It will be seen, from the foregoing document, that Beeston's agreement for the rebuilding of Salisbury Court Theatre was dated the 5th of April, 1660, exactly twenty days before Charles II. landed at Dover. The Theatre seems to have been very quickly rebuilt, (it was probably of wood) and was opened, there is reason to believe, (perhaps with Tatham's comedy of "The Rump") as early as June, 1660.1 It was taken the same year by Sir William Davenant, but upon what terms is not stated. Davenant remained here till his removal to Lincoln's Inn Fields, in 1662. I have already mentioned the return of the Duke's Company, acting under Davenant's patent, to a new theatre in this old locality, on the 9th of November, 1671; and I need, therefore, only add that this, the third theatre between Fleet Street and the Thames, was left by the Duke's Company in the year 1682; that it was subsequently let to wrestlers, fencers, and exhibitors of every description; that it was standing in 1720, when Strype published his continuation of Stow, but was shortly after taken down, and the site on which it stood transformed into a wood-yard. Of the front, towards the river, there is a view before Settle's "Empress of Morocco," 4to. 1673.

Kensington, January 12, 1849.

PETER CUNNINGHAM.

1 See the draft of Sir Henry Herbert's license to Beeston to continue the house called Salisbury Court Playhouse as a Playhouse, printed in Malone's Shakespeare by Boswell, iii., 243. Malone assigns it to June, 1660, and properly, as I think, though Mr. Collier, generally a safer authority than Malone, assigns it to a period twenty years earlier (Annals, ii., 102). It is clear, however, that all the documents printed in Malone, from p. 242, refer to Herbert's loss of power at the Restoration.

2 See Articles of Agreement Tripartite, dated 5th November, 1660, in Malone's Shak. by Boswell, iii., 257.

ART. XI.-The Players who acted in "The Shoemakers' Holiday," 1600, a Comedy by Thomas Dekker and Robert Wilson.

At p. 154 of "Henslowe's Diary," edited by the Director of our Society, I find an entry of "a Booke of Thomas Dickers called the gentle craft," for which he was paid £3. The date is 15 July, 1559, and, as Mr. Collier informs us in a note, this "book" must have been the play printed anonymously in 1600 under the title of "The Shoemakers' Holiday, or the Gentle Craft." On the authority of Henslowe, this production is therefore assigned to Thomas Dekker, and I cannot discover from the "Diary" that any other dramatist was concerned with Dekker; yet £3 seems to have been a small sum for a new play, even at the then rate of payment, when from £6 to £10 were not unfrequently given. The fact is, as I shall proceed to show presently, that another poet was a partner with Dekker in the piece, and probably in the payment, though his name in that capacity is not inserted by Henslowe: nevertheless, it often occurs in the "Diary," but not, in this instance, as Dekker's coadjutor. The poet I allude to was a man who, like not a few others at that day, was a dramatist as well as a performer-I mean, Robert Wilson; by whom a play, under the title of "The Cobbler's Prophesy," printed in 1594, has come down to us. I have a copy of it now before me, and "Written by Robert Wilson, Gent." is at full length upon the title-page.

With regard to "The Shoemakers' Holiday, or the Gentle Craft," the Biographia Dramatica makes some (even for it) remarkably stupid blunders: in one place, under the head of "The Gentle Craft," it asserts that the play is "not now in existence," while, under the head of "The Shoemakers' Holiday," it gives part of the title with tolerable correctness, but adds that the authorship of it had been "attributed to Dr. Barton Holiday;" the absurd mistake having no doubt origi

nated in the word "Holiday"-" Shoemakers' Holiday," and Barton Holiday. I may be allowed to remark, by the way, that it is a great pity that our Society does not put forth a new and correct edition of this necessary but most inaccurate book, bringing down the information to the period of the suppression of the stage in 1647. We should thus have some reliable authority to go to respecting our early and Shakesperian drama: and as for the rest, from the reign of Charles II. downwards, it may be very well left to take care of itself, at least, for the present.

My reason for stating that Robert Wilson, as well as Thomas Dekker, was engaged upon "The Shoemakers' Holiday" is, that a friend of mine, who really does not know the value of it, but who, at the same time, is unwilling to part with it, has a copy (in a tattered condition, I am sorry to say) with the names of the two dramatists at the end of the preliminary address. These names are not printed, but they have been added in manuscript in a handwriting coeval, I think, with the date of publication, but, at all events, very little posterior to it; moreover, (and this is quite as curious, though, perhaps, not quite as important) with the names of the actors against all the principal parts, as they were sustained when the comedy was first brought out. These are not made to precede the play in a regular list of the dramatis personæ, as has been usual since the Restoration, but they are inserted in the margin as the piece proceeds, and as the different performers enter. The following is the preliminary address to which the names of the authors are subscribed.

"To all good Fellowes, Professors of the Gentle Craft, of what degree soever.

"Kinde Gentlemen and honest boone companions, I present you here with a merrie conceited comedie, called the Shoomakers' Holyday, acted by my Lorde Admirall's Players this present Christmasse before the Queene's most excellent

Majestie. For the mirth and pleasant matter, by her Highnesse graciously accepted; being indeede no way offensive. The Argument of the play I will set downe in this Epistle; Sir Hugh Lacie, Earle of Lincolne, had a yong Gentleman of his owne name, his neere kinsman, that loved the Lorde Maiors daughter of London; to prevent and crosse which love the Earle caused his kinsman to be sent Coronell of a companie into France, who resigned his place to another Gentleman, his friend, and came, disguised like a Dutch Shoomaker, to the house of Symon Eyre, in Tower Streete, who served the Maior and his household with shooes. The merriments that passed in Eyre's house, his comming to be Maior of London, Lacie's getting his love, and other accidents, with two merry Three-men's songs. Take all in good worth that is well intended; for nothing is purposed but mirth: mirth lengtheneth long life, which, with all other blessings, I heartily wish you. Farewell.

"T. DEKKER.

"R. WILSON."

It is evident that either this address was meant to come, as in some other cases, from the printer, or that it was not intended, or perhaps thought worth while, to let the reader know that more than one author had been concerned in the comedy. Neither of them acknowledged it in print; but the early owner of this copy, learning in some way that it had been written by Dekker and Wilson, wrote their names at the end of the above dedication, if such it may be called.

If farther reference be made to "Henslowe's Diary," it will be seen (p. 153) that the old manager inserts "The Gentle Craft," as one of the dramas for the purchase of which he had "laid out" money for "my lord of Notingame men, frome the 26 of maye, 1599," and the title-page of "the Shoemakers' Holiday, or the Gentle Craft," states that it was printed "as it was acted before the Queene's most excellent Maiestie, on

New-yeare's day at night last, by the right honourable the Earle of Notingham, Lord High Admirall of England, his servants." I am thus particular, not merely because this quotation proves that it is the same play as that entered by Henslowe, but because it is so rare, that I have not anywhere met with any account of it, much less a correct one: for this reason I here subjoin also the imprint from my friend's copy, the title-page of which is preserved, though much torn:"Printed by Valentine Sims dwelling at the foote of Adling hill, neere Bainard's Castle, at the signe of the White Swanne, and are there to be sold. 1600."

Now, who were the members of the theatrical association called "the Earl of Nottingham's servants" in 1600, when this play was printed, in consequence, doubtless, of its great popularity, which had induced the authorities in such matters to select it for representation before the Queen on New Years' day at night? We have the names of the leading actors in "Henslowe's Diary," (p. 172) and with their own signatures, in the following order, under date of 10 July, 1600.

"J. Singer.

Thomas Downton.
Humfry Jeffes.

Charles Massye.

Samuell Rowlye.

Robert Shaa.

Thomas Towne.

W. Birde.

Richard Jones.

Edward Jubye."

We may be warranted, I think, in concluding that these were then the "sharers" of the company, for they acknowledge themselves responsible to Henslowe for the debt of £300 due to him for advances. We shall see presently that

VOL. IV.

I