CHAPTER I.

SHERIDAN, MANAGER.

THE question now debated was, who was to come forward as the purchaser? When this became known, a singular offer was made to Mr. Garrick by Almacks, viz. to secure him 10,000l. or "farm him" for that amount, if he would continue on the stage. It was curious, indeed, that he had never thought of working that great mine-of late years found so profitable to managers-viz. the provinces. Since his first appearance, some thirty years before, he had played but two seasons out of London, and never since he had become a manager, except in recitations at Stratford. With actors of less degree the custom had been coming in of playing at Bath and Dublin, and occasionally at some of the better houses on "the Circuit." Mr. Garrick, however, felt that he had made sufficient money.

He was at first anxious that George Colman should take his place, but the latter preferred the lighter duty of administering a small theatre. Colman would have made an admirable manager, and would have carried on the hereditary traditions of management. Under his rule there would have been no disorders, no neglect of duty, no financial embarrassment. He would have kept the whole together, and have transferred it, perhaps, to a worthy successor.

At this time, a clever young Irishman from Bath, Richard Brinsley Sheridan, had become celebrated by a romantic adventure, as well as by the successful production of a farcical comedy and a lively opera. He had married the celebrated Miss Linley, and had to win her, or rather secure her, by a desperate series of duels, and his plays had extraordinary success. He was, moreover, the son of a well-known actor. He succeeded in finding two friends to join him in offering to buy the share of Drury Lane that was for sale, viz. his father-in-law, Dr. Ford, and Mr. Ewart, a City merchant. 35,000l. was the sum to be found, of which he himself was to supply 10,000l. This he must have obtained after his usual fashion, viz. by borrowing. Mr. Ewart presently withdrew, and left the scheme to the three utterly inexperienced adventurers, who proposed to succeed one of the most skilful and judicious of English managers. There were great difficulties to be got over before the transaction was concluded. The truth was, Garrick had a high opinion of the clever young man whose pieces had drawn crowds to the other house, and declared that if he was complimented as "an Atlas," he left a "young Hercules " behind him to bear the weight of the administration. But Garrick, though he had a partner, was more deeply interested in the theatre than was supposed; he held a mortgage on Lacy's share of no less a sum than 22,000l., his whole interest thus covering 57,000l. out of the 70,000l. at which it was valued. An octogenarian of the Sheridan family, who has written a life of his relative, states that Garrick also advanced Sheridan 8500l., leaving him to find only 1500l., taking his bond for the remainder, to be defrayed out of the current profits, and which, it is said, was so discharged during the first seasons.

The curious part of this transaction was the young Sheridan's eagerness to secure the whole interest in the

theatre. He was anxious to buy out Lacy and take his mortgage, so as to have the whole contract. The contract was perfected on June 24th, 1776, and the three ignorant and inexperienced managers started on their course. And yet, such was Sheridan's abilities and opportunities, that, had he shown prudence in money matters, the adventure might have proved successful. But almost at once the partners began to dispute. An agreement had been made with Lacy that no new partner should take the place of another without the approbation of the rest. It was discovered that Lacy had all but concluded a sale with his friends, Thompson and Langford. This they opposed, and the dispute ran so high that the theatre had to be shut up for two nights-ominous sign of disorder-and Lacy at last had to address the public in the papers, declaring that he believed he was acting within his rights, "but would yield to oblige his partners.'

In 1778, however, Sheridan succeeded in getting rid of Lacy for the large sum of over 45,000l., a piece of reckless improvidence, and clearly more than his share was worth. But he was bent on gratifying his humour. Not content with this, he bought out Ford for 17,000l., and thus was left with his unlucky father-in-law, Linley, as virtually sole proprietor. Annuities, which after a time ceased to be paid, were the means by which they paid for their acquisition. Early signs of the want of judicious management soon appeared. It should be mentioned that a practice had latterly obtained that must, had it gone on longer, have seriously compromised the discipline of the theatre- that of advancing money to the improvident players, who had got largely into the books of the proprietors. This was an element in the contract with Sheridan, who agreed to take over these obligations. "Mr. Shuter (urged King in a grumbling letter to Garrick), at my salary nominally, had 100 guineas given him for signing

the article, and some hundreds lent him, which the manager, I believe, never expects to be repaid. Suffer me to say, I never have disputed your authority, never have feigned illness, or troubled you to rescue me from bailiffs or creditors."

One of the results naturally was a scandal before the audience. One night in April, 1772, Weston was to appear. He owed money to the theatre, "so the managers impounded the proceeds of his benefit." On this the player sent them word that he could not appear, as he had been arrested by the bailiffs. He begged, however, that no excuse of sickness would be made for him, as it would be a falsehood. Willing to gratify this praiseworthy and conscientious scruple, a general apology was made, when the unworthy actor started up in front of the upper gallery, where he was seated with a bailiff, and declared it was untrue-that he was there, and ready to play. This undignified proceeding led to a riotous interruption that lasted an hour; at the end of which he was permitted to play, the managers having to satisfy the officer. These disorders were bequeathed to the new managers, and added to the dissensions among the proprietors, leading to confusion behind the scenes and disrespect from the audience. Sheridan soon began to neglect rehearsals and supervision, and the actors, already inclined to take airs of independence, were not slow to take advantage of his carelessness. A single scene one night at Christmas, as the phrase runs, speaks volumes. "Much Ado about Nothing" was in the bills. At noon Henderson sent word to the theatre that he could not play. They hurried down to Covent Garden and obtained "the loan" of Lewis to supply his place. Soon after arrived a message from Parsons to the effect that he could not play. Moody was put into his part; and then, later, Vernon announced that he would not play. The prompter thought himself very lucky in being able to stop all these serious gaps so happily." But during the first act he found that one La Mash, who did Borachio, had neither come