinch, K. Soutar as Mark Tapley, G* Vincent as Montague Tigg, Belli© Parren as Bailey, John Clark© as Mrs, damp, Louisa Moore as M&ry Graham, Miss D*Late as Charity,Mrs* Lennox Grey as Mercy, Mrs, Lewis as Mrs* Lupin, and Mrs* Caulfield as Mrs, Todgers*^^ A few years later another short sketch on Mrs* Gamp appeared in London*

3a&roy Gamp was performed at the

Adelphi, March 22, 1875, with J*B* Buckston©*s Jack Sh©£pard*. John Clarke again played Mrs# Gamp and C»J, Smith was Betsey Prigg,23$ On March. 10, 1881, Joseph J# Dilley and Lewis Clifton*b three-act domestic comedy, Tom Pinch* was acted at the Vaudeville*

Opinions of its success are various

but It was at least good enough to be revived at tho st, James* Theatre, September 5, 19G5*220

At tho first production

there was an interesting note on the programs The Authors think it desirable to state that they have not attempted to dramatise the novel of wMarfcin Ohu&sslewib*1* They have simply taken one thread of the story, and have converted it into an acting play.

194#

staking alterations in Incident and dialogue only whore "they have been found necessary, or for the sake of dramatic effect# Funch did not like tho alterations and said as imach in the typical Punch manner* Those who have seen 1Tom Finch* at the Vaudeville will readily understand, why, as a rale, the late Charles Dickens so strongly objected to the drama­ tisations of his works# 'The piece now playing under this title might just as well have been called 1Tom Anybody1— say Tom *All-Alone#* The stage is said to hold the mirror up to Mature| in this case the glass used has been of rather inferior quality* The result Is a somewhat distorted reflection of an episode in *'Martin Ohussslewit ** Mr* Tom Thorne appears in the bills ae Mr* Tom Pinch, but, in spite of a wig of very peculiar construction, M s identity i© not at all the real article,'but Plncb-beek* Th© Pecksniff of Mr# William Farren is sketchily suggestive of Sir Fetor Te&sle in m o d e m costume, and the representatives of Cherry and Merry consolentiously preserve that reputation for burlesque which the Vaudeville enjoyed In the early days of Its management* Fifcss-Gerald disagrees with Punch and says that Charity and Mercy (the Cherry and Merry of Fundi) “were most admirably acted by two'exceptionally clever actresses, Miss Sophie Larkin and Miss Cicely Richards*B

He adds that the parts

,of Mary Graham by Kate Bishop and Kuth Finch by Lydia Cowell wore well played, that Clement Scott liked Tom Thorne as Tom Pinch#, and fchatE*J* Willard liked the play wellenough to add it to his repertoire and to play it all over the w o r l d I t

was Willard who revived the play at tho St.*

James* in 1903*

But Austin Brereton seems to agree with

Funch» wAs a comedy, or indeed as a dramatic work of any kind, Torn Pinch does not merit serious consideration.

It

was, in fact, an excuse for the appearance on the stage of a few of tho characters from Martin Chugsiewlt .”862

in the cast

195* other than the persons already mentioned were John Maclean as Old Martin Ciiuzzlewit, J*R* Crawford as John Westlock, W* Lestocq as Mark Tap ley, J*G> Grahame as Martin Chus alev/ifc, Miss E. Palmer as Jane

OO

Among the other plays on Martin Chug2 lewit is on© played and published In Germany in 1864, Tartuffe Junior* Oder Martin Gelclermann and Seine Brben 1

Lutspiel In funf

Aufsugen. Von H. Chr* L. Klein, and a five-aet comedy in verse whose author and performances are unknown * The Chimes Charles Dickens himself authorised Gilbert a Beckett and Mark Lesion to dramatize The Chimes and, in consequence, The Chimes s A Goblin Story of Some Bells that Ran& an Old Year out and a Hew Year in, A Drama in Four Quarters, was produced at the Adslphi 'Theatre, December 19, 1844* great success*

The play was a

”!t affected everybody very deeply, and red­

uced both a Beckett, Mae-ready, Thackeray, ana. other old stage goers t© tears*11 In the oast were Ellen Chaplin as the Pro­ logue (The Spirit of the Chimes), 0 .Smith as Toby Yeok, Ed­ ward Wright as Alderman Cute, Lambert as Filer, J* Culienford as Choker, Charles Selby as Richard, Munyard as Jabez, Saunders as John,Wilkinson as Tugby, Paul Bedford as Sir Joseph Bowley, Bart as M*P*, C *J*Smith as Fish, Hudson as Will Fern, Cowl as Lint, Worrell as Goblin of the Bell, Freeborn, G-lennaire, Wayne a© Goblins, Miss Fortescue as Meggy Veck, Mrs* F. Matthews as Mrs* CMckensfcalker, Miss E* Harding as Lady Bowley, Miss Turtle as Lilian, and Kiss M« Taylor as Lilian,

196 • age 18*

There were also villagers, peasants, and visitors*22® Because of the success of this first The Chimes,

other versions appeared immediately.

Samel Atkins, drama­

tist who had not previously adapted any work of Dickens but who was later the adapter of another Christmas story, pre­ pared a drama, The Chimes» for a new theatre, the Albert*22® His play opened the same day, December 28, 1844, aa K* Edwards* The Chimes opened at the Apollo#227 Edward Stirling could not ignore the dramatic possibil­ ities of Dickens* goblin tale and so prepared a version, The Chimesi or, A Goblin Tale for the Keeleya at the Lyceum* opened on January 2, 1845, with EeeXey as Trotty Vec’ k,

It rs#

Keeley as Margaret Veck, and Samuel Emery as Will Fern#22® Stirling* © play was soon followed by one at the Queen* s by an unknown author*

This drama, called simply The Chimes, was

given January 11, 1848, It was not for many years that another attempt was made to dramatis© The Chime©« On December 26, 1872, a twoact version^ Trotty Veck, by Mrs * Charles Calvert was played at the Gaiety Theatre* E* Bishop, Will Fern*

J*L, Tool© was Trotty Veck and Alfred Among the other members of the cast

were Robert Soutar as Sir Joseph Bow ley, J ,0 * Taylor- as Mr*

Filer, Crutwell as Mr* Fish, Margaret Cooper as Meg, and u. Leigh as Lady Bowloy A few days later, in January, 1875, Arthur V'illiams played Trotty Veck in his own one^act version, Christmas Chines; or* Trotty Veck* a Dream* at the Pavilion#

George

Yates acted Alderman Cute> Charles Reeve, R chard^ Clingan

.

197 Jones, Jabez; J* Clifton, Tu&by; I1* Morrison, Sir Joseph Bov;ley; George English, Mr* Fishj Alfred Raynor, Will Fern; Jemie Grainger, Meg; Mrs* Murray, lire • Chicken stalker; and Miss Lieke, Lilian*2®^ The Cricket on the Hearth Without doubt, The Cricket on the Hearth was the most popular of Dickens1 Christmas books on the stag©.*

The

first dramatisation was made not only at Dickens* special request, for ix© v;Of

tlii.£it Lb©

•i^Ceeley*©' sihon>ldtiiUv*o it

for performance at the Lyceum, but also with some assistance from him*

He provided Albert Smith, who was to adapt the

story, with the proof sheets so that the play could b© ready for production on the night of the morning the every was published and offered for sale.

The play was produced with

considerable success on Saturday, December SO,

1 8 4 5

.832

In January, 1846, a critic writes of the play and its performance in The Almanack of the Month* ••. • as the adaptor stuck very close indeed to the text of the original, of course it succeededt Why, we are going to explain* Although Mr* Dickens does not profess dramatic authorship, yet his writings have had a consider­ able influence on the stage. The character© in bis novels are— despite the exaggeration with which a few of the critical fraternity charge him— completely natural; so essentially natural, indeed, that even after some of the stage adaptors and ac­ tors have done their worst upon them, they eome upon the stage very like transcripts from real life. As play© they are altogether different from their predecessors* The dramatis personae cannot, as that of th® sentimentaf ’comedy and heavy melo­ drama, be sumnarily and arbitrarily put into the various conventional classes amongst which stage managers distribute the *parts* . One cannot safe­ ly be given out to the ’heavy father* of tlio com­

198. pany; another to tn© 1smart servant* ; a third, to the *low comr.iedian1 ; a fourth to the fjuvenile tragedian1 a fifth to the fehanibermaid1, or a sixth to the sentimental young l&dg.f Dickens characters are too like nature for that. Ho individual is, In real life, always being funny, or behaving wickedly, or eternally breathing forth sentimentality# The same persons have their times for being gay, and for being sad; they have their times for being brilliant and their dull moments; and so have the life portraits which Dickens draws. Some dramatists have attempt­ ed to act “Bos1s” compositions *to rights* for the stage, and to make his characters staglly 1effect­ ive*^ after their own tastes, and the consequence has boon that the plays don© on that principle have been as unnatural as a pantomime* In the present Instance, 'the dreamt 1st has stuck to his text.233 True, Smith* s version23^ follows the original almost exactly, for the changes made are t£o minor as to be of almost no significance.

While plot and characterisation

and the mechanics with "which they are developed are very similar, the spirit of the play is also very close to the spirit of the original.

The dramatist seems definitely

to have attempted to preserve this, for on more than one occasion he has taken explanatory materials from the text of the story and made them into speech for one of the characters, This helps to give to the auditors something which Dickens gave to his readers but which might have been omitted from the play,

Especially noteworthy In this respect

is the opening scene which begins with a long soliloquy by Dot Feerybingle as she prepares John* s supper and the begin­ ning of Act II which opens frith a soliloquy by Caleb flur

it was twenty yea -s before

Flo* a Patron by W.J. Hix was

acted at the Beccles P\Jblic Hall, on January 28, 1892*3'7ti A Message from the Sea For the I860 Christmas number of All the Year Round, Dickens wrote chapters one, two, and five and closely edited Wilkie Collins* portions of A Message from the Sea. Evident­ ly Dickens and Collins had intended to collaborate also in turning A Message from the Sea into a play, ...as In the British Museum there Is a small e&ghb page brochure which traces th© plot and action of Acts X and XI, and then; HAct the Third passes in Trefarthen*s cottage at bteew&ys and the story Is unravelled as in th©

246. Christmas number of All the Year Hound, and ending with the villager® all coming- in and cheering Captain Jorgan on his departure for America as heartily as they execrated him In Act I.n The title page runs thus: A hassaga from the Sea/ A Drama in Three Acts/ by/ Charles Dickens/ &ndj Wilkie Collins/ An Outline of the Plot/ Londons Published by 0* Holsworth/ At the office of “All the Year Round*1/ Wellington Street, Strand/ 1861. *. ♦. Thy this should be print­ ed goodness -only knows* I cannot trace the play* Bor does Forster mention it or even the stor-y in his 'Life of Dickens' Dickens

and Collins probably had this brochure printedfor

copyright purposes in an attempt to forestall other drama­ tizations* but if this were the purpose, it did not succeed* John. Brougham* & version wm

produced

in

1660and,

was brought to London to the Britannia Theatre

in

1861.

There were thirteen characters in Brougham*s play and thirteen scenes.

Among the actors who played in it at the

Britannia were F* Wilton* P» Merchant# J. Reynolds, ?#0* Drummond# S. Sidney* W . Crawford, M, Smythson# D# Stewart, Mrs, W, ftewhom* 'Miss B* Clayton, and Mrs. B. Y a m o I d . 378 A play called A Message from the Sea was acted at ^*7Q the Birmingham Prince of Wales* Theatre# August 30, 1869.^ s

Another A Me®sage from the Sea, a play in three-acts by an unknown author, was presented at the Surrey Theatre, Feb­ ruary 1, 1873.

Since the Surrey was then under the management

of Virginia Blackwood* it is possible and likely that the play was written by her husband, Murray Wood, who had previously dramatised some of Dickens* works,

This play vm.s revived

at Astley*s Theatre, October 14, 1878*

In the cast were

kelson Wheatcraft as Hugh Raybroek* G-.Murray Wood as Silas

Jorgan, Harry Cornwall as Tom Pettifer, H, Monte as Lawrence Oilssold, Frank Cates as Alfred R&ybrocl-r, Edward Chamberlain as Mr* Tregarthen, Fanny Fright as Mrs* R&ybroek, Hilda Dunbar as Kitty Treg&rfchen, Sad lie Blackwood as Margaret Raybroclc, and Virginia Blackwood as 2SE

Friend

The pattern followed by the course of the adaptations of Our Mutual Friend was more usual than that for many of the later Dickens* novels, except that there were no very early drama11za;.1jns, none before the book was finished.

Our Mutual Frlend was

issued in the usual twenty monthly parts beginning in Kay, 1864, and was finally published in two volumes in 1865, But the first dramatization was not mad© until 1866, H,.E, Farnio* e The Golden Dustman, an adaptation of Qur Mutual Friend, was first acted at the Sadler* s Wells on June 16, ISoo, under the mana ament of K.H.C .Mation, The part of John Harmon was acted by Thomas Swinbourne, Rogue Hiclerhood by W, McIntyre, Bradley Headstone by Charles Earner, Silas ftegg by George Belmore, Eugene Frayb u m by F, Bar shy, Mr. Boffin by Barrett, Mr. V/ilfer by V/.H, Court ley, Lizzie Hexham by Ada Dyas, Bella Wilier* by Fanny Gwynne, Lavina Wilfer by Ada Harland, Mrs, v-’ilfer by Mias Poynter, and Mrs, Boffin by Mrs, Bishop,

The play wa

a success at the Sadler* s Fells and also at Astley* s where it was revived, October 27, 1886, with Edward Atkins as

248. Bradley Headstone and James Fernandes as Silas Wegg.^B! This play was also acted at the Royal# Birmingham, success­ fully with Barret as Mr. Boffin and George Belmor© "really excellent as the wooden-legged Silas y?@gg,n382

Golden

Dustman was also clone in Leeds at the Amphitheatre in 1867 with Arthur Williams as Silas W©gg, a part which he also acted when the play was revived by William Holland at Hie Surrey In 1878.383 The Golden Dustman was soon followed by another adaptation of Qnr Mutual Friend. Dustman1s Treasure, which was acted at the Britannia, July 15, 1866.

In this play,

the author of which is unknown, W.K. Crawford was Gaffer Hexham; Robert Bell, Rogue Riderhood; T ,G * Drummond, John Harmon* K. Leslie, Eugene Wrayburne; J. Farr, Mr. Boffin* W, Morton, Headstone; Joseph Reynolds, Silas Wegg; w » Hewham, Mr, Wilfer; E, Harding, hr, Venus; Sophie Miles,

Lizzie Hexham, Mrs, Mewham,Hrs• Boffin, ^rs, Norton, Mrs* Wllfcr; and Mis® F. Jones, Bella Wilfer,384 George Fawcett Rowe also wrote a version of die novel.

His four-act drama# Found Drowned; or. Our Mutual

Friend, was given at the Opera Gomique, December 26, 187 ,'. George P, Howe played John Harmon and Rogue Riderhood; L . Mac Intyre, S&las Wegg; Sam Emery, Boffin; John Nelson, Bradley Headstone; Mrs, Ernst-one, Lizzie Hexham; Emily ?ltt, Charlie Hexham; Urs. Menders, Mrs, Boffin; Kose Lisle, Bella Wilfer; Tilly Earl®, Lavina; and Mrs. Ho Iston, K J . ’s Better-Half #385

249.

A play called Our Mutual Friend, by B.B, Pamle, was acted at the Gaiety* June 7# 1 8 7 1 , This may be another version by Fannie or it may be his old play, The Golden Dustman under the novel* s title. No Thoroughfare

For the Christmas 1867 number of All the Year Bound Dickens and Wilkie Collins again produced a collaborat­ ed work, No Thoroughfare. This time, however, Instead of preparing merely an outline of a proposed drama on the same material, as they had don© with A_Message from the.Sea, they actually dramatized the story, and. the resulting play was produced at the Adelphi, December 6, 1867,387

Litton

Cook writes about the play, what the adapters have donewith their own material in order to make a play, and something of the probable reason for tlioir preparing it. Adaptation to the stage being generally the fate of the popular novel at some period of its career, it Is not surprising that Mr, Dickens's works should almost invariably have undergone the process of conversion Into plays, although, the proceeding has now and then taken place entirely without the author1a ©auction, and Indeed In disregard of his most eax'nest remonstrances. Tbs readers of "Nich­ olas Nickloby w may remember the warm attack upon adapters put into the mouth of the hero of that story on the occasion of his encountering at the Crummels* farewell supper the literary gentleman who had dramatised in his time two hundred and forty-seven novels as fast as they came out, and "was a literary gentleman In consequence." The British novelist being without dramatic copyright in M s productions— wholly unprotected by law in such respect-- Mr, Dickens had nothing to do but (relieving his lalnd by as indignant a protest against the existing state of things as occurred to him at the moment) to submit to such outrage and degradation of his creations as the dullest of dramatists might choose to Inflict upon them.

250, In later days, however, he was enabled in some degree to combat his adapters by helping to forestall them. Thus, the Christmas boohs were severally dramatised by Mr, Albert Smith from proof sheets supplied expressly by the author, and the plays were brought upon the stage sim­ ultaneously with the publication of the stories. In this way unauthorized adaptations were at any rate anticipated# Later still, Mr, Dickens him­ self aided and supervised the dramatising of his nTale of Two Cities** by Mr, Tom Taylor, Until the present time, however, he has not presented himself to the public as M s own dramatist, Low, owever, we find the story of wKo Thoroughfare,n the Christmas number of All the Tear Hound, the ioinfc production of Mr, Dickens and%r7'u^rikTe Cb 1lins, appearing upon the stage of the Adelphi Theatre, the adaptation being announced as the work of the original authors. As Mr, Dickons was part-contriver of the story, so he is now part-adapter of it to the theatre.. The literary styles of the two writers a e so dissimilar that it would not be difficult for an ingenious reader to apportion to each novelist his particular share In the production in question, though of course there would be some risk of error and raisconcept Ion in so doing* But the fact that two hands and two minds have be&n at work In ttHo Thoroughfare” is manifest enough throughout its pages. It is not a very compact story and is in faet easily divisible into two distinct narratives, dealing with separate Interest, characters, and incidents, With a little unpicking of the stitches tacking the two tales together, they would entirely fall apart and stand confessed as two novelettes, each complete in itself, one of which might be entitled *** Story of the Foundling Hospital,1* and the other **An Adventure In Switzerland, or some such names. There is a sort of Incompatibility of temper, so to speak, between the works, and their union Is effected with some difficulty. They sunder upon the slightest provocation, and it is only by rather violent means that they can be brought together again. The exigencies of on© story are rather detrimental to the other, and In regard to the characters, w © have continually to bear in mind Mr., Fuff* s admonition relative to one of his dramatIs personae, **not to be too stxr© he Is a Beefeater Tho requirements of one author r&tfiier embarrass the arrangement of the other, and the simple Beefeater of Mr, Dickens has to develop Into something quite different to enable ^r• Collins to go on with his part of the narratlvo, Met tnat the work succeeded In obtaining a large amount of , tt

251 public fervour cannot be gainsaid* Indead, with all its defects, Its merits are considerable• The dramatic version of wHo Thoroughfare” Is In six acts, and occupies hore than four hours in presentation. The authors have been at great pains to make their plot thoroughly intelligible to the audience, m that even those who nay'visit the Adelphi unversed in the Christmas, number of All the Year Hound* can yet readily follow the complications and situations of the drama of v,flo Thoroughfare*” In this respect there has been some heedless insistence on small details of the narrative, and perspicuity ha® been gained at the cost of dull prolixity* The playgoer is less heedful about trifling discrepancies and Incon­ gruities in the entertainment set before him than is the novel-reader in relation to the pages occupying him* There is no stopping or turning back In a drama to see that all has bean correct­ ly and coherently ordered* Upon the whole, nUo Thoroughfare,” not being In itself particular­ ly available for theatrical purposes, ha: boon dramatised with, mutch skill. The play is not, of course, a production of very high class, but it might be tolerably interesting If reduced to reasonable proportions * The defects of the story as a literary work are not concealed In Its new shape. It Is still plain that the Foundling Hospital ami' Switzerland have been brought together In a very curious kind of way, strange Vocifallows Intro­ duced to each other by an imperative necessity*. Certain changes have b e n made in the work, and the dialogue has been most inordinate!', length­ ened and elaborated* Joey Ladle become® a prom­ inent character, and appears as the lover of Sarah (teId itraw. The clocklock is transferred ST'the'wnas'ie'ry of St. Bernard, The motive of Qbenreiser* g theft arises out of his desire to make extravagant gifts to his ward, Marguerite. These and other modifications are not altogether of a eozmnendable kind, and the necessity for Introducing Hfront scenes” while complicated •sets” are "in coun e of preparation, has Induced recourse to prolonged conversations that are as wearisome in themselves as they are useless in regard to the furthering of the business of the play. Several scenes might with advantage be excised altogether. Indeed it is manifest that condensation mint bo brought about with a free and firm hand, If due consideration is to be paid to the powers of endurance of the public*

252* No pains have boon spared by the Adelphi man­ agement in the production of t?Ho fhorou :hfare •” Mr, Pechter has been retained to support the part of Qbenreizer* Miss Carlotta Leclorcq has been added W the”company in ordar that Marg­ uerite night have a competent representative, and "Mr* Henry Neville has bean withdrawn frost Olympic Theatre to appear as George Vendale* Mr# Webster has emerged from. M s retirement to personate Joey Ladle» Mrs, Mellon plays Sally Goldstraw, and Mr# Belmore gives ample sig­ nificance to the character of Mr# Bintrey* the lawyer* Mr* and Mrs* Billington appear as Walter Wilding and the veiled lady, his mother, respectively* These characters were all very well played; Mr, Pechter* s Q'benreiser being an especially finished and vigorous performance• Joey is perhaps found to be less humorous on the stage, and his frequently repeated joke about the pores of M s skin Is less effective than had been anticipated from the perusal of the story# Bht nothing could have been better than Mr# Webster* s rendering of the part* The scenery by Mr* Grieve is entirely new, and the view of the Alpine pass in which Obenreiser attempts the m r d e r of Vendale is certainly as beautiful a picture as has ever been brought upon the stage ..388 But Ho Thoroughfare was a success with the critics praising especially Pechter as Obenreisor but also com­ mending the work of the other actors.

The play ran for

on© hundred and fifty nights at the Adelphi and then was transferred to the Royal Standard Theatre, Shoreditch*389 A Hb Thoroughfare was done in Hew York, January 6, 1888, and in Paris in June, 1888*3®0

But at the

Alexander Theatre, on April 15, 1858, opened the burlesque °n Ro. Thoroughfare* Mo Thorough-Fair* Bdyond Highbury; or, The Maid, the Mother.* and the Mali clous Mountaineer * Eaglewood* junior, was the

a u t h o r

#3$3-

it was follov/ed by another

burlesque, this one called HoTho ron ghfare a by G* Grossraith, It was acted at the Victoria, March 22, 1889.392

Ho Thorough-

fare; or, The Story of the Foundling* a play in a prologue and four acts, by 0* Brand, was performed at the Islington Grand, May 11, 1903,395

Dr# Marigold*, a Hr©scriptions, the Christmas 1885 number of All the Year Round * of which Dickens wrote chapters one, six, and eight* probably had no real dramatisations, Nevertheless, H »J.Byron1a very successful play, Uncle Dick1s Darling* was evidently based on Dickens* story.

This three*

act play was acted first at the Gaiety, December 13, 1869, with Irving .as Mr, Chevenlx*

In the east were also Toole

as Dick DoHand, a cheap Jack; Adelaide Dei Ison as the heroine, Mary Belton; John Clayton; Miss Elisworthy; and Marie Bitten#39^

In 1885, Toole revived th© play at his

own theatre and again it was successful,393

IM ggffiE&g g£ S&&& asssfi The last novel of Charles Dickens, The Mystery of

Edwin Prood, was not the last to be dramatised, for Bleak House was yet to be put on the stage*

Edwin Drool had

begun to appear in the customary monthly parts in April, 1870, but only six were issued, for Dickens died on June 9, before much of the book, which v&s already being widely read, was none.

The incomplete state of the work was not

a great deterrent to the dramatlzers, however, for they already had had experience In putting fragments of novels on the stage* The first stage adaptation of the book was The Mystery of Fdwln Proud* a four-act play by Walter Stephens

which was produced at the Surrey, November 4, 1871*

The

Keferoo of January 26, 1908, describes the play as, a wild and whirling piece of work, chiefly remarkable for the fact that Henry Neville played John Jasper, and, if I reme fuor rightly, Bob Brierly on the same evening* Jasper, having murdered Edwin, 'was thenceforth shadowed by Landless disguised, as Datehery, After many alarums and excursions, he finally swallowed cold poison and perished miserably at the foot of all concerned# Besides Neville, the cast contained George R'arcl© as Edwin Brood*■E#F, Edgar as Neville handles, K. Butler as Tho Reverend Septimus Or!sparkle, John Murray as hurdles, Georg© Tamold as Grewgious, W. Goodwind as 23assard, F* ?&ul as Datehery, Julia Daly as Deputy, Maria Jones as Roaa Budd, Miss M* Hayes as Helen Landless Mrs# Edgar a© Mrs# Orisparkle, and Mrs# Watson as Mrs# Tope* The play was also given on May 1, 2, 3, 1878, by the Wandering Thespians at the Mirror Theatre, Holbom#°^u Another Mystery of Edwin 33rood was den© July 22, 1872, at tho Brittania#

This play was by G*H. Mac-

dennott, -The Before© said of it. The other Brood drama I remember was concocted by the late G*B# Macdexnott, ih©n a struggling young East-End actor-of^all-work, filling up his time as a-playwright, and was played at tho Brittania* The Mystery, according to Macdermofct* panned out in this wise# Jasper, having, as he supposed, forever *re­ moved* Dread from his path, Landless was presently accused of the murder* Here ended Act I* In Act II Grewgious*s clerk Bazzard disguised hi self as a detective by the name of Datehery, and with tho assistance of Durdlos anon fastened tho crime on Jasper, who revealed his guilty secret in a trance. Tho play ended by Droocl turning up alive, which so aston shed Jas£>or that he fell dead at hxs nephew* s feet * Jasper was finely played by tho ’Britos' popular tragedian, Joseph Reynolds; the stillourvivlng G,B • Be.gwood enacted .-Airdies ; ano *;a for:-of contented himself with the part of Lazzaro aoias

255. Datdhery— > a fine 1 fat* creation in which the adapter had taken particular good care of himself and of which, indeed, he was always very proud. The members of the cast other than those mentioned by the Referee were Charles 'Reeve as Edwin Droocl, T, Hyde as th© Dean of Clalsternum, E* Newbound as Landless,^Julia Summers as the Deputy, John Harry as Orewgioxis, W*B,Bitt asorisparkle, Miss L* MacDonald as Ross Bu&d, Mies M»a * Bella!r as Helen Landless, Jane Coveny as Opium Sal, and Hiss L, Rayner as ^rs* Crisparkle*®y 7 On May 25, 1875, Robert -f* Hall10 four-act drama based on Edwin Brood was acted at the Sfc* Doors©* s Theatre5 It was played at the Hark, Camden Town, May 3, 1880*®®® In the cast at the Park, W. Howell was Edwin Droo&i P*C» Kirk, G-rswglous; leorg© Byrne, John Jasper; C* Cruikshank* Dur&lesj W* Vincent, Crisparkle; J*G* Bmmersou, Landless; Ii* Selby, the Deputy; Keefe, Justice Settlem| Stella Brere ton, Rosa

8

udd| Alice Raynor, Helen Handles cj| and Bella

Cuthbert, Opium Sal*39® Charles Dickons, junior, with Joseph Hatton, also tried his hand at an adaptation of Edwin Droocl and the piece was scheduled for production at the Princess*s Theatre 400 In March, 1880, but apparently the play was never acted* There was a revival of Interest in the dramatic possibilities of Dickens* last novel In th© early twentieth century*

J, Comyns Carr* s four-act Mystery of Edwin Prood

was produced at th© Cardiff h©w Theatre, November 27, 1207, and at Her Majesty*s, January 4, 1908; C*A* Clark and $*13*

Rogeraon* s four-act Mystery of Edwin Drood was dons at tho Manchester Osborne, March 2, 1908; and an unknown author*s sketch, The Mystery of tdw3 n Drood* was per­ formed at th© Bedford Music Hall, March 2, 1908,^^ Bleak Hpu,se Bleak House was not only the last of Dickens’ novels to be adapted for the stage, but it was also the slowest to be adapted*

It had begun to appear In the

customary twenty monthly parts in March, 1852, and had been published as a single volume in 1853.

But more than

twenty years was to elapse between the time the novel was Issued and th® tlm© it was reworked for the theatre, an almost unbelievably long time in consideration of th© speed with which other Dickens* novels were dramatized and the large number of versions of Bleak House and their popularity once the novel was dramatized. J* Falgrav© Slsipson wrote th© first version of Bleak

House, a version which had moderate success but not

the sucfces® of one of the later plays on th© subject * Simpson* e four-act play, Lady Deadlock* s Secret, was first given at the Aberdeen Opera House, April 3, 1874,

It was

given later by amateurs at the Theatre Royal, Windsor, November 28, 1883.

Finally it was acted at th© Opera

Comi© VIII) f the attack on the watchmen (Act II, Scone II) and the resulting arrest and scone at the court (Act II, deeno IV5 (This arrest and court scene is the result of yaive -nothor adventure in the book), the game of cards (Act II, Scene V) (This game of cards is likewise played under other circumstances in the book), the visit to the beggar’s den in the Holy Land (Act.II, Scon

VJ), the adventures at the fortune teller’s

(Act III, Scene II), the scene of the arrest of Lob Logic (Act III, Scene IV), the carnival scone (Act III, Scene VII;# All of those scenes appjar In Egan’s work but without the plot implication which gives them life and provides them with conf1ict and aet ion * Many other scenes from Li _e in London are usod also in the plays

the hunting dinner at Kav/thome* s (Act I,

cene

302* the Introduction of Logic and the fibbing of clothes by the tailor (Act I, Go on 3 IV), the buying of tho horse nv. Tattorsal1s (Act I, fcona VI,) tho visit uo Tom ■•ribL (Act II, Scone I), the visit to Jackson1s rooms and the forcing match (Act III, Scone I;, the scone at All-Lax (Act III, Scone III), the scone in the Whistling shop (Ac.- Ill, Scone V) . lait many scenes described by Egan are also omjUfced and these scones usod are altered by Monerieff to r*sko them more fit­ ting for stage use• ' Ho, of course, supplies them with speeches suitable to be spoken by actors, for not many of Egan1c lines are deliverable although &oncrl©ff uses a few. Besides supplying a plot which Is used against Kgan1s background, Moncrieff joakes some other alterations and. In­ ventions • Kabo and due becosae important instead of very minor and Jane la invented,

Jisiay Green, who Is merely men­

tioned by Bgan, feooames a significant comic character es­ pecially in the scene of the horse-buying (Act X, •.•cone VI), although he is throughout the play of significant assist­ ance to the women In carrying out fcheii? plot.

Trifle Is

also raised to a position of some importance to help Id.i© women. The tire© loading characters, Tom, Jer•y , and Logic, are not revealed to bo as extreme in their antics and habits as they were in the original, Many of the other numerous characters arc from

gan1s work and many are of donerioff18

Invention * Although there are a great many songs in the original,

303.

more seems to ho m d e of the songs In the play.

A groat deal

is also made of the dancing, and something is done, too, with the boring and forcing» The fascination of disguise is ■fcakon advantage of in the several ocones in which tho .omen are in disguise and most of all in the lac; two sconce of the play which are carnival scones with everyone in costume.. The language also has in It something of interest, for it frequently uses a clang which is sometimes very pubsling and sometimes very sno&ern and also frequently uses an miderworld lingo which Is hardly understandable. The cast of that original performance was tremend­ ous and should have attracted an audience for its siso if for no other reason. J. Boeva as

In It were -ranch as copintMan Tom;

erry Hawthorne; «Ilkinson as Logic; Hoe ley as

Jemmy 0-room Sallwny as Bon. Dick Trifle; Buckingham as Squire Hawthorn; Waylett as ^rlKaflt; Balter as •>’dooz-le; Lea as Vd Lush; Daly as Tartar, Cons table of tli© Light, Chapman as Jack, tho ftas Light Man; Maxwell as ••'•■•P. *-j-5XCc jj Broad and Wakefield as Cope an

Gull* cm, I* o Yorkshire Coves;

Soares as Baron Hub’em, alias Kich#

Borrowho&y; houall as

Tom Crlbb; Phillips as Tattersail; Smith as Regular; Calla­ han as Hr. Jenkins; Paulo as Billy Haters; ..albourn as lusty Bob; Cooper as Little Jemmy; Shaw as Ragged Jack; Drauy as Landlord of Back Slum©; Sharp as Village Lawyer*; H .rrls as Bill Pointer; Bishop as Sir Harry Blood; Truefit us Daren Rufus; Dog as Groom Porter; Bant as Poor Tradesman; Dennis as HcckaC Master; lock an Turnkey; Dancer as MiIlls; llassington as Drunken Buck; Hastings as Smuggler; Luohi>;.g,,on an

304. Master of Thisfllng Shop; &rs* Baker as ftate., otherwise the Hon* Mies Trifle, otherwise Sir Jorony Brag, otkertiso Han, the Latch Girl? 11vs. ’Taylot as Su-g ot* ercriso the Lou* Miss 'Trifle, otherwise Capt. Swaggery, otherwise roll, the Ballad Singer; Miss Hammorsloy as Jana, otherwise the Hon* Mlse Trifle, otherwise Mrs« Mummery, tho Fortune Toller, otherwise Sal, the Pretty Beg ;er; Mrs, Daly as Mrs» Tarter; Mrs.* Bryan as Mrs» Deris; Sanders as African Sal; Flaggon as Soldier Suke; Miss Simpson as Ligb^oot J

Mrs« Paste

as the Ouches® of 'Diamonds; Kiss Clack as Princess Conver­ sations;. Miss Feathers as Princess Plumarfce; Mrs« Ponntney as Lady Eastond; Sportsmen, Grooxas, Jockies, Hoblemon, Fancy Lads, Watchmen, . ’^aitere, Markers, Beggars, Debtors, Racket Flayers, Masqueraders, Ladies, Qnadrillere, Vteltzee, Visitors; To all these wss added the Corps tie Ballot with

b» Albin,

W* Ilirkby, Mies Simpson, and Miss Warhols as principal dancers A suggestion as to the. variety possible in the. play is found in •lenosti s summary: Tom brings up Jerry to London in order* to show him life-« ho introduce® M m to Logic— Tom and Logic teach Jerry their slang and take him to a variety of places— in particular to Tattersal’s where Jo- ;.iy Green, gives 2» 40 fovi a lame horse-- to Alr.iack* s in the Test, where there is a genteel assembly and good dancing— to Fleet street, where Tom, Jerry and Logic fight with some wat chasm— to a fashionable Holl, where Tom and Jerry lose their money— to a Back Slums in the Holy Land, where a number of beggars are assembled for supper— to All Max in the Last, where Dusty Bob and Black Sal dance— to the fleet prison, Logic being arrested— and, lastly, to a in Leicester Square— at the conclusion,

305,

Tom, Jerry, and Logic marry Eat©, Sue, and Jane,53* T M © variety made possible elaborate production which in­ cluded singing, dancing, a horse show, a boxing match, all of which could be set elaborately with scenery representing places which some of the audience knew of and most of the audience had heard about,

All of this and reputedly good

acting coupled with the type of humor called in its own time *low* mad® the play a success, not only at the Adelphi, but alee all over London and all over England and Scotland, E*.B»W&t®on says that the play ran for three hundred nights and that the following year it was performed in nine other London houses, Including the majors,52

Edward Stirling

played the Hon, Dick Trifle in Tom and Jerry at the Temple of Art© in Catherine Street, Strand, where young actors paid to play their roles.

The play, he contends, was given its

first performance, at Astley1s Amphitheatre t

n ♦,* and first

produced at Actley* s in an equestrian shape with real horse®, donkey®, etc.

The renowned pugilists, Tom Crlbb

and Spring boxed in the circle,

Tyrone Fewer (an unrivalled

Irish comedian) was the original Corinthian Tom,”55

Stirling

doe® not say whose version was performed at Astley*®; the name® of other possible adapters have also been overshadowed by the name of Moncrieffbut versions of Tom and Jerry were played early in, besides the theatres already mentioned, the Coburg, the Olympic, and Sadler1s Wells,

Since the play was

not printed until 1826, and therefor© was probably not ad-

306, ©quately protected, it is very likely that these may havo been garbled versions of Honcrioff1s • The play lends itself easily to cutting up as may be seen in a comparison of the scenes in the original edition with those in the edition printed later by Samuel French*

The original ha© three

act© with a total of twenty-one scenes; the French has two acts with a total of fifteen ©canes*

In the French edition

many character® are also omitted, many songs are left out, and many of the included scenes are extensively cut down* While it may or may not have been Moncrief£!fs version in original or cut down form, which played at various theatre© in London, it was, at least, Monerieffrs version which opened at •Brighton on September 2* 1822, and ran until September 21; it wag revived'on December 16 in the same year and on April 21 the following year.

In the original

cast Hassell wa® Jerry; Hamlin, Tom; Vlnlng,Logic $ W,s, Whatford, Bill Ch&umt; Miss McCook©, Corinthian Kate; Mrs* Clark©,. Mrs* Gadabout*

But the cast changed somov/hat

for the performance in December,

Power was Tom; Chapman,

Bob| Hussel, Jerry; Chambers, Hawthorn; Mortimer, Tattersail; Hatton, Princept; Collier, Muff; Jones, Belcher; W,S# Whatford, Bill Chaunt; Mills, Jack; Webber, Sam,

The play tr/ was acted In Brighton even as late as December 12, 1853# It was imt little more than a month after the first Brighton production that the play wa© produced at Bath, Nov­ ember 20, 1822*

It had not been anticipated that the play

would be a success there, for Hthe Bath audience Is vastly

307, more squeamish than the audiences In London,11 Nevertheless the play met with considerable success and brought crowded houses to a theatre which had had poor houses nearly every night In the season*

**Wiien the adventures of Tom and Jerry

were put on, with the introduction of pugllsts in one scone, the house was crowded, a fact which indicated a great change In the Bath pl&ygolng public *ir55

In the cast, Fining acted

as Tom, Burroughs as Jerry, would® as Bob Logic, Huekel as Jemmy Green, John Fisher as Busty Bob, lisa Lois h* Kelly as Kate, and Mrs', Collier as Mrs* Tarter * and Would s acted very well —

ttVining, Burroughs,

no tiling, could be better than

Mrs* Collier**$6 The Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, was but a month behind Bath, for Tom m d Jerry was produced there December 26, 1802-*

In Edinburgh th® play was a great success, for

it was acted thirty-six times at the Theatre Royal and oftenor at the minor theatres* It contained, In fact, what in all successful pieces of Its class is the element of success, namely, no plot, smart action and dialogue, with no more wit than an average audience could under­ stand, and & certain suggestion of naughtiness that is esp ecially dear to t he heart of occasional playgoers* Murray was evidently well versed In catering for this variable quantity and his aud­ iences, for he advertised that all the objection­ able pieces had been suppressed, thereby plainly implying the nature of the play*&/ The play was also acted at the Caledonian, Edinburgh.

It

opened there on January 25, 1823, while It might still have been running at the Theatre Royal, and ran some eighteen

308. nights.

In the cast were J, Mason as Corinthian Tom, H.

Johnston as Jerry Hawthorn, Stanley as Logic, Chippendale as Billy

aters, Mrs, Chlpx^endale as Princess Plumonte*^® Glasgow was somewhat slow to take up the play,for

It was not produced there until 1825.

But when it was played

it was given under most unusual circumstances, for It open­ ed the same week in two theatres and ran for a month, in the Caledonian and in the Dominion of Fancy, the second being in the basement of the building occupied by the firstV

The

rivalry between the two theatres was so great and the pub­ lic curiosity so stimulated that the rival managers, Sey­ mour and Alexander, both ended the season with good profits, but the manager of a third theatre, Byraa, lost money playKQ Ing to a deserted houso# The manager of another theatre, In .Dunlop Street, Klnlock, also produced Tom and Jerry during the same season, with Tyrone Power In tho east, and made a seasonal profit of more than h 2000,50 The success of these productions led to a phenomenon nowhere else evident in the progress of dramatlnation©— writing of dequels.

the

The first on© was produced at the

M e l p M in 1821 or 1822 following the original Tom and Jerry. It was called Green in France; or, Tom and Jerry* s Tour. In the play# ^om

go to Paris and engage in a series

of adventures there Illustrative of phases of life In Paris similar to those they had already gone through In London, Although the play was produced In an even more elaborate and more costly manner than the original, It was a failure*

309. It was forced to run some thirty-five nights and then Torn and Jerry was r e v i v e d . A n o t h e r sequel of some years later also was a failure.

This was Tom and Jerry, with logic

on the Grand Hop and was produced In Brighton*Hovoggber 4* 1834*02

In consideration of the fact that Tom and Jerry demands an understanding of a specific time and locale In order Mequ&bely to be appreciated* it lasted a surprisingly long time through the century*

It was revived at Govent

Garden* June 4, 1888* with French and Keeley in the part© which they had originated at the Adelphi* Corinthian Tom and Jemmy Green*

In the cast were also J* Beeve as Jerry

Hawthorn and W* Barren as Logie***5

Barren also played Logie

in the revival at Drury Lane* June 10, 1889, with Browne as Corinthian Tom, Bedford as Jerry Hawthorn* and Webster as Jemmy Green

The originator of the characters of Tom

and Jerry* Fierce Egan, tried his hand at acting when he played Bob Logic in a version at the Lyceum* June 28* 1 8 4 2 . ^ The most interesting attempt at reviving Tom and Jerry was done at the Victoria under J*A* Cave* s management in 1870*

The play m m called Life in London fflfty Years Ago,

and had J#l* Fifespatrlck and James Fawn In the cast as Tom and Jerry*

The revival seems to hav© been a success Because Fierce Egan* a Lfcffe 1& Lopdon had been so

very ©iiccessful, some unknown dramatist adapted his Life of an Actor with moderate success# 4* 1824.

It was acted September

310. It was a coarse burlesque upon the theatrical profession* Its shifts* its poverty, Its seamy and ridiculous sldej the tiling chiefly owed its success to the farcical humour of John Reeve, in the part of Abraham Delawhang, in which he gave his imitations of contem­ porary actors#®*^ James Robinson Blanche may have felt that the writing of an adaptation of Life fgx London was beneath him, but he did not disdain to writ© his first opera on Thomas Love Peacock1s M^ld, Marian, which had been published by HooMi&m in 1022*

It mist have been easy to make the

conversation#, for the novel already contained, some de­

lightful songs*

Bishop wrote the music, and the opera,

j&rlMU jfee Huntress, oi; Arllnj^ford* was perform©d with considerable success.

Planchfe makes a comment

about the contents of his libretto and about his relation­ ship with the publisher of the novel; To Mr* Hookh&m, as in duty bound, I offered the refusal of the libretto of my opera, which, be It observed, contained much original lyrical and other matter, besides two or three situat­ ions fr>m Ivsnho©, a kindred subject, ir. Peacock* s story being too alight to form the entire framework of a three-act opera* Hooteham declined Blanche’s offer and threatened to prevent the performance of the opera a® an infringement of his copy­ right*

He could do nothing, however, and seemed to be

placated when m m ® m

of tho opera Increased the sale of

the novel as well as other works of Peacock.®8 Mrs* Shelley*e

Frankenstein

Even though Mrs* Shelley1e novel, Frankenstein.

.

311 or The M o d e m Prometheus, had boon published in 18XS, the first dramatisation from It was slow in appearing.

Per­

haps the materials frightened even the most fearless of adapters, but, at any rate, on Monday, July 28, 1823, Richard Biwislsj Soak©1& melodrama, PresumptionI or. The v I 111 ip h iw O * !* uni w

om m m w

Fate of Frankenstein* with srnsic by Watson, was performed at the English Opera House {Lyceum)

William Godwin the

next day wrote to Mrs. Shelley? w! write these lines merely to tell you that Frankenstein was acted last night for the first time, and with .success*

I have therefore, ordered 500 copies of the

novel to be printed with all dispatch, the whole profits of which, without a pen-y deduction, shall be your own*w^® The success of this version seems to have bean largely the success of T.P.Cooke, who played the Monster* He acted the part not only In London but also in Paris where

he played the Monster In a French version which ran for eighty nights at the Forte St* Martin* with tremendous

success When Presumption was played &g In at Covent Garden, July 9, 1824, Cooke was again In the cast with Bennett as Fraztkenstain and Hoe ley as Frits* very successful*^8

But the revival was not

lor did it have great success when Ifc

was again revived March 2d, 1829, at Covent Garden with 0 * Smith as the Monster and Diddoar as Frankenstein• % 1 1 « Froaua^t|>pn. was still In its original success, other versions began to appear at other theatres.

V.'Milner

312, was the author of the melodrama, Frankenstein; or, The .Peroon of Switzerland, which opened at the Coburg, August 18, 1823. Genesfc sumarizes the plot, which seems to be fairly close to the original although he says, It was called the Man and the Monster,'7® or ©he Fate of Frankenstein-- it is principally founded on Mrs. Shelley*s singular work, entitled Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus, and partly on a French piece— the seen© lies on the Prince del Prcnbino’s estate, near the foot of Mount Aetna**** Frankenstein contrives to make, and animate a man— the man, or rather the Monster, is possessed of vast strength— he kills the young son of the prince—— the prince orders his guards to shoot the monster— he forces his way through tho guards— Frankenstein repents in his Presumption in having formed the Monster— he now wishes to destroy him— Frankenstein and a large army of armed peasants find the Monster lying ex­ hausted at the foot of a rock— they bind him with strong cords— he recovers his liberty and kills Frankenstein— a party of soldiers fir© on the Monster— they surround him on all sides— he rushes, In despair, to tho apes of Mount Aetna, and le&ps Into the crater— 0» Smith acted the Monster,'® Another Frankenstein appeared very soon at the Royalty, Sept­ ember 22, 1825, and with the subtitle The Danger of Fro s-umpfelon.7?

!!Adaptations* .** .persisted far Into the century,

The lurid and original thorn© of tho story, together with tho great acting opportunities in the character of the monster, made ’Frankenstein* a popular favourite In this dramatization

fopaa.*^® Among the succeeding dramatizations were;

one at

the Coburg, July 3, 1826* one at the Lyceum, 1839* an© at Sadler’s Tiells, 1845; and a burlesque at the Gaiety, Dec­ ember 24, 1887*79

This was at least the second burlesque,

for one called Frankensteinl or, The Model |te. hy 81 ill am and Robert Barnabas Brough had been acted at tho Adelphi, Dec ember 26, 1849.®®

Mrs* She Hay'a ’ The hast Marx. (3.826) was also apparently draimti zed.

vrritlng In 1904, John Coleman says that John Browne*

creation of The feast Man, In a commonplace drama founded upon^^eTyheTIey*s morbid story, was the moat impressive study of the kind t h m o ever wit* nessed* The last scene, In which he conjured into life the phantoms of the dead and tmried peat, haunted me for weeks,a nd, after all these years, come© hack upon me w e n nowgwtth a thrill which time has scarcely weakened* * During the next few years immediately following the popularity of Frankenstein there is apparently a lull in the activities of the dramatigser© or else they are too occupied with keeping Scott on the ©tag© to bother with much else* They give their attention to only a few miscellaneous novel* 1st© until they start turning their attention,, in 1850, to G.P*EtJames*

In 1828, John Doe1a Tale of the Dollara

was dramtleed as The guerilla Chief and was performed at the English Opera House, July 6* 'Later versions appeared at Drury Lane* November 19, 1827, as The Guerilla phiof and His Daughters with music by R* Hushes, and at the Surrey, In 1829, as Monalto a p.r Thft tonafcain £sEE*8S

At Covent

Carden on April 1$, 1827# *a play founded on the once-pop* ular romance of 1Peter Wilkins* or, The Flying Indians1 was produced with great success, and acted fifty times* Evidently dramatists were somewhat shy of material, for Robert P&Iboek had written The, Life, and Adventures of Peter in 1781 and it had apparently gone undr&matised these many years#

Perhaps it was the fact that Scott read the man*

xiscrlpt of (r*P*H#James* Richelieu and encouraged James that caused the dramatists to turn their attention to his works,

old

■

which they did not find to he particularly good dramatic material*

Since Scott* a historical novels had been suc­

cessful on the stage, tho dramatists probably expected that James* would be*

Nevertheless they ignored his first

novel, hlcholleui and. began their work on M s second, Darnleyi

2£, J&g, g l« M 1850,

3t a ® S±°th 2£

S2M * wM-ch

Published in

On June 22, 1830, a melodrama, DarMey, ‘ The Khfafct of

ggfiBSffiSE* 3£> SS£ E i S M Si & & S M S l 2£ 2 a M * ®«s acted at tho Gotourg*^4

Biotas %e*tan Wllka wrote tho next adaptation, o

fcwo**?.ct drama, herd Darnleyi or, 1?he Eeepef of the Castle Hill, which was acted at the Surrey, September 9, 1 8 5 7 These plays and the novel on which they were based attracted enough attention so that william Brough produced an J!historic extra­ vaganza*1 called nThe Field of the Cloth of Gold at the Strand, April 11, 1868^ this drama was revised by F* Fiesmore and produced at the Kingston Country 3*h©atr®, Swptsofter 50, 1901*' At Brighton, however, Pfemley appeared as a burlesque entitled a ® t i s M 3t ttS. 2 i £ B St £ ° M » ®k°a it we® acted there Sept*? ember 7, 1888, H, Cox was in the cast as Francis 1, chart as Henry VIII* loslna Eonoe as Damley, Maude Brennan as Rose Folx, Iiouise ScLen as Anne Boleyn, Roberta Rrskine as Constance d© Grey, Bden 0larks m

fe&©-*&©-Veuu, S«J# George-as Sir Guy,

Silburn© as Bloc, Kate Newton as Boissy, Mrs* Leigh as due on Kate, and Miss Mellor 4s Suffolk*

Since the burlesque was

revived there on March 12, 1889, and on December 2, 1870, it m e t have been moderately p o p u l a r T h e best dramatlsatIon of the novelw as a serious one*

Shafto Scott wv-oto

The Field of the Cloth of Gold! or* Henry the

Eighth and Francis tho. First* a three-act drama which was performed at Astley* s, April PA, 1869*®® Tho game year as ParnIoy3 James wrote De 1*0 m o * which was promptly adapted and played at the Coburg, Feb­ ruary 14, 1831, as a melodrama with the title. Do 1* Qrme s or, The Priest of S a r a g o s s a , T h e next year, 1832, Thoms Egerbon Wilks tried drama tiding Philip Aitrustns i or, The Brpffers in Arms {1831} as She

££& JS2S. i§£k*

comedy w m acted at the Surrey, June 6, 1858*®° SS2& Bj^tliers

Another,

£$%&.* &E* 2 M FftW aP d S E fy&P. v/as acted

at the st* James1s, April 13, 1338*°^

Only one reputable

dramatist used this work or, for that matter, any of James* work as a basis for

his

plays*

James Westland Marston*a

ifirje. He Merafiia (1850), in which Helen Faucit played with Q great success, was based to some extent on Pi'lllip Augustus» A drama, brothers In k w m * was acted at tho Stalybridge Grand, September 5, 1894,°® But four other of James1 some hundred novels wore dramatized*

Or© in & Thousandi or, !ghe

(1835) was dramabizccl and published in 1837 by Arthur Hume Fhiakett#®^

The Kina*» Highway (1840) was acted undo: the Ofi earn© title as Binary Lane, March 20, 1843 ; Arrah Neil was

acted as Arrah Nells o£, ffee 7ale of the K.pockfiema at the Liverpool A&elphl, April 1, 1872°°| and The Fight of the Fiddlers,was acted in XS79 as a comedy drama, Roger Dalton, by C* Stewart

516.

Six months after the first P&rnlev was acted, an

eighteenth century writer, Samel Hlchardson, had his first nineteenth century adaptation when a version of Clarissa

'

Hax^owe was played at the Olympic, January 3, 1831.^ Clarissa Hari^we had not, oddly enough considering the stage success it was to have, been adapted in its own century, This is noteworthy, too, in that a highly successful version of gftajola had been acted at Goodman* s Fields, November 7, 1741, and in Edinburgh, Dec k e r 20, 1741 *90

It is likewise

odd that Fame la was to go without dramatisation In the nine** fceenth century,

The Olympic version of Clarisea Harlowe.

which m y have been by T *Ti* Racy, was followed by one at the Princess* a, September 9, 1846, which was amiaunced as by Thoms H# Heynoldson*^-j0

The next year, m r c h 18, a

version played at the St* James1s * ^ 2- diaries Matthews was also said to have written a version*2'03

An 1890 per~

formanee at the Vaudeville of an unidentified version of Clarissa Marlowe is described by Clement Scott; ****tears once more ’were shed in abundance over the sorrows of Clarissa Earlows# Hot even the ■ beautiful Hose Cherl, when in the heydoy of her Success and lev lines a, could have raois ened sympathetic eyes more effectively, or caused each suppressed sobs, as Winifred Emery did, when, *clothed in whit© samite, mystic, wonderful,* this *pure and stainless soul,1 in the poetical phrase of Robert Buchanan, *triumphed over all possible physical corruption,* and, rejecting |her betrayor* $ proffered hand, rises above him to the sublimity of martyrdom,* The pathetic death of Clarissa, as acted wlth^ such pathos and exquisite sensibility by Winifred Emery, moved her sympathetic audience to abundant tears* This death scene was so finely Imagined

^ l/f

that the attention was riveted throughout by Clarissa’s plaintive pleading, and the eye held spell-bound with the wondrous .far-away expression that her face as sms© s. In no part of Winifred Emory1 s performance was there one jarring note* In the earliest scenes the actress was wholly in the manner of Richardson, — sweet, modest, maidenly, and unobtrusive * In her m o :t draasatlc scenes she was entirely natxiral, and never for a moment stagey. She aroused interest at the outset,, and at the conclusion touched th© teaderesfc,fibres of the heart by a method that was alike artistic and pathetic*3^ ® Quite a far cry from Clarissa Bar low© was herald Griffin*

b

The Collegians (1829), which was mad© into -a play,

Bily C**Connori qr The Foster Brothers» which was played with some success at the City Theatre, Crlpplegato, London, in August,

1851*-

Hiss Ellen Tree played Slly 0*Connor,-^

But this early adaptation is almost entirely overshadowed by Dion. B£mcicaultrs very free adaptation of the same novel, The Colleen

acted at th© A&elphi in

pathetic dr&$ia**«*createcl a furore»

1859,

,?T M s

Houses crowded night-*

ly for many souths to enjoy really good acting,

Mrs,

Bouclcauli played the part of th© poor ill-used Colleen, and Dion, %l©s^m«*Copp&l©e&*

Nothing could exceed th©

pathos and comic hmuour that he Invested this part wlth*w^°® Another critic, praises th© production from quit© another point of view* Th© new Adolph! mad© a promising beginning with Th© Colleen Sawn, the first of th© sensational dramas, that 'Is to say, th© first drams, in which a striking m o h m i e a l effect was the principal attraction, and the first serious drama In which the actor become of secondary importance to tho machinist and tho scene painter. There had boon

313.

shaking waters and rolling billows and other watery offsets "before the casern scene of The C.Q.jleon Barer*,,««» but transparent stage water had never before been seen, and a few yards of blue gauze did mora than all tho fine acting In the world could have acco aplished, It filled the Adelphi for hundreds of nights, it filled the treasuries of provincial managers, it sent people to the theatre that had never been before, and It made the forbum© of the author* Tot it is said that he was not actually the inventor of tho wonderful thing but that the idea first occurred to an old stage carpenter while he was constructing the scene, Nevertheless the piece was well acted* lylesHO&^Coppaioen was, with Shaun the Post, Bouclcault* 0 best parti tfrs* Soucioault was a charming Colleen Bawr; Falconer was the Danny Maaaii; and it oould not have been better play@d| Indeed, every part was almost perfect in Its way, and the drama was very cleverly cons true ted,' But there Is no denying- that, but for the blue gauze, The Colleen., Bagm might not have run twenty As this writer has suggeste&* th© play was acted down through the year® with repeated success. Other novelist© follow in alow succession with a few works unprentontlonely dramatised.

Frederick Marryatda

Jacob Faithful w m immediately seised upon after its pub­ lication in 1334 mid was dramatised.

Jacob Faithful; or,

The M f e of & Tfmmu. Waterman was performed at the Surrey, December 0, 1 8 3 4 Jacob Faithful, ttie Lighter Boy» A Tale of the Thame S'by Join Thomas Haines was acted at the Victoria, 108 eight days later, December 18, 1834; a third version,

Jacob Faithful, was seen in Edinburgh, Sept©mb r 1, 1341 Susan Forrier* a The Inheritance. although it had boon publish­ ed eleven years before, in 1824, was dramatized by Hdv.-ard

with, coma success a t Covent Sa-'-don, November 24, 1855* Fit shall himself says, "Tho play met with a chorus of faint prals© from the reviewers."

Henry W&Xlaek played Adam Black,

and Miss Taylor played Gertrude

Samuel Lover, in 1887,

wrote a dramatisation of his own novel, dory PfMore, which had boon published in that same year,

The three-act play

was performed with moderate success at tho Adelphi, Sept­ ember 29, 1837, century,

and was acted now and age in through the

On May 28, 1858, it was acted for the first time

at the Adelphi, Bdinhurgh,2*3-2 arid was popular enough so that ten years later, July, 1848, Hudson, in a three weeks engage­ ment at th© M e l p M , Edinburgh, played it several times It was played at tho Queen*s, Edinburgh, as late as 1880 T>TA when Mr* and Mrs* Vtyhdlmm acted it on Juno 18* J*K* Planeljfe says that Lover hl&self tried to act Rory somewhere in th© provinces but that he failed miserably**3^

Another

version of th© novel was Rory 0*More, an Irish drama In four acts, by J*W* Whitehead, which was acted at the Dublin

Queen* s Royal Theatre, April 18, 1900 The drsmfcisers turned next from contomporary pieces back to the eighteenth century and chose for new attention a work which had been dramatised many years before, Horace Walpole1s The Castle, of Otranto» This novel had first been adapted for the stag© In 1779 by Robert Jephson as T.foe Count of Hasbonne and1was first played at Covent Garden, November 17, 1781*

The "tragedy*, which

should have been called a "melodrama,8 was tremendously successful, had an excellent cast in the original per­ formance, and was consistently and frequently revived as late as November 5, 1807 entertainment,8

' A second version, a "pantomime

with libretto by Miles Peter Andrews, and

music by Shields, was produced successfully at Covent Garden in December, X78&*13-8

Thomas Dibdia, already

mentioned frequently as an adapter, records that he "trans­ formed Jephson* s *Cotrnfc of Narbonno1 into 1Tho Prophecy, or Giant spectre*f®X19

The methods used by these earlier drama­

tists wore essentially the same as those used by their success­ ors except that the nineteenth century dramatists did not treat The Castle of Otranto w ith the serious respect pre­ viously accorded It,

Nevertheless they made it popular—

as a burlesque and as a pantomime*

The pantomime based

on It which played at Covent Garden during th© season of 1840-1841 under the management of Charles J. Matthews was perforated fifty-five times*

"It wets nearly all a harliquin-

ade with tricks and change*83-^® Gilbert a Beckett was the author of a one-act burlesque which was acted at th© Haymarket, April 84, 1848, and which was advertised as an MB*8fcar novelty8 wad a "grand romantic extranvaganea,8 This vapid bur lew ta, a thing of an hour end twenty minutes i n .the performing, was sandwiched between lorton1® Old Honest?/ and Lavater the Phyajiognondst;. I'ecley bu?foohed Manfred, a stout little man In velvet| Priscilla Boston played Theodora* and Mrs. Clifford, Hippo11ta# The Times critic, although evidently Msliking th© violent caricature says

that iV3hsn the curtain Tell, a sentence of appro­ bation was given In from all sides..** The acting was very good*1 To us this travesty, delivered in rhymes which alternately hobble slow with shambling gait and clink briskly w^th tinnifiad jingle seems Indescribably weak. Even if one fairly remembers that there is no more ephemeral form of play than theatrical burlesque, oven if every allowance bo made for the evaporation of the current jokes# the up-to-date slang, the topical and political allusions, the remainder is stale, and ©von curious*dry bones# and dust Th© Edinburgh Theatre Royal, not to be outdone# also played a burlesque on The Castle of Otranto# December 2, 18S2*1SS For the same season that the burlesque of The Castle of Otranto * was being played at Covert Carden, (1840-41)# Charles James Lever* s novel, Charles QfHailey was dramatised for the Olympic.

The three-act piece,

Sfeasagg. 2iM M sx* ££® M a il Dragoon, by 'Maearthy was acted April IE, 1841* and was revived December 4* 1843. Edward Edmund Falconer’s play on the same material, Charles 0fMalleyj qr, Love, Fun and Fighting was acted at the Liverpool Amphitheatre # April 22, 1871#*^

Although Samuel

barren1s f m Thousand a Tear had been published a yoar before Charles CdMalley, in 1839, it was not adapted until sometime afterward although t he melodramatic material should have had a certain appeal.

The only recorded dn&i&atication was made

by Richard Brinsley X-'eak© for Frederick Yates at tho Adelphi 125 Theatre# It was first acted Marcn 29, 1844* Bronte* s

Jane Eyre#

The next author had the fortune to have her first

publication and while her name and identity were still iinknov/n ♦ Charlotte Bronte's Jane Hypo was first acted at the Victoria,. January 51, 1848, in a version by John Brougham, who gave his play the subtitle, Tho Secrets of Tiiornflela Mano.y House« The book had been published In the previous August and had already gained so much attention that a second edition was published tho same month as tho play was prochiood#

Brougham* s four-act play, which was produced by

Osbaldleton, had for its chief character Mis® Vincent and was daid to have had good scenery and good &cting*^2U

But

tho play, considering the fact that the novel was to be tremendously popular as a stage medium through the rest of the century, was not very successful*

The novel wan to be

played through the provinces and in Americaj many foreign versions were to be made of it#lBV including “an immensely popular Sermon drama by Pfeiffer, 1Das Walse von Lowood*' On November 16, 1867, a two-act Jane Byyft was being played at the

S u r r e y , 129

and on August 87, 1879, a play in a pro­

logue and four acts, Poor Relationsi or, Jane Byre by James Willing was being played at the Alexandra (or $ark) Theatre in Camden Town*

“In this, Stella Brereton did well as the

1SO heroine and Odell gave a realistic picture of the clergyman?-1'0 -' A little later tho same year, on Ootober 13, T.H. Paul's version, this time in three acts, was performed at the i%h Oldham Amphitheatre*

OwO• TV© most famous version of Jan© Byre was to appear a few years later, however, when v/,G* wills1 play was per­ formed at the Glob©, late in 1088* On December 23 an adaptation of Charlotte Bronte* s well-known novel, 1Jone Byre* ?/as produced at the Globe Theatre. The play, by Mr, R.G.Tillsi,. was written in a domestic style and did not prove sufficiently powerful. The drama was divided lnt:> four acts, the first of which takes place at Tl3 0 rn.fiell Hall, There we see the arrival of Jane 33yr© at Mr. Rochester's, end her intro­ duction to her pupil, Adel©, a part which was cleverly played by a little French child, Idlie. Cleiitence Colie • In the second act the scene take® place in which the heroine is insulted by the Ingrams, Hochest©r proposes to her, and the act concludes with the entrance of the mad woman-- a scene skillfully contrived by the dramatist, and mad© very impressive through the weird acting of Mies d'Alm&in© in the character of the distracted creature. The third act shows Jan© Byre ;?uot recovered from a sever© illness consequent upon her fright at seeing the mad woman# She is visited by the Ingrams, who toll her that Koch© ator is already married* Jane confronts Kochestar with the truth of the state­ ment * Learning tho truth, Jane lyre resolves to leave Thomf laid• The last act concludes with the return of Jane, and she is then visit­ ed by Rochester. The tltlo ro3© was sustained by Mrs * Bernard Beer©, who acted in a quiet, domestic man»ax% and succeeded in crooting some Interest in tho character, although she did not represent the character ae It Is des­ cribed in the novel. Mr, Charles Kelly was a very lifeless representative o£ Rochester. Th© play was adequately issounted*3-.^

Clement Scott gives elaborate praises to Mrs • Been© and describes her pj|r3fonuance in some delall. Too

In tho cast

were, other than the persons mentioned s Carlotta Leclercq as Lady Ingram, Kelli© Jordan as Miss Bocchy, Kate Bisnop m

Blanch© Ingram, Maggie Hunt as Mary Ingram, Alexes

Leighton as Mrs, Fairfax, Miss Masson as Grace Poole, a .v• Denison as Lord Desmond, H*B, Russell a;. tho Reverend -a?# Prior, H,H« Caaoron as Rat Lee, anu o, tevons as ju^os. 134

324 ,

Late'in 1651, the dramatizes*© seized upon tho work of another eighteenth century writer, Jonathan Swiit, and, December 29, Gulliver1g Travels,^, or, Tho kingdom of Lllllput, a pantoxaiiao, was ffroduced at the A&olphi, Edinburgh*

The

chief attraction seems to have boon the some sixty children who. were the Lilliputians*

The children were headed by Miss

Annie Parker and trained by Mrs* hyndham, Hungall and Saker were Clown and Pantaloon, and Miss Kate Elrby, Columbia© ,3-^ This must have been a far cry from Swift*

Lat© in 1899,

another pantomime on tho same subject by Mr# Soutar played at the Marylobon©, London, with Miss Koslna Kanoe in tlx© cast *1'*®

Baring the season of !S75 June 10, 1872, sup* ported by Walter Roberts, Fred Thorne, Dennis Coyne, J#S# Blythe, George Thorne, F•Paulo, L* Fredericks, Lilli© Roberts, Jennie Rogers, Maggie Beach, A*M .Warren•

iii© company

was still in Brighton and again acted East Lynne between May $ and 12, 1875a1®4

Bast. Lynn© was played In Brighton again

on December 4, 1875, mitb Alice Finch as Isabel, a nd might have been seen there during the next three years:

on An,gust

28, 1876 (played by the Beatrice Company;? on October 22, 1877 on September 5, 1878*185

East Lynne was acted in HottIngham,

342. November 19, 1874; was burlesqued In Wolverhampton, April 18, 1881; was performed In Coventry as The Lost Lady of Lynne by A. Willoughby, January 24, 1883; and was given at Fulham, February 20, 1899*3-®® East Lynne was likewise popular In London and particularly so In 1879 when it was performed in four dif­ ferent theatres. and 1879*3,87

It was given at the Standard in both 1878

x« February, 1879, Bella Patem&n played in the

dual parts of Lady Isabel and Madam© Vine at the Surrey*

Five

months later there was a second revival at the same theatre with Louise hoodie playing the leading character.188

At Astley*s

Amphitheatre, a revival of East Lynne was played October* 27, 1879, when Sarah Thorns played Lady Isabel Carlyle and Madame Vine; Emily Thome, Cornelia Carlyle; George Thome, Lawyer Di

11*3.39

At the Olympic, June 23, Miss Heath p3.ay©d Lady

Isabel Carlyle and Madame

Vine

*3.90

noteworthy that

two of the companies acting East Lynne In London In 1879 had first played It in the provinces, the Thornes in Brighton and Miss Heath In Birmingham.

The play might have bean seen

In London for some time thereafter, at the Princess* s, March 7, 1896;

at the Olympic in 1888, 1889, 1898; at the Royalty

in 1891;

and atthe Opera-Oomique, April 10, 1897.3*^3A1 though Maria Edgeworth had been long dead, in

1866 one

of her novels was the subject of adaptation.

Edmund

Falconer produced on November 19, at Her Majesty*s Theatre in the Haym&rket, an ttIrish play called ’Donah,* or *The Lovers of Lisnamona1 (sic?, founded on two novels, Marla Edgeworth’s

o4o * celebrated story, and Carlton’s 1FardQuroughra the Miser.1 Falconer, who was devoted to weird characters, played the Miser, and Fanny Addison was ’Dough,1 the heroine.*1192

The

play was unsuccessful, and most of the audience had gone home before it was finished*

"The drama went on for seven hours

and was then not finished, though it was past 2 a.m*

Finally,

the stage carpenters took the law Into their own hands, pulled the carpet from under the feet of the actors, then rang the curtain down and the unfortunate play was no more. for a drama that was never fin ished —

Record

even once."193

An

unfortunate ending for the play*. The first adaptation from a novel of Ouida also failed.

This was Idalia by George Roberts, "taken from one

of Ouida* s novels —

another dreadful St# James* s failure —

an evening of mishaps, brilliantly related by Charles Wyn&ham, who was In the cast with Irving#11 It seems that water spilled on a bridge became frosen and that characters "slipped, slid, sprawled, and finally came to g r i f I n

the unfortunate play,

which was performed on April 22, 1867, Henry Irving acted Count Falcon#19^

An adaptation of Ouida* s first novel, Held

in Bondage (1863)^ was more successful.

This play, Delilah

by James Willing, jr., was first acted at the Alexandra (or Tank) Theatre, Camden Town, October 7* 1880, and "had quite a good run and was well put on and well acted."193 brought to London to the Olympic on October 30. huge.

It was

Its cast was

In the prologue, Leonard Boyne appeared as Arthur Tempest,

o4i4 . Arthur Dacre as Lord Tinsley, F* Barsby a® Major Bond, Ernest Welmoxe as Hecfcor Hazleton, Amy Steinberg as Miss Trevelyn, Stella Brereton as Ada Trevor, Bella Cuthbert as The Dowager Lady Dreytown, Fanny Addison as Lady Tempest* The characters In the drama, seven years latex*, included Leonard Boyne as Col* Sir. Arthur Tempest, Arthur Dacre as Lord Tinsley, P.# Barsby as Major Bond, W, Vincent a s Ernest Robinson, Charles Harrison as Lord Carleton, Ernest V/iiiuore as Charles Hazleton, Ada Murray as Lady Windham, Fanny Thorn© as May, Stella Brereton as Ada Trevor, Bella Cuthbert as Dowager Lady Greytown, and Amy Steinberg as Delilah.19*^ Ouida1s Moths (1880) also had an adaptation made of It,

H* Hamilton wrote the play, which was acted at the

Glob© Theatre, Saturday afternoon, March 25, 1882#

"It was

only acted there once, and on April 27 it was transferred to the stage of the Olympic Theatre, where It had a fairly success­ ful run*

The adaptation did not display much skill —

It

was simply a pasting together of so many pages from the novel, ■and the play was too long and overdone with dialogue.”19 In the cast were Carlotta Addison as Lady Dolly, Louis© Allies as Fuschia Leach, Herbert Standing as Lord Jura, Kyrl© Bellow as Govrize* Marie Litton as Marie, A* Bstcoui't as Trine© gouroff, K* Hamilton as the Duke of Mull and Cantyre. Cantley as Evan, Lizzie Claremont as Nadine.. Melaguine, and Maude Brennan as Dutchess de Sennas*198 In 1867 P&lgmve Simpson, creditable dramatist, adapted the novel Black Sheep by Edmund Yafcos, obscure novelist.

345 As a mere work of constructive skill, nothing on the English stage can excel his admirable dramatisation of Mr. Edmund Yates1s *Black Sheep,1 a work which only failed to attract through Charles Matthews1 execrable attempt at Stuart Routh# There were strong moments, though, in the other parts* Mrs* Charles Matthews, who had been a traged­ ienne in her own country, doomed by adverse circum­ stances to pose herself as a comedienne, was strong as fire and true as steel in Mrs# Routhj and, barring his nasal mannerism, so was Johnny Clark, as Jim, the street arab,3-99 The play, which had been at the Olympic, was not successful and neither was it successful when the Matthews played it in Birmingham the next year, 1868-69 It was some time before another Yates novel appeared on the stage*

This time it was Kissing the Rod*

which was made into a play called A Millionaire by Or#W# Godfrey, acted at the Court, September 27, 1883*

The play

was moderately successful a net Mrs* Beorbohm Tree was highly praised for her acting of Hester Gould# The wosaftn depicted had a silent and determined passion for Robert Streightley* The love was so strong that it demoralized and unsexed her* She was the evil shadow lurking about the scene, and the bitterness of her hate was as relentless as the fever of her love# Such a character might be made the most stagey and artificial in exist­ ence* If badly acted it would have gone far to ruin the play, but Mrs, Bserbohm Tree gave this wierd creature a reality that sometimes startled the audience, and endowed her with serpentine fascination# Well mad© up, cold, pale, red-haired, and grimly passionate, the actress showed us not the mere husk and shell, as so many actresses do, but the heart of the woman, he could see how she loved, feel how oho hated$ we could almost sympathize with the cold ter­ ror of her revenge. The scene In which Hester -Gould, with cat-like purring ways and claws ready to tear and rend, handed to her rival the document that would break her heart, was rendered by Mrs* Reerbohin Tree

30 •

in a singularly artistic fashion, but throughout the made very few false stops, and secured on that occasion the best share of the acting honors. ^ On April 1, 1872, John Ho 11ingshead produced at the Gaiety theatre a threo-aefc comedy called Shi 1ly-Slial1:/» which is unusual in the history of adaptations*

The adaptation, was

M d e by Charles Heads of Anthony Trollope* a novel, .Ralph the Heir, but in consideration of the fact that as a novelist Charles Heads was a vociferous objector against free adapt­ ations without permission, it is noteworthy that he did not have Trollope* s permission nor approval to put Ralph the Heir on the stage*

The adaptation* a comparative failure anyway,

was suggested by Holllngahoad* Reads claimed to have in­ formed Trollope of his intention to make the adaptation, but Trollope not only disclaimed all know lodge of tho play but was so indignant about it that tho two writers were unfriendly for many years#

Heads, at the least, did put Trollope*s name

on the playbills and had decided to give Trollope half the receipts# so perhaps his intentions were honorable*202

John

Coleman says that Beado actually offered Trollop half the roy­ alties but that Trollope refused them*

Read©1'® story is that

“from their (r;'©ad©,» and Trollope1s) intimate friendship he did not think it necessary to ask Trollope1s permission to drama­ tise the work**

Coleman also indicates that ho facie Eeado

did Trollope a fa.or by dramatiaing his work, but fchrnraa of Yesterday and Today* vol* I, P • 21*

32*

Ellis, S »,?!*,. William Harrison Ainsworth. and His friends, vol* I, pp * m

S3* 34*

f

p

o p *cit**

pp* 4-5.

»-5v4 •

SfiM*. P* 366*

35*

Goodman, Walter, op* cit** pp* 8-9* The quotation quoted in the text from tn© $5named critic appears on p* S* Mention Is made of this revival in Ellis, s*!>W, wmiara Harri son Ainsworth and His, Friends* vol. I, p* 366,

36*

Ellis, S W i l l i a m Harrison Ainsworth and His Friends* vol* I, p* 36‘ S| Scott, Clement" h e Draxiia of Yestegday and Today* vol*. X, p. 369*

369 . 37*

Reynolds, p* 141 j Kicoll, XIX, vol* II, p. 474.

35*

Goodman, Walter, op* cit*, p* 7. Although this version la listed here among those which appeared in the closing isontbs of 1839, no definite date is given it*

39*

Sorter, Henry C., The History of the Theatres of Brighton from 1.774 to 1805* p. 7 K '

40*

X M d .* pp, 90, 91, 94, 197, 167, 201.

41*

Penley, Belville s . , The Bath Stage* A History of Dramatie Hepromentations in Bath* pT 139*

42,

Dibdin, James 0*, The Annals of the Edinburgh stage With an Account of the ITse^'and^'lProgres& of Dramatic Writing m H l ^ r p T s v w r i i c o T i r AIX, vo1« XX, P* o35 ^ Reynolds, p. 141*

43.

Hicoll, XXX, vol, IX, p. 380#

44*

Clarence, p, 228*

45.

Sills# S*M** William harrlson Ainsworth andHis Friends* vol, X, p. 369, ! 1 ~~

46,

Clarence, p* 328,

47#

Baker, H* riarton,

48*

sherson, Erroll, o£, pit,, p. 1"/; Bills,S*R.,William Harrison Ainswortn andHis Friends, vol, I, p.3G^(Hote 1); !!o111ngaheadJohn, Gaiety Chronlcles* p, 470.

49#

Clarence, p* 228#

■ r^*

Ibid** p* 328#

51,

X M d .* p, 328#

52,

X M d ,* p, 222,

0

£, cit#* p* 329,

53 * XbJjd#, P * 22 .i.:* 54,

Hi CO 11, XXX, vol* XI, P* 534.

55*

Bills, 3*&*j> William Harrison Ainsworth andKi£ Friends* vol* X, p* 4217™’

56.

Scott, Clement, The Drama of Yesterday and Today* vol. II, P# 164,

57*

HIco11, XXX, vol. II, P* 534.

58.

Reynolds, p.* 141 | Clarence, p. 449.; Mi coll, XIX, vol. II, p* 315.

59.

Ellis, S#M•, William Harrison Ainsworth and pis Friends, vol. I, p. 42Y* ~~

60*

Clarence, p* 449;Reynolds,

81*

Clarence, p, 449*

62*

Ibid*. p* 449.

63*

18id., p* 184* She succeeding material; on the plays on Cuy Fawkss are all taken from Clarence, Reginald, StteQ Cyclopedia; A Bibliography of Plays, London, wfEesSage, 1 ^ $ , p* 165, except the references to Hodge©1 and Hermann* s plays which are found on. earlier pages of the same book* Smith* s first version la men** tionad in Micoll, XIX, vol* II, p# 592, and Byron*© in Holllngahead, John, op * cit*, p* 464*

84*

.Evidently a play called The Miser* s Daughter was pro­ duced at Drury Lane, F e b r a a r y ^ ? 7 i a W T $ e e Clarence, p* 287; Mico 11, XXX, vol. II, p* 401; BeynoX&s, p. 141, IIcoll definitely states that this play was founded on Ainsworth1s novel and that it was written by Thomas Frochis Taylor* However, the novel was not published until 1842, after It had been run In Ainsworth* e la^ayin.e where it began serial pub 11cat 1on T n W e H S i t n u m b e r In February, 1842*

65.

Clarence, p. 297; Kicoll, XIX, vol. II, p* 397; 311'e, $ that of the smr&ar of Haney and the death of Sikes*— point©.In the story which, only appeared in the previous month of October# when the story was finished** The play may have an. ending different front t he ending of Barnett* b , but not for the reason given# for Oliver Twist was completed In the January# 1838#issue^ofa Miscellany. before any of ifa.- d r mm t i actions oT^EebuolT’i ^ earid»

57.

HIcoXI ,X.IX# vol* II# p. 3111 Pits-florald# p* 104*

88*

FIta-Oerald# p* 104* ho other mention was found of these two versions or performances*

59*

Clarence# p* 3291 Reynolds* p. 143# In.coll# XIX# vol* II,, p* 398# Fitg-a#»ld, p* 106* Fit»-Gerald says th© play is by Lacy and HIcoll says th© play Is by Stirling and in th© list of plays by Lacy# vol# 11# p* 330# does not mention an 0liver Twist *

60*

Fita^Oemld# pp* 106 £#■

61*

Ibid., p* 98 1 Forster, John, W S S 129*

62#

Porter# Henry 0*, op*, bit*# pp# 70# 98# 104*

63*

HIco 11, XIX, voI.il P# 855# Dibdln, James 0*# 0 £, cit., pp* 378# 42*; ms-Jerald# p* 107* The cast of char­ acters Is given in both I>ibdin, James G*# op. cit.*, p, 378, and Pit©-Gerald p* 107*

o p

*

cit#, p# 188, Editor1e

377. 64*

Dib&in, Janes C •, op. clt,», p. 424. 3liS"» PP- 450, 457,

66*

Baynhaia, Walter, Tho Gigsr o w Sfca£o, p, 218.

67*

Reynolds, p. 143# Fitz-0©raid, p. 109.

68.

Sliis passage is quoted In Hamilton# Cicely, and Baylis, U llan,fgt© Q M Vic,, p. 98; Sherson* Brroll, op* cit* P* 13# SSoW J o SST ”2 M Il0*n 4 Century or Theatric-* History 18X6*10,16. pa.HScf £, From the faclithat it was^Saviil© who' was. playing Sikes, it is possible to estimate that this performance probably took place about 1850*

69*

Scott, Clement, The Dr&sm o£ 'Yesterday and Today, vol* II, p. 31.

70*

Sherson# Erroll, op* cit,, p. 202# A oast is also g iven in Ptia^OeraXd, p* 1oB7"an& the play is mentioned in Clarence, p. 329| Reynolds, Ernest, p. 143; Pemberton, T* Edgar, Ellen Terry and Her Sisters* p* 213,

71*

Sherson# Erroll, op, cit,, p* 204,

72*

Pemberton, T, Edgar, The Birmin^aia Theatres: Retrospect* pp, ©8, el7* ~~

73.

Reynolds, p* X45|Clarenc@# p*. 329, Pits*9erald# p, 100; Sherson, Erroll, op* cit# pp* 96 f*

74.

Reynolds* p* 143| Clarence, p* 330| Fits-Oorald, p. 110,

75*

Reynolds, p# M 5 | Clarence, p« 313; Sherson# Hr roll, op , cit .* pp* 107, 108; Fita-Gerald, p* 110*

A Local

76,

Flts-Corald, pp* 110 £*

77,

Ibid#, p* 112; Clarence, p. 60,

78,

Sheraen# Erroll, op* cit., p* 116#

79,

Fifca**# cit,* p* 454; Reynolds, p# 144*

276*

Rico 11, XIX, vol. IX, p. 3641 Reynolds, p*

277*

Baker, B* Barton, os* cit.* p* 4G7f FitzGerald, p* 811| Reynolds,p* 1447

278*

Hi coll, XIX, vol* II, p# 4201 Reynolds, p.* 144.

879*

FitzGerald, p* 212*

280*

Reynolds, p# 144*

2S1*

FitzGerald, p. 211* See also Hollingshead, John, op * ejt** pp# 858 f *, 4641 Clarence, p» 38; Hey* rioMs, p* 144* PitzOer&id gives the date of the initial performance as December 25; all other ref oronce s as Dec ember 26#

282*

Clarence, p* 38; FitzGerald, p* 212*

283#

FitzGerald, p* 212; Clarence, p# 280*

284*

Clarence, p* 36* FitzGerald, p* 212, indicates that the play given at the Melphi, Liverpool, August 6, 1894.. Is the play given at the Bijou, Baysw&ter.

285*

FitzGerald, p* 218*

286*

144*

FitzGerald, pp* 223 ff* FitzOeimld Is incensed at this critic, and this dramatisation, and the changes made in the plot* see also, Rico 13., XXX, vol. IX, p* 401;Reynolds> p* 144#

287*- FitzGerald, g* 225* 88-8#

Clarence, p* 254$ FitzGerald, p* 230*

289*

FitzGerald, pp* 227 f# See also Clarence, p# 192; Reynolds, p# 1441 Broretcm, Austin, Dramatic Botes, 16...I, p* 41; 'Foreter, John, op* cit*# p* 863, Selltor' s note 506; Baker, X. Barton, ££* cit,, p* 331#

200*

FitzGerald, p* 250* Xbid*> pp* 226 £*

390 , 292*

Clarence, p* 65,

293*

Rldeing, William H,# 0£* cit,, p* 93*

294 * Pemberton, T* Edgar, Charles Pi ekens and the 5tn^e, p. 177 * 295,

Clarence, p# 205,

296,

Ibid*, P* 117,

297,

Pits-Geralcl, p« 226*

298*

Forster, John, op* cit.. pp* 507, 514, Editor* s no to 326* See also Gerald pp* 212 f *$ Ley, 4 .9., * cit,, p* 2381 Reynolds, p* 144$ Clarenco, p* 191* coil, XIX., vol* II, pp* 466 and 467 lists two plays by unknown authors, The Haunted man* or* The Conp&afe with the Ghost The E a S n tS 'hanj. or, Tho. Bargain"(A Fancy"Tor’ChrIst-oan}, as Having been given at ¥He Adelphi, Wednesday, Peeestfbor 20, 1842. Girrely this I© not possible, robably Lemon* s play is meant •

t

299.

Pit&^Gemld, p* 213*

300 9

Hiooll, XIX, vol * II, p* 487$ Reynolds, p* 144*

301*

Reynolds, p* 144*

302*

McoXX, XIX, vol. II, p* 467.

303,

Clarence, p* 191*

304*

Fits~Ceral&, pp* 238 f.$ Clarence, p. 104$ Reynolds, p. 144*

305*

Pits-G©raid, p. 239$ Reynolds, p, 144, Clarence, p. 104, gives the date of this Surrey version as November 7, 1880, and indicates that It was' another version which was acted, at the Standard later in the month,

300,

Flt&^Ger&M, p.* 237$ Reynolds, p, 144$ brougham, John, David Copperfield, p. 2$ Clarence, p* 104,

307,

FitzGerald, pp* 237 f*

308*

Ibid** PP. 238, f39$ Reynolds, p. 144*

309*

Pemberton, T ; Edgar, Charles Dickens and tho stage, pp * 184 £ *

310*

Forster, John, op* cit., p* 845$ see also Editor’s noto 506, p.* 852, which states that **Dickens was oop eialiy pleased with the performance of Mir'*—

391* 311.*

FitzGerald, pp.* 255, 234, 236, 257# Porstor, John, op . cit*, p. 852, M l tor1s note 506 ) Brereton, Auv tin, Draxjmfl'G Botes. 180% a p* 41*

312*

Pemberton, e £% Edgar, Charles Blckens and the styto * pp* 175 t m- See also, Pltr^Gerald, pp. 1^54, 2357 286; F©:>barton, T, Edgar, fhe Iflirs&nrda&si •Phea.tros * p. 76.

313*

FitzGerald,■p« 233; Fehborton, 9* S&gar, Hie BlrMr^nr.: ‘theatre a , p* 25 j Forster, John, op* cit*, p* 658, M i tor c nolie S&6*

314*

Peraberbon, Edgar, Charles Dickens and tho ctago* p* 176) Fltzilorald, -p *. §3^7"^""" '

315*

FitzGerald, pp* 234 £, See also Forster, John, on*' cit** p, 852, Editor*® note 506* Fits-* doraid lists Mattie Reinhardt as Martha but speaks of Dickens* praise of His© Emefcone in the part in the original Olympic production*

316,

Clarence, p* 259*

317*

Pemberton, I1* Edgar, l*hs BirsalnefcamTheatres, p. 76*

318*,

Porter# Henry C**

519*

FitzGerald, p* 238*

320*

Ibid*» p * 237; Clarence, p* 252*

321*

FitzGerald, p, 42Q-

522#

j&id*, p* 241*

323*

Ibid,* p, 240) O’Xaronc©, p» 1Q4| Reynolds,p. 144*

324*

FitzGerald, p.

240) Clarence, p* 262*

825*

FitzGerald, p*

240; Clarence, p* 259*

826*

FitzGerald, p*

840) Reynolds, p# 144.

327*

FitzGerald, pp. 235 £., p. 240*

528.

Porter, Henry C*, o£, elj;*, p* 200*

329.

FitzGerald, p , . 242; Clarence, p. 131.

350*

FitzGerald, p» 240; Clarence, p* 28, gives the date as October 19, 1870*

351.

Clarence, p. 131*

0

£* cit*, p# 171,

592*

Xbicu« p. 102# 335*

Pit z-(Jerald, pp* 256 f* See also

p* 260*

334*

I M J l** PP* 266 £. See also Clarence, p* 189*

555*

Fitzgerald, pp* 261 £*; Clarence Brroll, 0 £* cit*# p. 75#

356*

Clarence, p# 299*

357*

Flb»-*Gerald, p* 214* February 4, 1856*

ctoS#

Fitss^tJ-eraXd, p* 215*

359*

Ibid,* p*. 216*

340*

Ibid*.* p* 2161 Clarence, p* 202#

541#

PltsH*G«rald, P* 23.31 Clarence, p. 406#"

542*

Fitzgerald, pp* 213 t *| Clarence, p, 406#

343#

Scott, Clement, The Drama of Yesterday and Today, vol* II, p» llT^&forson, IrrolT* * cit ** p# 884*

p# 462; Sherson,

Clarence, p. 53, gives the date as

544*

Clarence, p# 406*

345*

Ibid*, p* 495#

346*

Flta~Qeral&f PP. 265 f£#

347#

For a discussion of therelation ofWattsPhillips* play to Dickens1" novel, seeFitz-Gerald, pp. 269 IT and Scott, Clement, From RThe Dells11 to vM m Arthur”,

348*

A Tale of Two Cities., A Drama, in two Acts and a Pro* ToiueJ By foil Taylor* London and New York, S&asueX .French#

349*

Fitzgerald, pp* 277 £*

350#

Taylor, Tom, A Tale of Two Cities, pp* 2 ff* A partial cast is given"’inlets**Gerald, pp# 277 f* Sea also Fits-* Gerald, pp# 877 £f ♦, pp* 284 f.j Clarence, p* 435; Koynolds, p.* 1441 Sherson, Enroll, o&* £lt#, p. 97$ Baker, H* Barton, 0£. cit.* P- 294; Williams, Michael, 0 £. cit.* p * 181 #■

551#

PIt»«(verald, P* .279*

395. S5S* Ibid., pp* 284 f. See also p. 279, The Cambridge B p -* ilographv of English Literature, vol, III, p. 443, gives tHodate o F “RiverS*""*play as 1862, which would njake it published after Fo^ Cooper* a play and not before as FitzGerald suggesta* 355,

FitzGerald, pp, 278 f, .So© also pp* 284 f », and Reynolds, p* 144*

534,

Cook, Dutton, fflisht.g at the Play, pp* 288 ff,

335*

FitzGerald, p« 280,

556,

Pemberton, T, Edgar, Charles Dickens and tho staue, p. 175# See also Baker*P' llir, Barton*'op* cTS’.T"!? * 3§7 J Baynham, Walter, 0 £, cit** p. 162,

537*

FitzGerald, p. 280. For other accounts of the play and eo«ao-n1;s# see Hollingshead, John, op* cit **p* 502\ Sherson, Erroll, op, cit*, p* 1941 ScoW, Clement, Thirty Years at, the ?Tay, p# 46; FitzGerald, pp. 879 ffTi BaEer, R* Barton, o£* Cit.** P. 887; Reynolds, P* 1441 Clarence, p. 17* '

338,

Pemberton, T* Edgar,

359,

Porter, Henry C „ op# cit,* p# 198*

560*

Clarence, p. 17*

361*

Clarence, p* 454| FitzGerald, p, 284*

362*

0larence , p * 434; FitzGerald, p * 281 *

363*

Clarence, p. 406; FitzGerald, p* 281,

864#

Clarence# p* 3 3*

The Birainfdmm rhea tree* p. 168#

865*

Hadden* Archibald, Green Room Gossip., p* 286,

366.

Ibid., PP# 192 f*

867#

Forster, John, op# cit*, p* 732#

368*

FitzGerald, pp. 283 f*

589*

Clarence, p* 434»

370.

FitzGerald, p. 287*

571*

Ibid,, p* 291; Reynolds, p* 144*

372#

Pemberton, T. Edgar, Charles .Dickons and tho stage, P , 174.

394 • 573*

FitzGerald, p* 266. See also Clarence, p. 181; Reynolds, p.* 144; Brereton, Austin, Dramatic Hotos* 1881. p. 38.

374* Pemberton, T » Edgar, The Birmingham Theatres * p. 86. 375.

FitzGerald, p, -2SB; Gl&rence, p. 311*

376.

FitzGerald, p. 291. Clarence, p. 356, gives the date as January 28, 1692 *

377.

FitzGerald, pp.216*£f* See also-The Cambridge Bib~ ilography of English Literature * vol* XI1,'^* 4457 _

578#

FitzGerald, pp# 218- £.,

379.

T M d »» •p» 219| Reynolds, p. 144; Clarence, p* 291*

380#

FitzGerald, p.,219; Reynolds, p*. 144; Clarence,p.* 291,

381*

FitzGerald, pp. 093 f* See also Clarence, p* 17?; Scott, Clamentr The Dra^m Yesterday and Today* vol. I, p. 177; Person,r grroll, o£* citTT p* 107*

382*

Foriborfeon, T., Edgar, The Birmjnphiua Theatres, pp., 38 f.,

385*. FitzGerald, pp.# 293 f , A collet©, cast of the Leeds performance is ^Iven here. 384*

Ibid*. p. 094. SO© also Clarence, p. 125; Forster, TfSSSS., op, cit., p. 452, Editor's note 355; Ley, J.W.T., op* cilT*. p.- 253* Qlax»@nce, p. 125, gives the data of production a© July 16, 1868*

585,

FitzGerald, pp* 894 f.| Clarence, p* 160,

58©*. Bollingahead, John, 8p« cit*. p* 461* 387*, Clarence, p. 320; Reynolds, p. 144;, Ley, J *7/.T,, op, pit *, pm 037} Forster, John, 0 £* cit., p. 660*- Porstor, p* 745, Indicates that Collins was tho s ae author of tho dramatisation2and Ho Thoroughfare* the last a joint piece with.Mr# Collin©, who during Ur, Dickens's absence in the States transformed It into a play for Mr# Fochter, with a view to which It had boon planned originally.® It seems doubtful that Dickens would permit Collins ter do this without his help, and Forster himself had already said, p, 97, that go Thoroupfefare Is "the only story he (Dickons) eve^ took~part in 3re atising*,*® This statement, In spite of the fact that it indicates Dickens at least helped with the drama** tiding of lo Thorou^hfare, is also somewhat in error.

395. 5S8 *

Cook, Dutton, Eights at the Flay, pp« 3*8 ff«

389 *

Pemberton, T * Edgar, Charles Dickens and tho Stage, PP* 173 f Ley, 'J.IY.T., op» cl'C; "p* 256.

300*

Reynolds, p# 144*

381*

Clarence, p* 521*

592*.

Clarence, p# 3.20*

393.

raid*, p* 320.

394*

Scott, Clement, The Drama of Yesterday and Today* vol. II, pp* 45 f*| Clarence, p. 461*

395,

Sherson, Errol!, pp.pit♦, p, 311*

398.

Fibs^Cerald., p? Clarence, p.* 518*

387*

FitzGerald, pp* SOSff* See also Clarence, p.* 318* , Slierson, Brroll, op, pit.* p* 98*

385.

clarence, p* X6*

399.

PitzOer&ld, p *.310. p, 295.

400.

FitzGerald, p ; 311*

401*

Clarence, p. 312*

402*

FitzGerald, pp* 258 ff *; Clarence, p, 239*

403,

Pemberton, T. Edgar, The Birralngham Theatres, p* 120*

404.

Clarence, p* 48, p* 2261 Reynolds, p. 144j FitzGerald, p, 245, p* 247,

see also Sherson, Enroll, op* cit**

405*

Cher son, Enroll, op.

cit., p* 241.

406*

FitzGerald, p. 247*

407*

Pemberton, T* Edgar, The Bfrmf n;dmm Theatres,p. 171.

408*

Sherson, Enroll, on.

409,

FitzGerald, p., * 24S, 2541 Clarence, p. 286. See also Sherson, Enroll, Q|>* cit*, p* 300$ Baker, H. Barton, op* cit., pp* 331, SSDjPemberton, T. Edgar, Charles Dickons and the Stage, p . 180.

cit., P. 300.

396. 410.

FitzGerald, pp. 248, 249 j Slierson, Srroll, o£* cit.. p. 5001 Pemberton, T. Edgar, Charles Pickens and the Stage, p. 180*

411.

FitzGerald, p. 247#

4X2.

X b i d ♦, p . 2 4 9 #

415 *

ISM*-# P* 254 *

414#

Ibid** p. 240* Clarence, p* 48, gives the date as E r e k 28, 1876*

415*

FitzGerald, p* 2501 Clarence,

p, 227JReynolds,

416*

Pits^Ge-rald, p* 2504 Clarence,

p* 48.

417*

FitzGerald, p. 249*

418*.

Ibid*» p* 2501 Clarence, p. 360.

419*

FitzGerald, p* 2501 Clarence, p# 360*

420 * Ho H i ng ahead, Cohn,

op*

P* 144*

tit*, p. 467*

421*

Clarence,, p* 226i Fits-Gerald,

422*

.FitzGerald,, p# 230 IT*

428*

FitzGerald* p* 250*

424*

Clarence* p* 48*

p. 252*

See also Clarence, p.306*

397 • Chapter VI X.

Praamtications off the Novel® of Charles Read©

For a full or account of this cui . as well as Heade1s other efforts against piracyof his works see Biwin* Kalcolm, Charles Heade* pp. 131-144, particularly pp. 138-144. Cvo b Tbo "CoToiaan, Joh£* Charles Head# as £ H410W PP* loo ff. ~~ Biwin, pp* 60 ff** Adams, W* Davenport,, the Pragm, P* 885; Coleman, John# Player 4lass.Sfe»» -p* 11 x; Coleman* Churles W S:‘ i a w m . p, 85*. Coleman* Players and p » 13«

4*' Coleman,

.jsbt.a.I Have Known* vol. II. as I feew

p . 141 ♦

fii O ft Clarence, Reginald, fhe Stage Cyclopedia* p. 17; Adams, Wft Davenport, p # 835*

o # For accounts of the collaboration of Bead© and faylor on and Paoee see Coleman, Charles Heade as- X Knew^ pp* w y SIoa j Heade, Charles'"Lr* and “Reade7 Hev* Compton, gfiarlea Read#, pp* 1S7-X94* Biwin, pp. 77-79* ;7 , Clarence, p.- 399* 8*

Xbicl«* p, 34-9 •

9*

i*, P* 349*.

10*

Elwin, p* 84| Stirling, Edward, Old Drury Lane» vol* I. P. 3501 Baker, B* Barton* K3story of the London Sfeago and Its, Famous, flayers, p. IQcj Clarence, p* 176*

XX * Blwin, p* 89* 12*

Heade and Heade* op* cit*, p. 534

13*

Ibid*, 538*

14:#

Coleman* p * 31 f *

IB*

Accounts of just what happened at this performance vary* See flench#, J«H«# ‘ fhe Recollections and Reflections o f , vol. 1, p. 219; Saker, H* Barton, ©£* « % * * I“ 4l33i " Blwin, pp# 180 ff| Coleman, Flayers and Playwrlghts I. Bay# Known, vol. II, p* 32; Snsrson, Erroil, ‘'London17 T S m ffiee^res of the Nineteenth Century, p , 3 5 7 ; Reads and Read©, op*~ l t r »T p;?* 524 ff*, Coler.mn, John, Charles

and

^ Bave Known* vol. II,

398* Ke&cXe as I Knew Elm# pp* 208 ££$ Scott, Gleii-.-nt, The Draiiia 0 ? Test ©relay, and Today * vol* IX, pp* 875 fd, 16*

Baker, M* Barton,

17*

dcotc, 0lament,

18*

Pemberton, T* Edgar, Ellon Terry and Her Sigtors,, p* 140$ Elwln, pp* 260, W t j Person, Erroll, 0 0 . cit*, p.* 75$ Coloman, John, Players and iaaywrlglxts 1 gave Kn-wn» vol* IX, p « 83#" #

*• * • *

59.

HlwXn# pp. 206 ff, and p* 209,

40#

Coleman# Jolmf flayers and Flay^ri/mts X Have Known# vol. II# p, 80,

41,

ElwXn#

42,

PemHerton# p# 159,

43,

Elwin# pp-, 258 f *

44,

Elwin# p* 519,

45,

Elwln#. p, 355$ Glajpence* p* 414*

pp,

257

f

.

400» Chapter VII. Dramatizations of the hovels of Elscell&nocms Writers. X*

Dye, William S*# Jr., A Study of Melodrama inInland from 1800 to 1G4Q. p. 27. ' '~

2.

Genest, vol. ¥11, p. 313*

3,

.Bye, V/iliiam S*, Jxv, op* eit#* p* 181 Reynolds, Srnost, yearly Victorian Drama* 185^i070a p* 138* Clarence, p. 32.

. 4*

Dye, William S* Jr., op# cit#, p* 30*

5#

Coleman, John, Fifty. Tears of an'Actor1a Life 3 p* 15.

8#

Bafeor, H# Barton, History of the London Sfca&© and Its Famous Players* (1576^190377 p. 465*

7#

1’ Ilcoll, XIX, vol.# II, p# 343# XM d .» p* 408#

0#

Dye, William s#, Jr*, on# olt *# p* 16| Reynolds, p. 138| Geneet, vol# ¥Ii, pp# W l H T H w a . . P# 806#

10#

Dye, William 3«, Jr#, o|t» oft»# p# 18 j Reynolds, p# 138* Vfyndfcasa, Henry Saxo, Wne Annals of Co vent Garden Thoatx*o frota 1738 to 1887. voT7"l7T.“ S'6ST Oenest, vol. vTl, pp# XfST*

11.

don©at, vol* VIII, pp* 66 ff#

12*

Williams, Michael, Some London Wheatres Fast and Present* p # 81 *

13*

ftorter, Henry C *, The History of the Theatres of Brltdr* & | r a J S i l a J M * i n w .

14*

Famherton^T* Bhlgar, The

Theatres i A Local

XS# Ibid*, p*. .180* 16*

Fltsball, Edsmrd, Thirty^fiveYears of £ drscntic Author1s Life, w l . I, pp. S O F T Hcoll, XIX,vol* It, p. 302:

17*

Clarence, pp* 382,387, 472*

18*

Hicoll, XlX, vol. II, p* 508#

19*

Ibid** p. 291

20•

Ihjd»* p.* 291*

401, ■ 21,

lllcoll, X I X v o l * II* P 0 291,

22,

Coleman, John, Players and Playwrights !_ Have Known* vol, II, p, 11 n* ’* ~

25,

Uic-oll, XIX, vol, II* p. 2911 Bib&in, fhoiuas, The HemIni sconces of Thomas D d M I n of the Theatres Royal, Covent "harden Drury hay^ larket, etc,, and M t l S r Tl'lfhe ciHnet* etc,, vol, 2, p, 156; Dye, Vi'llllara sV#*r*, E E 1* Mil** P* 58 *

24,

Hlcoll* XIX, voUXX, p* 291,

25*- DIMan, Thomas, op, eft,, vol* II, p. 170, 86 *• Fitsball, Edward, op, pit., vol 1, pp# 60 ff, 27*

Slooll,XlX, vol* 2, p* .740*

28*

Watson, Ernest Bra&lee, Sheridan To Robartson* p. 37. 8 m also S' M M i n , 'Thomas, g£* eft*, voTT'TfT'p* 272; Clarence, p* 468* Hieoll Txix, vol, II, p# 291#) m j B that DiMin* s version with bs*®Ic by Sanderson wsa given at the Royal Circus, Monday, August 25, 1817* hut aI2 other available sources indicate 1819 as the date*

29*

Geneet, vol, IX, p* 211| Glarenee, p* 488; Sherson* Enroll, hon&on* a Lost Theatres of the nineteenth Pen tuny." g'«' &STT ' ~ ■

30*

Shewwm, BrroXl, op* clt,* P* 216; Clarence, p* 460; Baker, E*( Barton, op * eft ** p* 443,

31*

She rson, ErrolX, op, clt *, $>, 215#

38*

Porter, Henry 0,* op* clt**- pp* 91, 95*

33*

Clarence* p, 468*; Sherson, Erroll, on* clt*, p# 215*

84*

Porter, Henry C*, o£* oft** p* 175*

35,

Peciberton* T* Edgar, Ellen Tern? and Key. Sisters* p* 162.

38*

shannon* Enroll, op, cit,* p* 815; Seofci, clement, grorn nm ® Balls** to * m m Arthur»*, p# 274.

57,

Pemberton, f* Edgar-, Ellen Terry and Her Sisters, p. 1^‘E

®9*

It id** pp* 106 ff,, See also Cook, Dutton, Hi^hta at the & n ® E ffif. & £ § B S l & & SS2S®. Pi5* 389 ff*

59,

Scott, Client,

40,

Xbid., pp. 877-280.

41 *

She r©on, Sircoll

42*

Scott, Clement, Prom’wfhe Bolls1* t-o ®&ing Arthur*, pp# 589 f #, lists revivals on June 29, 1887# 'Kay ""'27# 18901 Juno 7* 1895. Clarence lists revivals on April 82* 1891 j Jan# 50* 1898) June 16, 1900. See also Pemberton, f . Edgar, Ellen ferry IP$ Sisters, p# 255. The casts for some o F C S b q perforswices are xTstod by Scott# June 89* 1887 (in 404/s Henry Irfing as Dr. Primrose, llorm&n Forbes as loses, G* Alexander m Squire Thornhill, Wmmmm. as Bnrchell, fyars as Leigh, B* Howe as Farmer Flamborough, Miss F* Harwood as folly Flamborough* Hiss Mills as Phoebe, Miss Barnett as the Gypcy Woman, Ire# P&imeefort as Mrs* frlasrose* Miss M# Holland as Pick, Miss B* Harwood as Bill, Hiss Winifred B&ery as Sophie* Miss Ellen ferry as Olivia.. July 14* 1895 (p*4X8)s Henry Irving as Hr* Primrose, William farise at? Squire ThornhllJ, Frank Cooper as Burchell, -Cordon Craig as loses,, How© as F a i w r -Fltet borough* fyare, as Leigh, Master Leo Byrne as Dick, Miss Grace Webb as Bill* Miss Fate Phillips as Polly FXmaboroagb# Miss Foster m Phoebe, Miss Ailsa Craig as the Gypsy Woxa&n* Miss Maud Milton as Mr©# Primrose* Miss Amy Coleridge .'a© Sophia* and Miss Ellen ferry as Olivia*

45*

Pemberton* T # Edgar, fhe Hetroapeet, p. 185.

From '"the Belisf>to*King Arthur**, p. 274

oit#, p. 215.

44* Hollingshead, John,

fheatree;

A Local

Chronicles, pp. 450* 470;

Clarence, p. 468*

45*

Clarence# jgfc 44, 468.

46*

Ellis, S*M,,

47.

Baker, B# Barton# op. clt., pp. 416-7,

48.

Pl&nchb * J *H., fhe Bocol and Reflections of * pp. 417-9# 80#

Moncrioff* BS& JQ.riy; £r* Bffa |n Igndon. Both Stirling, Edward# old P y u ^ T & n o , Flfty^ears1 M Author* Actor, Manager, P# 87“an£ Sanest * vol. XT? p*.5Ss* staFe tEaT Burroughs was tho original Jerry Hawthorne.

405* 51*

Gonest# vol# II# p* 214*

52*

P/atson#' Ernest Bradlee, o£* cifr»* p, 74 n*

55*

Stirling# Edward, pp* clt ** vol* 1, p. 8*

54#

Porter* Henry G*# op* clt;*, pp* 49# 50# 51,

56*

Penley# Bollville S», The Bath stage * A HI story of Dramatic Hep re sent at! one in Bath* p. iTl*

56*

Gonosb, vol* IX, p# 21S•

57.

Dlbdln# James c** The Annals of the Edinburgh Stage With an Account ofTEs'lTST'aSI iMiing W ^6e©Tland* p*TRH>* mihuMm

*awfr«*a**f* r i». w >

»

i

i

f

r

»

jM*ei 'u w

d w d f y ia 1* l i i 1

**m * —■■»

urn* utumfmm* 4 m m - - » # * * *

94*

inwm m w .iwmnwiii * * '•*=*»#**»

58*

Ibid*t p. 541*

59*

Pemberton*. T* Edgar# The Birmingham Theatres: A Local Retrospect* p.117* For discuislorT*oT*”*the~rTvaliti Be^w^ntEeatrea, see pp* 114 ff*

®Q*

P* 13.5#

61*

Baker* H. Barton* o£* clt ** p* 419 *

62#

Porter* Henry C*# o£# clt*> p* 84*

625*

Sanest* vol* IX# p. 454* S M * * #*■ 467

65*

Williams# Michael* Some London Theatres Past and Present, p * 162 #

86#

Scott# 0lament# The Drama of Yesterday and Today, vol* 1# ppr 544 ff Sherson# Erroll* o57 Z£tr ?7~P. 285*

87*

Baker*. B* Barton*. ..££* Sit*, p. 419*

68*

Planehb, J*R#* ££* clt «* vol* I* p* 48; lilcoll, :\XX, vol. 11# P* 587.

60.*

Ifloo XX# AiK# vo * II* p* 369 *

70#

A manuscript letter from William Godwin to Mrs« shelloy* In the Leigh Hunt Collection at t lie University of Iowa.

71*

Baker# H. Barton* op# elt.* p. 283 f| Planch©, J..R#, OP* SiS** VQl* ^ *

404 •

72#

Gonest?vol* IX, p* 259$ Wyndham,Henry Saxe,The An­ nals of Covent Garden Theatre from 1732 to1897* vol* I T T p# 31# ~~ "

73*

Genest, vol* XX, p* 482#

74*

Hi go 11 #XIX, vol* IX.,. p* 348*

75*

According to BicelX,. XXX, vol* II, p* 348, the title given the play in Duneem'be, vol# XI*

78*

Genesfc,vol* XX, p# 280*

77*

Hlcoll, XXX,. vol* IX, p* 454*

78*

Reynolds, S m e s t , S&rXff Victorian Drama, (1830*1870) pp* 144 t+ ~ ' *•*—

79 • Xhid »i p #14 5 * 80*

Bleoll* XXX, vol# IX, p* 8-81*

81*

Coleman, John, F&ffcy Years offin Ac tot*.v& Life* p* 418*

82#

liooll, XXX, vol. XI, pp* 459 £*

88*

Wyadh&ia# Henry Saxo, op* clt ** vol* II, p# 42*

84*

Hlcoll, XIX, vol* II, p* 438#

85*

Xfeld*.* p* 4101 Clarence, p#105#

86*

Clarence, p* 151*

87*

Sorter, henry C*, &£* cifc*,

88*

Clarence, p# 151*

89#

Ileoll, XIX, vol* IX, p»

90.

rtoid*, p* 410*

91.

Xhid## P* 427* Ellis* Aclyentnre.s.

pp#

154, 156,- 165*

The Solitary Horseman or The. yt£e. and s.# p. 273j Reynoldsf p . 141 •

93*

Clarence., p.# 59*

04,

3111s, S*K„, |£e Soll-Us.gy Hsgej**m.ov J£a U £ 8 anu Agvent&IL »R« 4'fiU5S#£j, p'* £*7$ ,

405 *

95*

Hlcell, XXX, vol* XI, p. 141*

96*

Reynolds, Ernest, op* c i t p # 141| Glax’enee, p. 29*

97* 98* 99*. 100* 101*

Ellis, S*M«, f&a Solitary. Horseman ox4 The hlffe and Adventurea of g , F * HIeo 11, XXX, vol* IX, p* 453* Geaeat, vol* XV, pp* 17 ff*| Dib&in, tTamea 0*, og# cit*, P* 53* Meoll, XXX, vol* XX, pp.* 330 f| 383* X M & «* p* 433*

109*

Bolllngahead, John, op* clt*, p* 494*

103*

Scott, 0lament, pie D r a m off Yesterday and Today, vol* II, p* 328*

104*

Baker^ B* Barton, on* cit#, p* 405}Sherson,Erroll* op* cit», p* 40 1 Williams,. Michael, pp* clt** p* 43*

105*

Stirling, Edvard,

0

£* c|t*,vol* II, p*

106#

Baker, H*Barton,

op#

107*

Bleoll, XIX, vol* II, p# 475#

108.

Ibid.* P* 312*

109*

Ibid** p* 475*

251*

cit * * p* 432#

110*

Ibid.# p* 3051 Wyndham, Henry Saxe, 0£. cit*# vol, II, p* 103} Pit shall, Edward, gj>* clt*, p.* 30#

111*

licol, XIX# vol. II, p* 3371 Clarence, p* 389.

112*

Dibdln, lames 0*, 0£* clt*, p* 373*

113*

Ibid., P* 402*

114*

Ibid*, P* 474*

115#

Planch6, J#H,, o&* cit., p# 292*

116#

Clarence, p# 389#

117*

Walpole, Horace, The Castle of Otranto and the Mysterious Mother, p .i.xxxi i 1 Iff*| Bye, Vvllliam S# «r 7 , op# cit», p. 13 'ff*"}" Genes'i/, vol VI, PP* 221 ff #} 431, 601* Goriest, vofli. VII, p# 337} Genest, vol. VIII, p# 82*

406* 118*

Walpole, Horace, op* clt,,p* xsxvlil f*

119*

Dibdcn, Xhom&s » dp* clt *, -vol*II, 179,

120,

Sherson, Erroll, 0 £, clt,, p* 25; Wyndham, Henry Saxe, Q.P, C-lt,* p, 155*

121*

Walpole, Horace, op*- clt** P* 3oa&x; Clarence, p, 69; Hleoll, XIX, vol, il, p. '241*

122*

DIMln, James C*, op, cit«. p*

123*

Clarence, p« 73; HIcoll, XIX, vol* II, p, 339*

124,

Clarence, p * 73*

125*

Iieoll,XXX, vol* II, p* 361; Plt$«aerald, S.J*Adair, Dleteftna and ffhe '.Drama* ■p* 2111 Stirling, Edward, og r ^ i f ,, voITl ,' p * 99 *

126*

Clarence, p* 223; Hicoll,XIX, vol* XI, p* 262; Hamilton, Cicely, and Bay lie, Lilian,. The Q M Vie, p# 100; Booth, John, -*ghe >Old ■ A, gentn^ of T&eatrUel History* 1016*^.619* pp, 51 f *

187*

For some foreign adaptations see Qambrld&e History of English literature* vol* XIII. p l O T . '

126*

Reynolds, p* 145*

189*

Clarence, p*

446*

283; Reynolds, p, 145*

150*

$ hemon$ Irroll, op* clt** p* 293. .See also Xbid*#’ pm 2471 Fascoe, Charles %re, Dramatic Hots a r§79. ' p* 73;"Clarence, p, 361*

151*

Clarence, p* 823; Reynolds, p* 145*

132*

Brereteoxi# Austin* Dramatic Hot©* 1862* pp* 75 f,

133*

Scott, Clement, ffee P r a m of Yesterday and Todayt vol. XI, p* 350,

154,

Brer©ton, Austin, Dramatic lotos* 1682, p* 87. For further mention ofu,f M s 'rplay3Clarenc©, p, 223; HeynoIds, P-* 143; Slierson, Brroll, o&* cit** p# 847; Baker, H* Barton, og,

135*

DiMln, James C «, pp.* clt*, p. 435*

136#

Williams, Michael, op. clt., p. 113,

407. 137*

Pemberton# T * Edgar, The Blz^nahajn Theatres; A Local Retrospect. p. “149. ""

136 *

Shersan* Enroll, op* clt#» p* 97*

139*

Cook,, Button* Eights at the Play A View of the Smllsh Sta^e, p. 118* -

140*

Dih&ia, James 0*, ££* cit*. p* 475#

141#

Baynhaa# Walter#- The Clas^ow Stage* p. 198*

149*

Cook# Dutton# Mffhtff. at the fflasr, A ¥, lew of the English p * 3ixe». . . . . . . . . .

143*

Sherson, Enroll# o p * clt** p# 10S| Baker, H* Barton*. Off* clt ** p.# 872*

X'i'4:*

Scott* Clement* Thirty Years at the Play and Dramatic B M E $Eti£* p* & l - ~

145*

P ©Norton# T. Edgar# The Bli^nabaa Theatresi A Local P * 105 #

145*

p* 1051 Porter# Henry 0** The History of the »©S of Brighton from 1774 to'T'BS'&t p « Ix*

147*

Sherson, Erroll# £&# cit,, pp* 97# 102, 151# 190$ Baker# H* Barton# op* cit ** p* 434 j Scott# Clo ent* The,^rama of Y ©at eraa??nd Today» vol* X# p* 485# Sofetmn# John*’'vjimovi aSI TlaygrlRhts X Haown, vol.* XI# p* 512 f*

148 #

XhLd** p* 313* p* 151*

149*

Ihidf # pp * 151# 102 *

150*

Cook# Dutton# flights at the Flay A. &£ £&£ Bnffllafa Stage# pp. 1 7 7 x fiSeo also Baker# H; Barton# op* cit*, pTslB# Sherson., Srroll# ££• clt** p. 102.

151*

Scott# Clement# Thirty Years at the PJ,ay and D^anatic Table Talk,p99*

159*

Cook, Dutton#. Bights at t lie Play, A Jlfs of the ^ l i s h Stage, p. 199* A complete review Ts given on pp. l§6 f*

155*

Sberaoft# ErroXX, op* cit ** PP* 103# 106# 107*

154*

Cook# Dutton# Hlsfrt* at the Play, A Via* of the English Stage# pp* 314*318,

155*

Scott, Clement# Thirty ‘S.eM * 'Talk, p. 99.

See also Sherson* Brroll, o&. clt*,

at the Play and D^roatlc

408 156*.

Sherson, Erroll* op*. clt*, p. 103*

157*

Williams, Michael* op* clt. p, 203; Sherson, Erroll, £*£*» p* 103*

158*

Shex»aan# Enroll* op* clt ** p* 108*

158*

~ **

• “'* % ‘s at the P Ja* & X t S Z 2£

180*

Sherson# ErrolI,

161*

Porter, Boxirjr o*# 0£* c,lt»* p. 117*

182*

Olaronoo, p. 9*

165*

Bateor, 1* Barton* pp.clfr *.*p« 328*

164*

Clarence* p* 9,

16S *

Sh©reo% Brroll, g|>* clt **p* 188*

166*

Porter* &enry 0*#

op

SBg&gfe

* cit.**p * 102*

elt.»* p* 201*

167'#:, Clarenco* p* 413* 168*

Pemberton# T# Edgar# Ellen Ten*? andHer 81 atore*

169*

Fmifo®vtea, T* Edgar. The Biminghasa TheatrestA Lpcal Retrospect* P* 170*

170*

Scott* Ciemcmt*. The Ppm$k of Yesterday, and Today* vol* XX* pp* 16 f*

171*

Eidelng# William II*,Dramatic gotea*

172*

Share©a# Enroll*

175*

WilXtaaff# Michael# op * cit** p* 110.

174*

Pemberton# T* Edgar# Ellen

175*

Brer©ton# Auatin$ Dramatic Kot.oa* 1881* p*

176*

Coleman, John# Fifty Y 0araof an ActorU Life, p* 365*

177*

Pomfeorton# T* Edgar* The p* 52 *

0

P* 197*

1880, p* 55*

£* cit ** p* 75*

178*

P* ®«*

179*

Ibid#* P* 05*

180,

Xbld** pp# 87* 110.

181.

Ibid*# PP* 124* 146

Terry and.HerSis cerg,* p* 110. 33*

Theatres: & Loegj,

409. 182,

Elwin* Malcolm, Charles Reade, A Biography. p* 228.

IBS*

Porter, Henry w # op.c j t p. 170.

184,

Ibid.. p. 174*

185* IMd., pp* 183, 185, 188, 190. 180*

Heynolds, p. 145*

See also Clarence, p. 259*

18*7* Xb.ld». p* 145* 188*

Fascoe, Charles Byre*Dr&raafr1c Hotes. 1879* p. 68,

189*

Ibid.* p* 731 Eeynslds, p* 145,

190*

Fascoe, Charles Byre, op* clt*, p. 40* Reynolds, p. 145*

191*

Reynolds, p* 145*

192*

Scott. C lament, The Drama of tester day and Today, vol* IX, PP* 291 f*

198*

Sheraon, Brroll,

194,

op*

clt*, p. 165*

Seofct, Client, The Drama of Yesterday and Today* .vol. II# p* 16*

195*

Sherson, Erroll, op* clt». p* 293*

196,

Kidding* T/llliaa, op*.clt*. p.92; on p. 68 Rldelng says the play wag performeoat the Olympic, December 11, 1880,

197,

Brereton, Austin, dramatic Hot as * 1882* pp* 15 f * A suwiary of the plot is also given hire* see also Bancroft, Squire, ffigpty Chairs, pp, 31 f *

190,

Brereton, Austin, Dramatic Hpteg. 1002* pp. 15 f,, 78.

199 * Coleman, John, Flayers and Playwrl&hts 1 Have Known*, vol# IX, pp# 167 17 000,

Sherson,Erroll, qg.»cit*» p, 104; Pemberton, T • Edgar, The Birmimham Tniatres: A Retrospect* p* 57*

201,

Staerson, Brroll, og.» cit., p, 104 * Peafoorton, T. Edgar, The Birmingham Theatresi A Retrospect. p, 57,

202,

Biwin, Malcolm, 3 0 , clt,, pp* 236 ff.

203,

Coleman, John, Players and Playwrights I Have Known, vol, 11, pp. 37 f«

410* 204*

See Hollingsheaci, John, op . clt*, pp. 212-210.

202.

Ibid.. pp, 211 f.

206,

Cook,- Dutton, Bights at the flaar A Tiew of the Smllsh 3ta»e, pp, Ibl'TT" A pIotsiOTa^"*is given on p p ’ / 159 ff,

207,

Xhld,, p, 212* Ibid., pp* 214 ff*

209* 210*

A plot summary is given on pp. 218 ff.

Elwin, Malcolm, op, ojt.,, p* 317* Sherson, Erroll, op* cit,, p# 2552 Elwin, Malcolm, op* ■ cit*, p p # 355 ffi coleK&n* John, flayers and Plawra/^hte n a v e Known, vol* 11* p* 587* ~

211.

Clarence, p« 171*

212*

Breretcm, Austin* ^xmatic. Botes* 1881, pp. 23 f .

213*

Ibid** p* 79,

2X4*'

Baker, H, Barton, o£* clt * pp# $51, 46S fjSherson, Erroll, o p * clt#, p* 243| Brerefcon, Austin, Dramatic Motes., life, pp# 24 f*

215*

X b l h f p* 25*.

216*

Ibid., p* 80*

217*

Baker, H# Barton, ©£* cit*, p* 515*

218*' Scott, Clement* The jftrayaa of Yesterday and Today, vol. X , p * 515 # 219*

Clarence, m

40, 466#

880*

Porter, Henry 0*,

221#

Clarence, gfc 89# 139, 195*

282*

Shoreon, Erroll,

285*

Clarence, pp. 31, 476, 389, 479, 209*

224,

Holllngshead, John, Q£* Sherson* Erroll,

226*

Ibid#* p* 25S*

227*

Ibid*, p* 179*

op>-

0

p* 201.

£. oft*, p* 178.

op»

P* 473*

clt*, p# 258*

411 228*

P* 258*

229•

ISIS**

250*

Clarence, p* 373*

231*

Is79’

Baker, E* Barton, o£* clt ** p* 5011 She rson, Erroll, 2£* Pt 281*

832*

Baker, B* Barton, op*.clt** p. 273*

233 *

Shorson, Erroll, op.* elt ** pp> 110 f *

234* 238'*

pp* 471

472%

X M & **pg 185# Baker, B* Barton, g£* cit..* p* 4@7*

*

412. BIBLIOGRAPHY Adana, W. Davenport, A Dictionary of the Praam, Vol, 1, A-G, Ghat to and Wlndus ,' WncLon, '1004, ' ^ Archer, William, William Charles Maoready* Kogan, Faul* French, "ISM^oTJ"' 1890* *t Xitsct^ Armstrong, Margaret, Fanny Ramble* A Passionate Victorian, Macmillan, Bow 1!oV&, i 9 W r

Baker, Ernest A*, The History of the English Hovel? The Age of Dickens and’^fBaoWrayT H3F* 'anSnf* W t B e W y , lSET, xonmT"ff«— — Baker, Ernest, A*, The History of the English Hovel From the Brontes to M e r e l f W t ^ ^ l S S n W e T B ----- w m ^ ^ r w m r n j t rmrr^^nTiw? Baker, H* Barton, History of the London Stage and Its Famous

S te m *

B S u s n a g n s a r g g g fr tsgdsossr w r r

Bancroft, Squire, Empty Chairs* John Murray, London, 1025* Bayhha®, 'alter, The 1898* '“ “

Stage, Robert Forrester, Glasgow,

Booth, John* The n01d Vic »** A, Century of theatrical iftli #■■ 19YflT S^eadrS^ubTliE3!ngnouse7^^Wr— * Brereton, Austin* Dramatic lotos, 1881* David Bogu©, London, 1885, , -■ — ~* Brereton, Austin, Dramatic Motes, 1889, David Bogus,Xondon, 1885, “ Brereton* Austin, the Literary History of the Adeiphl, T* lusher HwinJ T ^ . T ^ ^ r m T . ~ --------- ' Bunn* Alfred, f-he Stage? lilha I^ w

.m+jfX t* * .

Both Before and Behind the Curtain* f§§j Spot,n In three volumes*

*, *w W *M n«m «

mm> j m v .a* * * * * * * *

m v y * ..... W < -

mm m kw *

i

-+w

Casfcri a ^ ^ihliographv English Literature-,. The* ed, by F*W, ttesoii* 'In' ?5ur volumes, The Macmillaii Co •* lew York, 1941. e Bistory Of Emllsh Literature, The, In fifteen vol-

U2Q0S;

jaScs^

s s t s h t i s

Ss ;

Coieann, John, ci-atiS& How Tork* 1905*

M

& iiSE IiS» 2.P. Dutton and Co.,

Coleman* John, Fifty %mum# of an Acta#*5® Jtees Pott ted Co.* "low tork* 1904.,

MM,

Coleman* John*

and volumes* Ohafct© and Windus* London* 180S*

la two V0lU3i@S* In two

Cook* Button* A jBjftfjfe o£ the Bi&y, In two vote*®®, Sampson, how* liar©ton* Se&rle* and Bivin-fcGn* London* 1878. uook* Dutton* hour® With the 1005*

Chatto and W Indus* London*

Cook* 'Dutton, midjt® at |ho flm* A V i m g£ ** “ ‘ v TIBSo, er Chatto and- Wlrkhis* London,' Derbyshire* Alfred* Tgw Art. &f th& v ted Hughes, London, 1907.

■£$flgg> Dhoxn-att

te-u m&mmw or sne y«o* Colburn* Iromon, 1637*

o f fcfoe Ec ^ Stage With __ Account ff the Rlao , v...,. _ ,,,,,,, . ,, % in lootlim d , HI chard Camoron* 'Edinburgh, 1088 «

D l M i n * Jama© 0** Tfta

Domldmn# $ art Maxwell. ■*

i*. John and Rob-

l)oran, Dr., In m d About. Drury Lane and .Other Paper®., In two volume a # Hi chard Bentley and Son* London* 1881* Dye* william 5#* Jr., A Study of Melodrama in England from 1800 to 1840, ilie Witt any Printing and Publishing Co., sWa^e'Toftlgo* gt,, 1919. Ellis* S*M.* r iho Solitary horseman or the Life and Adventures of O.P.R.^yikea, cayme"!5roWs * Kensington, lWF7,

414, Bills, s,M ,, Wilkie Collins. LePami, and Others, Cons table and Co,, W ; , ’ l Z M o n ^ X $ $ I •--— . Kills, s ,M, William Harrison Ainsworth^and His Friends, In EXwin, Malcolm* Charles Hoad©, A London, 19337*“------ --- -

■> Jonathan Capo,

Pltzbali, m^ard, 'Otirfcy-flvo Ygjffisjtf £ Brsmat3.c Author's .nxfo. In two volumes, T*u* &&srby, Publisher, London, 1859,

Fifcs-Gerald, 3#J* Adair, Jg; Kew York, 1910,

.apd th e Byaiaa* S c r ib n e r s ,

Forster, John, gha off ____ __£ ___ l&fckena « Edited and teiot&tod with an Introduction by f*^w*Sm Ley.'Doubleto*, Doran* How York, rud* (192*7), Honest, John, g&Dunt &g Jh§ . English ,Cy®m the ■Host ______ jjfgSJj& l^SO» In ton volumes (Volumes ?, ¥, "fX, VlX, VIII, XX, XJ, H,B* Carrin;:tOB, Bath, 1858*

Oootoan, Falter, MsiSZfi M j M M $ m J8& M Bentlay and Bon, London, 1895*

Stm* Richard

Haddon, Archibald, Q-roon. Hoorn ftaae&p* Stanley Paul and Co*, London, 1922, Hamilton, Cicely and. Baylls, Lilian, Thg Old ¥ic* Jonathan Cape, Ltd*, London, 1980* Haimon^Glark, Theodore* Drama in Gloucestershire {The Cotweld County?, BoIXingsheod, John, Qaletg Chronicles, Archibald Constable •and Co,, '.■■esfcxainster, 1898* Jerrold, Blanches &, The Life and Remains off B Tlokeo* and Flo’ ids,T Bo e¥on, iBfftf*

Jerrold,

Jerrold, Walter, Douglas Jerrold*. Dramatist and Wit* in two volumes, Ho cider and Stoughton, jGSSESiIT"1914, Lennox* Lord William Pitt, ffters * Flayera * mid Playhouses at Home and Abroad with Aneodote^l g tfte €ho^stage, In two volumes, Sursfc and Blackout, London, XSSI. iey# J«w„T., Bfe&jag- Cl role , A Itoratlva of the HovollatVa Frienclahlna . Ltd *, London, 1918*

Lytton, The Earl of* The Llfo of Edward Bulwer* First Lord Pvtton. in two volStes, Macmillan arid "Co », L o n d o n 13 • His Son, The Life, Letters and Literary Remains of Edward Mathews, Mrs,^Memolrs^of Charles Mathews,^Comedian, In four lieoll* Allardyce, A History of the Late Eighteenth Century Drama, I75Q-ie ■ !■ * '— V *

■ —

— — — -—

—

«

Porter* Henry C»» The Histo: 1774 to 1695, SHg^aHTI

,

S£ £ M . P l a t e s _£ BKfafotcm frog mie, Brighton, lob6«

Price*. William Thompson, A Life of Hew York* '1894* ’ ~ “

Brentano'

Reads, Charles* The Eighth Coiamandment, Truhner and Co#, London# 1860 * ''™" Reads# Charles L* and Heads, The Rev* Compton* Charles Reado. Q».Q.*L*, Dramatist, Hove list, Journalist, A IXemoB?''compiTed chTefly''from Els Xltorary Remains, Harper and BroReynolds* Ernest, Early Victorian Drama (1850-1870), v* Heffor and Sons# Ltd#, Camhridge, 1956* Rideing, William H,, Dramatic London# 1885*

i, 1880, David Bogue,

416 *

Hobson, Lillians, The 1846* "

•g;oer, Jo soph Masters, London,

Sadlelr, Michael. Bulwen A Panorama Edward and Eoslna* 1805-1836, Constable and ^oT7^^don7T§'3Tr* Scott, Clament, The Drama of Yesterday and To voXumes, li&cmTiI'aii"anrf^oT,^StclT/ hondon7

Xn two

Scott, Clement, From ”The Bells® to*Kixi& Arthur”, A Critical Record of t b T W r s ¥ X f ^ ^ L?cBS5T"-Theat^re rrom 1B7X toi89S ,Joh^Iacq.iieen, London, 1806* Scott, OXmant, Thirty Isms. & M & £2m. m i . z m m m a t Talk, The R&ixw&y and CenemlAutomatic Library, Ltd*, ^ondon, n«&# Sfeerson, Erroll, London1g Lost Theatres off the nineteenth Century, John’ Stohhins, Emma* Charlotte i, Her Lottery and Memoir St M£s » " ® 5 5 p i « a , Osgood 'smTco,7 Boston,

Sss.

Stirling, Edward, Old Drury .Lane, Fifty Years* Recollections of tethor* Actor: i a S t e r T T A W 7 o l 5 5 S t , BEKtSnEid--Ralpole, Horace* The Oastla of Otranto and the kysti Mother, Efiiie H ^ i W^^^r^ucFIo^r^nTTnoWi-by .«< S i w s | , Printed at the Chiswick Press for Houghton Mifflin Co, and Constable and Co*, Ltd,, 198S, Wat©on»Bmeafc Bradlee, Sh.er:ldan to Robertson, A study of the nineteenth Century Lo, nd;on"1TS, tago,‘"harvard, university Press, Cambridge, 1926. Williams, Michael, Some London Theatres, Past and Present, Sampson, Low, iSB^onT^earTeT^m^^lvlBgton, TSSnHon’jT 1883* ftyxtdham* Eenry & & m * The Annals of Cevent larden Theatre from .1732 to 1897, Xn two W S u m s , ChatW"anH'^TKETsT^^don,

417* (Texts of Plays Used in this Study)

Leonard1a * A drama in Three Acts* Adapted from Sir Walter Scott* s admired hovel, with Introductions from T * Dib&an* s Play, L # Murray*s Alteration' of the same, iSugena Scribe* s Opera, and Dion Boucieault* s Amalgmimtion of the above, Colin Be.si©wood* s Adjustment and Le-Ad justmeni, J*B* Johnston©1s Appro pidation , and other equally Original Versions, together with a very small amount of new Hatter* Samuel French# London and Hew York:* (This m y be by T h o m s Ha ilea Lacy *} i a t m 2 £L b&*. ££* Iftdjab t e l a _.. ..... Drama# in Three Acts* nAdapted from, th© celebrated Novel# by Charles Dickons #** (Ho Author*a name is given on the title page but the play is pro** bofely by George Aimer* Catalogued by the University of Iowa Library as by him* ^Pirefe performed at the ' Pavilion Theatre# May# 1S58~~ At the Royal Surrey Theatre# on Monday# November 19th# 1858** This corresponds to the date of Almar* s play*) London and Hew York# Samuel -French* The waverlev D r a m s « from th© Hovels Scott, Bart*# George Beutlafige, London* 1845* (The contents of the volume with the authorship of the plays as indicated by the Library of Congress: Guy Bannering; and Th© Antiquary by Daniel ferry j, The th i a n ^ y^ Y H o m ^ B i bdln^ Hob Hoy by Isaac W ^ l £ f y ^ e v n r T f ~ t h e Peak by Edward P I T s O T X with Alto rat lone j"PTvaHSb e^Uy''Tflli1iam Henry Wood Murray; The Fortunes ol^rjgel and Kenilworth by authors unknown* AXm&r, George* Oliver Twist* A Drama in Four Acts, As performed, at The HintS^aKiEiilazmel French, London and How York* Boueic&ult* Dion* Pour Acta* As London* under Thursday* May

and Bead©* Charles, PonX Play, A Drama, in First Produced at the Holburn Theatre, the management of Miss Fanny Josephs, 28# 1B6S, Dramatic Publishing Co*, Chicago*

Buckstone* Jack She French, Hew York, and

A Drama in Four Acts, Samuel

Buefcstone, J*BM Th£. Last .Days g£ A Dramatic Spectacle In Three Acts* falcon from Bulwer* s celebrated novel of the same name* Joins. Dicks, Ho * 829, Dicks* standard Plays, London#

4X8* Dibdin, Thomas, lyanhoeg or, The Jew1a Daughter, A Romantic '.elodraaa, In 'Sirea Acts, Samuel French, London and How York* Kalliday, Andrew and Lawrence, Frederic, Kenilworth; or, Ye Queene * ye Earle« and Y© Maydenne, A Condo" 'OperatXc .axtr&vag&nza, in One Act * TRovTsed and rewritten by Andrvw HalXIday *) Samuel French, London and Hew York, Honor1©if, w*T*, Tom tic Extravaganza Theatre, Strand, typewritten copy

and Jerry; or. Life in London, An Opera­ InrEree Acls, FSrfomedat Adelphi London, W*T* Honcrleff, 1828* (A owned by Professor B*V* Crawford*)

Moncrief(aic?, . * Tom and Jerry; or* Life in London* A BurTe^fca SFIKuT, ProYic, a S ' ’Flash, in Two'note, Samuel French# Hew York (A rnch abbreviated version of the above*51 Hoad®, Charles, GoldI, A drama In five acts, Thomas Hailes Lacy, London* Smith, Albert, Esq*, The Cricket on the Hearths Tale Of Home» A Drfisir'Tn ’fhree Zc^sT”lS*ama author, Charles Dickens, Esq*, Samuel French, H©w York and London* Stirling, Edward, Hlcholas Hlckelby (sic), A Farce-*- In two Acts,. Samuef "French,''mm 'York and London* Taylor, Tom, A Tale of ‘ Two Cities* A Dram, in Two Acts and a Prologue,”Mapted from the Story of that Kara© by Charles Dickens, Esq,, London and New York, Samuel French* Townsend, William Thompson {?), The Cricket on the Hearth* A Fairy Tale of Home in Three Chirps, ITdaptecT"froST™ Mr* Charles Dickens1s Popular Story, Samuel French, Xjondon and New York* (Catalogued by the University of Iowa Library as by Townsend* Ho author1s name is given on the title page *)