'[the famous wars of Henry the First and the Prince of Wales] the some of 41.'

In the same year Dekker obtained 5l. for his Triplicity of Cuckolds, and only 41. for Phaeton; so that prior to 1599, the price seems to have varied according to circumstances with which we are now unacquainted. About 1600, perhaps in consequence of the exertions of rival companies, the price for a play seems to have been raised: on the 22d of June, 1602, we find an entry by Henslowe of 101. to Ben Jonson, in earnest of a book called Richard Crookback, and for additions to Jeronimo;' and on the 25th of September, 1601, he had already been paid 21. for writing his additions in Jeronimo;' so that in the whole he received as much as had been the price of two new plays ' in earnest' of one new one and for additions to an old one, The Spanish Tragedy. At this date it was very customary also for authors to be paid money beforehand, in order to secure a promised production,—a circumstance which frequently renders it very difficult, and sometimes impossible, to ascertain the exact sum paid for any one piece. Thus, in the autumn of 1599, Henslowe seems to have been very desirous of obtaining a play from Marston, who was notorious on account of the recent publication of his satires, and the old manager therefore paid him 21. in hand, before he had even heard the title of the play, or well knew the name of the author he was endeavouring to secure for his theatre*. Sometimes it was specified that the money received was only in part payment of the whole sum; and in the entry regarding Drayton's William Longsword, it is stated that the cost of

* See this item quoted in the Annals of the Stage, i. 335.

the play when complete was to be 61. In other instances the entire amount stipulated is not inserted, as in the following item, which (excepting the signatures of Haughton and Dekker) stands in Henslowe's Diary in the handwriting of Chettle

'Received in earnest of patient Grissell, by us Thomas 'Dekker, Hen. Chettle, and William Hawton, the summe ' of 31. of good and lawfull money, by a note sent from Mr. Robt. Shaw, the 19th of December, 1599.

The advances were not always made to secure dramatic compositions, but not unfrequently to relieve the wants of poets, who applied to Henslowe in their distresses; and it is evident, from the letters of Daborne, that the old manager did not scruple to avail himself of an author's poverty in order to make a more advantageous bargain. Daborne was a needy man, with a pending law-suit, and the sums he obtained for plays were uncertain and disproportionate: all his letters are very urgent in the solicitation of money upon plays in hand, to show his progress in which, he was often obliged to send Henslowe the MS. as he proceeded, and in one instance he furnished him even with the rough draught of the last scene of a play in order to procure an advance.

Ben Jonson alludes to the practice of paying poets beforehand, in order to secure their services, in his Poetaster, acted in 1601, where Tucca, addressing Histrio, says: Rascal! to him-cherish his muse-go; thou hast forty-forty shillings I mean, stinkard: give him in

' earnest, do. He shall write for thee, slave!' and the player afterwards gives Minos 25s. 'in earnest,' which was all the money he had about him.

Nathaniel Field, who acted in the Poetaster as one of the Children of the Chapel, and who published his Woman is a Weathercock in 1612, could hardly have begun to write before 1609 or 1610: he had a good deal of correspondence with Henslowe, and some of the letters connect him indisputably with Massinger, a point denied by Reed before they were discovered *. In a communication, without date, he desires Henslowe, on his own behalf, and on behalf of some others in conjunction with whom he was engaged in writing a play (the title of which is not inserted), to let them have 107. in hand:' in another note, also without date, he speaks of 107. more at least to be received of you for the play.' Daborne usually adds dates to his letters, and on the 28th of March, 1613, he tells the manager that he desires him to 'disburse but 127. a-play, till they be played.' By a memorandum of agreement between Henslowe and Daborne of the 17th of April, 1613, the latter engages to furnish a tragedy to be called Machiavel and the Devil, for 20l.; and on the 19th of May following, he acknowledges the receipt of 161. of that sum. On the 25th of June, 1613, he informs Henslowe that he can obtain 251. for his Arraignment of London. Perhaps these increased prices were to be given for the copy without any ulterior advantage to the author; for, on the 3rd of August, 1613, Daborne stipulates for but 127., and the overplus of the second day,' adding that from 201. he had come to 127.;' and it is to be remarked that at this date

* See Dodsley's Old Plays by Reed, edition 1780, vol. xii. p. 350.

he was in great want, and supplicated Henslowe 'not to forsake him in his extremity.' In December, of the same year, we find Daborne entreating 107. for a play, and telling Henslowe that he will be able to get 201. for it from the company,' showing the manner in which Henslowe dealt in these commodities between the actors and authors, both of whom he seems to have long had very much in his power. The competition of other companies, and particularly of the King's men,' who played at the Globe, is frequently alluded to in these documents.

Two, three, four, or even more authors were frequently engaged upon the same production at the same time, often perhaps in order to bring it out with peculiar dispatch; and it is to be concluded that the division of the sum given for it was regulated among themselves. It does not, however, by any means follow that the poets, whose names have come down to us united on the same title-page, or even perhaps in the same entry in Henslowe's Diary, were contemporaneously employed upon the play. It was the constant practice for dramatic authors to make additions to, and alterations in, older plays on their revival, and this duty formed a considerable source of emolument. Ben Jonson's additions to The Spanish Tragedy have been already noticed: 41. was the highest sum ever paid by Henslowe for 'additions,' and 1. the lowest: Dekker, Rowley, Heywood, Chettle, and others were frequently employed in this manner, and they were paid according to the extent and nature of their alterations. On the revival of old pieces, or on their performance at court, Henslowe was in the habit of having new prologues and epilogues written for them; and it will be observed, by the two following quo

tations from his Diary, that 5s. was the sum he usually paid for a prologue and epilogue

14 December, 1602, for a prol. and Epil. for the playe ' of Bacon, for the Corte, 58.

29 December, 1602, paid Henry Chettle for a prol. and 'epil. for the Corte, 5s.'

Malone observes :-' as it was a general practice in the 'time of Shakespeare to sell the copy of the play to the theatre, I imagine, in such cases, the author derived no ' other advantage from his piece than what arose from the 'sale of it. It is evident, however, that sometimes ulterior advantages were also stipulated for, beyond the sum given in the first instance. Daborne, as we have just seen, bargains with Henslowe for 127. and the overplus of the second day,' which overplus, perhaps, meant what was received at the doors over and above the expenses of the house, including Henslowe's claim, whatever that might be. This might be matter of special agreement, and when such a sum as 20l. was given for a play, the overplus of the second day' might not belong to the author.

That it was the custom of old for dramatists to have an interest in one of the days of performance, may be esta blished by various other authorities. Davenant, in his Play-house to be Let, written about 1673, tells us,

-There is an old tradition,

That in the times of mighty Tamburlaine,

Of conjuring Faustus, and the Beauchamps bold,

You poets used to have a second day.

The three plays here mentioned were written before

1600, two of them before 1593†, and the office-book of Sir

*Shakespeare by Boswell, iii. 157.

By Marlow. The third, The bold Beauchamps, according to the