CHAPTER VIII.

GARRICK AND QUIN; GARRICK AND BARRY.

This new actor, Spranger Barry, who has come to London to wrestle,

as it were, with Garrick, is now in his twenty-seventh year, and

has been but two years, brief noviciate, on the Irish stage. He

had previously followed, with some reluctance, the vocation of his

father, that of silversmith; but, respectable and lucrative as it

was, the stage had more attraction for him, and thither he went in

pursuit of fame and fortune, nor missed the object he pursued so

steadily. His success in Ireland was great at a time when there

was a body of players there, which for ability has certainly never

been surpassed. Spranger was very well connected, and it was by the

counsel of his kinsman, Sir Edward Barry, that he turned his face

towards London, and resolved to try a fall there with David Garrick.

His first appearance was at Drury Lane, October 2, 1746,[48] in the

character of Othello; Iago, Macklin; Cassio, Mills; Roderigo, Yates;

Desdemona, Mrs. Ridout; Emilia, Mrs. Macklin. What aspirant entering

on a struggle of a similar nature now, would be gratified with such

notice as the press, in the _General Advertiser_, awarded to the new

actor, on this occasion? "Barry performed Othello before a numerous

and polite audience, and met _with as great applause as could be

expected_."

And the triumph _was_ as great as the player could have hoped for.

In some things, Barry profited by the suggestions and teaching of

Macklin; and the fact that for nearly eighty nights, about half of

which were given to Othello, Lord Townley, and Macbeth, Barry drew

crowded houses, will show that a new and dangerous rival had sprung

up in Garrick's path, at the moment he was contending with a skilled

and older rival at Covent Garden. In the earlier part of the season,

Garrick had played Hamlet, King Lear, Richard, Archer, Bayes, and

Chamont; Quin had played Richard, with no success; Cato, Bajazet, and

Sir John Brute. The two met together for the first time in the same

piece, on the 14th of November 1746, in the "Fair Penitent;" Horatio,

Quin; Lothario, Garrick; Altamont, Ryan; Calista, Mrs. Cibber.

This was the greatest theatrical event that had occurred for years;

and when the actor of the old school, and he of the new met on the

stage, in the second act, the audience who now first saw them,

as they had long wished to see them, face to face, absolutely

disconcerted them by a hurricane of greeting--a perfect storm of

gratulation, expressed in every way that applause can be given, but

in louder and longer peals than had ever been heard by actors of

that "generation." When it had passed, every word was breathlessly

listened to; every action marked. Some were won by the grand emphasis

and the moral dignity of Quin; others by the grace, spirit, and happy

wickedness of Garrick. Between them, it was difficult to award the

palm of supreme distinction to either--and Mrs. Cibber was, for once,

forgotten. They subsequently played together Falstaff and Hotspur;

and Hastings and Glo'ster, repeatedly, in "Jane Shore." Glo'ster

was one of Quin's "strut and whisker parts," and Garrick had such

advantage over him in Hastings, that "the scale was now completely

turned in Garrick's favour."

Was it from fear that Garrick declined to play Jaffier to Quin's

Pierre? It could not have arisen from fatigue, as alleged, for

Garrick wrote a capital farce, "Miss in her Teens," and played

Fribble in it, and then _created_ Ranger, in Dr. Hoadley's

"Suspicious Husband," in which Quin declined the part of Mr.

Strictland, and gave to Bridgwater the one opportunity which he

seized, of being considered an actor. In Ranger, Garrick surpassed

even what old playgoers could recollect of comic excellence. His

"Neck or nothing; up I go!" became a popular saying, and the

rendering it was a tradition on the stage, from his days to the days

of Elliston, the gentlemanly impudence, and the incomparable grace of

whose Ranger is still remembered by many among us.

The originality of style and expression in this comedy displeased

Quin. He was a conservative, and disliked innovation; contemptuously

called the piece a speaking pantomime--forgetful that the old

comedies were often much more farcical (which is what he meant) in

their incident, and when a name for it was being discussed, suggested

scornfully "The Hat and Ladder." Some of Hoadley's friends kindly

foretold failure, in order to afford consolation after a kind. Thence

the epigram of one of them:--

"Dear doctor, if your comic muse don't please,

Turn to your tragic and write recipes."

Not merely as a character piece, but for construction of plot,

simplicity and grace of style, and comparative purity of speech and

action, the "Suspicious Husband" is the best comedy the eighteenth

century had, up to this time, produced. It has a good story clearly

and rapidly developed, and the persons of the drama are ladies and

gentlemen, and not the dully-vivacious ruffians and the unclean

hussies of the Aphra Behn, the Etherege, and Sedley period. The

writer was a "royal physician," and son to the famous bishop who,

for his opposition to civil and ecclesiastical tyranny, was treated

as if he were an infidel. The bishop did not go to witness his son's

play; but as all the Hoadleys had a theatrical turn, I feel sure he

and his family read it, with many a cheery laugh, in the old room at

Chelsea. George II. certainly did so at Windsor, and saw it, too, at

the Garden, and was so well pleased with his physician, the author,

that he gratefully sent him the handsome fee of £100.

Garrick came off so well in his contest with Quin, that he probably

had no fears of trying the fall to which he was challenged, with

Barry. For this struggle Spranger Barry passed over to Drury Lane, to

wrestle with David on his own ground. Drury may be called peculiarly

his, for, by purchasing a share in the patent, he now commenced that

career of management which lasted during his theatrical life, and the

brilliancy of which was spoken of in every part of the world where an

interest was felt in the intellectual enjoyments of the people.

The Drury Lane season of 1747-48 found Garrick joint-patentee with

Lacy; Garrick directing the stage without interference, and receiving

between six and seven hundred a year, as an actor, exclusive of

his profits as part-proprietor. Garrick's company included Barry,

Macklin, Delane, Havard, Mills, Yates, Barrington, Sparks, Lowe; and

Mrs. Pritchard, Mrs. Cibber, Mrs. Woffington, Mrs. Clive, and other

bright but lesser stars.

In this season the chief attractions were Macklin's Shylock, Barry's

Hamlet, Othello, and Pierre; and in less degree, his Bajazet, Henry

V., and Orestes. Garrick drew full houses by Archer and Abel Drugger,

Lear and Richard, Sir John Brute and Plume, Hamlet and Macbeth; but

the greatest attraction of all was when Garrick and Barry played

together, as Chamont and Castalio ("Orphan") Hastings and Dumont

("Jane Shore"), Lothario and Horatio ("Fair Penitent"), and Jaffier

and Pierre. Against such attractions as were here presented, with the

addition of Mrs. Woffington as Sir Harry Wildair, and Mrs. Clive, in

all that was light, airy, impertinent, and tuneful--Covent Garden

was more than usually weak. The latter, however, depended on the

"Beggar's Opera," on Ryan and Delane,[49] the younger Cibber, the

Giffards, and especially Mrs. Horton; Woodward was in Ireland. Quin

had withdrawn to Bath. Garrick's triumphs had soured him. He desired

to be asked back, but Rich would not humour him. The one wrote, "I

am at Bath; yours, James Quin:" and the other answered, "Stay there

and be d----d; yours, John Rich." The old actor returned, however, to

play Othello, without fee, on occasion of a "charity benefit." Drury

Lane alone produced a new piece, with new characters for Garrick and

Barry, namely, Moore's "Foundling," in which Garrick played Young

Belmont with great _éclat_; Barry, Sir Charles Raymond, with dignity

and tenderness, and Macklin, a knavish fop, Faddle, with wonderful

power.

Moore, like Gay, had originally served in a draper's shop, and like

Gay, wrote "Fables,"--"for the female sex." His "Foundling" bears

some resemblance to the "Conscious Lovers;" but there is more art in

the construction of the plot, and it is far purer than that piece

which was written to inaugurate an era of purity. In the part of

Faddle, he satirised a well-known individual, named Russell, who was

the delight of ladies of _ton_, because of his good looks, crowning

impudence, and his "imitations" of opera-singers. These qualities

made him a guest, for whom ladies contended; and some displeasure

arose, in aristocratic breasts, at Macklin's close mimicry of the

man,--who, after all, on being arrested for a debt of £40, was left

to pine, starve, and finally to die mad, in the Fleet prison. Such

was the fate of this once favourite of fashion.

With the season of 1748-49, came increase of opposition between the

two houses. At Drury Lane, Garrick and Barry played alternately

Hamlet and Macbeth--the Hamlet of Garrick drawing by far the

greater crowds. In the same pieces they played--Barry, Henry V.,

Garrick, the Chorus; Garrick, Horatio, Barry, Lothario; Garrick,

Othello, Barry, Iago;[50] and Mahomet by Barry to the Demetrius of

Garrick in Johnson's "Irene." Garrick also revived "A New Way to

Pay Old Debts," in which King, springing from a coffee house, acted

Allworth with great spirit and delicacy. It is strange that Garrick

failed to perceive the golden opportunity he might have had as Sir

Giles; he assigned the part to an inferior actor named Bridges, and

preferred playing Fribble in "Miss in Her Teens." Garrick's greatest

triumph this season was in playing Benedick to the Beatrice of Mrs.

Pritchard. The town had not had so exquisite a delight for many a

long day; and Garrick's happiness would have been supreme, but for

the fact that Barry and Mrs. Cibber produced as great a sensation,

though of another quality, in Romeo and Juliet. This last piece was

not repeated,[51] to the great annoyance of Barry; and Garrick, at

the close of the season married the pretty Violetti to the intense

disgust of Mrs. Woffington, who now joined Rich.

At Covent Garden Quin, Delane, Ryan, Mrs. Woffington, Mrs. Horton,

and Miss Bellamy, were the chief attractions. Quin played many parts

which Garrick would not attempt. Of those played by both actors, Quin

is said to have surpassed Garrick in Sir John Brute. But the most

exciting event of this season was the abduction of Miss Bellamy,

while playing Lady Fanciful to Quin's Brute. A gentleman named Metham

begged to be allowed to speak with her in the hall of the theatre,

and thence carried her off and bore her away, little loth, I think,

in his carriage. Quin explained the matter to the audience, who

enjoyed it as a good thing done and a pleasant thing to hear of.

While the houses were thus contending, Foote was filling the little

theatre in the Haymarket with an entertainment of his own; but

there were authors of a higher class offering more intellectual

pieces to the town. Fourteen years before, when Samuel Johnson was

keeping school near Lichfield, he wrote his tragedy "Irene," which,

in its rough state, he brought to London, when he and Garrick came

up together in search of fortune. With poet, as with actor, the

aspects of life had improved; but most with the latter. Johnson,

now about forty, had been long known for his _London_, and had at

this time put the finishing touches to his _Vanity of Human Wishes_.

Garrick produced his friend's tragedy, and Johnson was present on the

first night in gala dress, but not to be crowned, as Voltaire was,

when the lively old Frenchman attended the representation of _his_

"Irene." For nine nights, yielding the poet three benefits--Garrick,

Demetrius; Barry, Mahomet; and Mrs. Cibber and Mrs. Pritchard as

Aspasia and Irene, exerted themselves--with indifferent success.

There is no local colour in this Turkish piece; the language and

sentiment are elevated, but they are never oriental in form or

spirit. The unities are strictly preserved, but not nature; and

therewith the piece was set aside, and Johnson never tried the drama

again.

In this season, too, kindly, over-speculating, fanciful Aaron Hill,

brought his efforts to a close, with "Merope;"--and creditably,

although he challenged comparison with Corneille, and in some

things was allowed to have stood it with advantage. The piece was

successful, but the author did not live to profit by it.[52] His

family were weeping for his death, while audiences were shedding

tears at the acting of Garrick, Dorilas; and Mrs. Pritchard, Merope.

Not only did this tragedy long hold the stage, but the subject of a

mother suffering because of a lost son, was so agreeable, it would

seem, that Browne, Whitehead, and Home, adopted it in "Barbarossa,"

"Creusa," and "Douglas."

Covent Garden, too, had its classical tragedy, in "Coriolanus,"

brought forward by Quin, after his friend Thomson's death. Quin

played the hero of Thomson's play; Ryan, Tullius; Delane, Galesus;

Mrs. Woffington, Veturia; and Miss Bellamy, Volumnia. This tragedy is

worth reading, if it be only to see how very civil and colloquial the

hot leader of the Volsci could be made by the Scottish poet in Kew

Lane. In Shakspeare's tragedy, we have the annals of a life put into

action. In Thomson's, as in Laharpe's "Coriolan," we have a single

incident diluted through five acts;--the secession from Rome, and its

consequences, forming the staple of a play which ends with a tag of

trotting rhymes, which are as natural, and not half so amusing, as if

the grave speaker of them had danced a hornpipe in his _cothurni_.

In 1749-50, symptoms were discernible of a break up in the Drury Lane

company. Mrs. Cibber, at odds with Garrick, withdrew; and Barry,

not allowed to play Romeo, was often indisposed to act in other

plays. So it was said: but he publicly protested against any feigned

indisposition. He repeated many of his old parts with Garrick, and

created Publius Horatius to Garrick's Horatius, in Whitehead's

"Roman Father." At Covent Garden, Delane exerted his dying efforts

fruitlessly against Barry; and Woffington opposed Woodward in Sir

Harry Wildair.

The above tragedy, by the son of a Cambridge baker, and one of Clare

Hall's most honoured Fellows, was not the only novelty produced at

Drury;--whither William Shirley brought from Portugal, where he had

written it in his leisure hours, his "Edward, the Black Prince."

Garrick played Edward; Barry, Ribemont; and Mrs. Ward, Marianne. It

will suffice, as a sample of Shirley's insight into the Prince's

character, to say, that he makes Edward, for love of Marianne, desert

to the French side! A more absurd violation of history was never

perpetrated by poet.[53] In the way of novelty, excepting pantomimic

trifles, Covent Garden offered no sign.

The latter house made no acquisitions such as Drury found in King and

in Palmer. Dyer, however, proved a useful actor, beginning his career

with Tom Errand, and bringing with him his wife, the daughter of

Mrs. Christopher Bullock, the daughter of Wilks. On the other hand,

the Garden lost Delane, whose first appearance at Goodman's Fields,

in 1730,[54] was temporarily menacing to the supremacy of Quin, as

Garrick's was permanently so, some years later. He was a graceful and

clever actor, but there was only one character of note of which he

was the original representative--Mahomet.

With this season also departed the actress whom Wilks and Booth

looked upon as the legitimate successor of Mrs. Oldfield, namely,

Mrs. Horton. Steele highly praised her for her acting Lady Brumpton

in his "Funeral." Long after youth was passed she retained a

luxuriant beauty, which was the envy of less richly endowed ladies.

She loved homage rendered to her charms, and was grateful for it,

however humble he who paid it. In her best days all young London

was sighing at her feet, and in the meridian of her sunny time she

invited adoration by the most exquisite coquetry. About this time

her powers began so to decay that Rich only estimated her worth at

£4 per week. Between Mrs. Woffington and Mrs. Pritchard she suffered

shipwreck. Mrs. Horton was an artificial actress, the other two were

of an opposite quality; Mrs. Pritchard especially captivated the

public by her natural and intelligible style of speaking. Davies

says,--Mrs. Horton had a small annuity, and that Garrick and Lacy

added to it by giving her a "part of a benefit." She had, however,

other resources. When Lord Orford patronised Lord Luxborough,

eldest son of Knight, of South Sea Company notoriety, people could

not account for it, but Horace Walpole could. "Lord Luxborough," he

writes to Mann, "keeps Mrs. Horton the player; _we_ (Orford) keep

Miss Norsa, the player. Rich, the harlequin, is an intimate of all;

and to cement the harlequinity, somebody's brother (excuse me if I

am not perfect in such genealogy) is to marry the Jewess's sister."

In this wise did the stage in those days act upon politics. The Miss

Norsa, above-named, had been a singer, of some repute, and Orford,

then Lord Walpole, had taken her off the stage with the concurrence

of her parents, to whom he gave a bond by which he engaged to marry

her as soon as his wife should die! His wife, however, happily

outlived him. Horace Walpole, writing to Mann from Houghton, in 1743,

says:--"Lord Walpole has taken a dozen pictures to Stanno, a small

house, about four miles from hence, where he lives with my Lady

Walpole's vicegerent. You may imagine that her deputies are no fitter

than she is to come where there is a modest, unmarried girl." This

girl was Maria Walpole, daughter of Sir Robert, and subsequently the

wife of Colonel Churchill, one of Mrs. Oldfield's sons.

Six-and-thirty years had Mrs. Horton been on the stage (1714-1750),

and in all that time she was the original representative of only one

character, Mariana, in the "Miser."

And now we come to the famous Romeo and Juliet season, that of

1750-51, in which Garrick and Barry were the rival Romeos, Miss

Bellamy and Mrs. Cibber the opposing Juliets. Barry, by passing to

Covent Garden, was enabled to play with Quin, in "Othello," the

"Orphan," "Jane Shore," "Henry V.," "Julius Cæsar," "Distressed

Mother," "Fair Penitent," "Tamerlane," and "King John." In these,

Barry's Faulconbridge was alone a failure, and Quin held his own

so well that his terms for the season were £1000, the largest sum

ever yet received by English actor; but his Richard was as little a

success as Barry's Faulconbridge. Garrick, Mrs. Pritchard, and Miss

Bellamy appeared together in "Zara;" at the other house,[55] Barry,

Mrs. Cibber, and Mrs. Woffington, in the "Conscious Lovers." Mrs.

Cibber, as Indiana, made a great point by her delivery of such simple

words as these: "Sir, if you will pay the money to a servant, it will

do as well!" Barry and Mrs. Woffington in Lord and Lady Townley, and

Quin and Mrs. Woffington in "Macbeth," were among the attractions of

Covent Garden, added to which was Rich's Harlequin; but for that also

Garrick found a rival in Woodward, who played the motley hero as he

played everything, with care and effect.

But all these matters were as nothing when compared with the rival

Romeos and Juliets. They appeared on the same night, at their

respective houses, the 28th of September, 1750. At Covent Garden,

the public had Romeo, Barry; Mercutio, Macklin; Juliet, Mrs. Cibber.

At Drury, Romeo, Garrick; Mercutio, Woodward; Juliet, Miss Bellamy.

On the first night Barry spoke a poor prologue, in which it was

insinuated that the arrogance and selfishness of Garrick had driven

him and Mrs. Cibber from Covent Garden. Garrick, ready to repel

assault, answered in a lively, good-natured epilogue, delivered

saucily by Mrs. Clive.

It was considered a wonderful circumstance that this play ran

for _twelve_ nights successively; Garrick played it thirteen, to

show that he was not beaten from the field! At that period the

Londoners, who were constant playgoers, demanded a frequent change

of performance; and the few country folk then in town felt aggrieved

that one play should keep the stage during the whole fortnight they

were in London. Thence the well-known epigram:--

"'Well, what's to-night?' says angry Ned,

As up from bed he rouses;

'Romeo again!' he shakes his head:

'A plague on both your houses!'"

Contemporary journals, indeed, affirm that the audiences grew thin

towards the end of the fortnight, but this seems doubtful, as Barry's

twenty-third representation, in the course of the season, was given

expressly on account of the great number of persons who were unable

to obtain admission to his twenty-second performance.

There is no doubt that Mrs. Cibber had the handsomer, more

silver-tongued, and tender lover. She seemed to listen to him in a

sort of modest ecstasy; while Miss Bellamy, eager love in her eyes,

rapture in her heart, and amorous impatience in every expression,

was ready to fling herself into Romeo's arms. In Barry's Romeo,

the critics laud his harmony of feature, his melting eyes, and his

unequalled plaintiveness of voice. In the garden scenes of the second

and fourth acts, and in the first part of the scene in the tomb, were

Barry's most effective points. Garrick's great scenes were with the

Friar and the Apothecary. Miss Bellamy declared that in the scene

with the Friar alone was Garrick superior to Barry; Macklin swore

that Barry excelled his rival in every scene.

The Juliets, too, divided the public judgment. Some were taken by the

amorous rapture, the loveliness, and the natural style of Bellamy;

others were moved by the grander beauty, the force, and the tragic

expression of distress and despair which distinguished Mrs. Cibber.

Perhaps, after all, the truest idea of the two Romeos may be gathered

from the remark of a lady who did not pretend to be a critic, and

who was guided by her feelings. "Had I been Juliet," she said, "to

Garrick's Romeo,--so ardent and impassioned was he, I should have

expected that he would have _come up_ to me in the balcony; but

had I been Juliet to Barry's Romeo, so tender, so eloquent, and so

seductive was he, I should certainly have _gone down_ to him!"

Respectively, Barry acted Romeo twenty-three, Garrick nineteen times

this season,--a season of which there is nothing more to be said,

save that Garrick created the part of Gil Blas, in Moore's comedy of

that name, and that he produced Mallet's version of "Alfred"--playing

the king.

At this time, the poets were not inspired, or managers could dispense

with them, so attractive were the old actors in old pieces, with

new actors--Shuter, Palmer, and Miss Macklin--aiding them. Thus, in

the season 1751-52, Covent Garden, save in a burletta called the

"Oracle," relied on its stock-pieces; and Drury only produced Foote's

farce, "Taste," in which Worsdale, the painter, who kept, starved,

beat, and lived upon Laetitia Pilkington, played Lady Pentweazle,

with humorous effect;--and "Eugenia," a tragedy, by the Rev. Dr.

Francis, the father of Sir Philip, in which there was the coarseness

of sentiment, but none of the beauty of language or tenderness of

feeling of Otway. Yet it was approved by Chesterfield, who sneered

at the pit and gallery as "common people who must have objects that

strike the senses, and are only moved by the sufferings they see,

and even then must be dyed with the blood." But this is untrue,

although my lord said it, for Johnson's "Irene" failed because of the

strangling of the heroine in presence of the audience; and it was

only tolerated, during its brief run, after the killing was described

and not performed.

[Illustration: (Mr. Mossop)]

I have said that the managers relied on the actors and not on

the poets. In return, the actors exerted themselves to the very

utmost. Mrs. Cibber was as much stirred by Miss Bellamy as Barry by

Garrick, and the reverse. In "Jane Shore," for instance, Mrs.

Cibber, who played Alicia to the Jane of pretty and modest Miss

Macklin, seemed, on the 25th of October especially, to be inspired

"with something more than mortal." Though Alicia had always been

looked on as one of her very best characters, yet this night's

performance she never equalled, before nor since.

In this season, Barry acted Romeo twelve, Garrick only six times;

but the latter introduced a new opposition to his formidable rival,

in the persons of Mossop and Ross, both from Ireland. Mossop first

appeared in Richard, which he repeated seven times with great

applause. His Zanga was still more successful; indeed, he has never

been excelled in that character. Six times he played Horatio to

Garrick's Lothario, and charmed the town more frequently by his grand

Theseus to Mrs. Pritchard's Phædra. In Macbeth, Othello, Wolsey, and

Orestes, he also displayed great powers. Ross, a gentlemanlike actor,

made his _début_ in Young Bevil, by Garrick's advice, and acted Lord

Townley, Altamont, and Castalio,--the latter to Garrick's Chamont,

with great effect. Garrick, no doubt, would have reluctantly seen

himself eclipsed by either of those players; but because inferior

actors sought to flatter him by calling Mossop a ranter, and Ross a

sniveller, and epigrammatists declared indifference to both, it is

not conclusive that the flattery pleased or the sneer delighted him.

Garrick had his own peculiar triumphs. His Kitely, to Woodward's

Bobadil, Yates's Brainworm, Shuter's Master Stephen, Ross's Young

Knowell, and Palmer's Wellbred, gave new life to Ben Johnson's comedy

of character. Thenceforward was associated the name of Captain

Bobadil with that of the scholar from Merchant Tailors'--Harry

Woodward.

But this has brought us into a new half-century, Let us pause and

look back at the audiences of that which has gone by.

[Illustration: Mrs. Yates as Lady Macbeth.]

FOOTNOTES:

[48] Should be October 4.

[49] Delane was not at Covent Garden. He did not leave Drury Lane

till next season.

[50] Dr. Doran has reversed the cast of these two plays. Garrick

played Lothario and Iago; Barry, Horatio and Othello.

[51] This is a most extraordinary statement. It was acted nineteen

times.

[52] He lived for nearly a year. "Merope" was produced April 1749:

Hill died February 1750.

[53] It is a character named Arnold who joins the French for love

of Marianne. Dr. Doran has misread a somewhat obscure sentence in

Genest's description of the plot.

[54] 1731.

[55] Probably the "Mourning Bride"--(Zara by Mrs. Pritchard)--is

meant. "Zara" does not seem to have been played.

[Illustration: WOODWARD IN "EVERY MAN IN HIS HUMOUR."]

"Their Majesties' Servants." Annals of the English Stage (Volume 2 of 3) · 第 8 / 22 章