1886,--Belasco received and accepted an invitation to return to the city
of his birth, and the scene of much of his vicissitudinous early career,
as stage manager of what was fairly denominated “a stock company of
stars” and was, without question, one of the strongest theatrical
companies ever assembled in America. That company was organized by Al.
Hayman to fill a summer season at the Baldwin Theatre (of which he had
obtained control in 1883) and it comprised the following players:
Robert B. Mantell.
Joseph Haworth.
William J. Ferguson.
Charles Vandenhoff.
Rowland Buckstone.
Henry Miller.
Owen Fawcett.
W. H. Crompton.
Maurice Barrymore.
L. J. Henderson.
Alfred Fisher.
Errol Dunbar.
George H. Cohill.
Sophie Eyre.
Florence Gerard.
Mary Shaw.
Louise Dillon.
Kate Denin.
Kitty Wilson.
Ada Dyer.
Mrs. Alfred Fisher.
Agnes Thomas.
Mrs. C. R. Saunders.
Hayman’s company began its engagement under Belasco’s direction, at the
Baldwin, May 31, in a dramatized synopsis of Ouida’s novel of “Moths,”
which was cast thus:
_Lord Jura_ Joseph Haworth.
_Prince Zouroff_ Charles Vandenhoff.
_Raphael de Correze_ Henry Miller.
_Duke of Mull and Cantyre_ Rowland Buckstone.
_Joan_ E. J. Holden.
_Fuchsia Leach_ Louise Dillon.
_Duchess de Sonnah_ Agnes Thomas.
_Lady Dolly Vanderdecken_ Kate Denin.
_Princess Nadine Helegrine_ Sydney Cowell.
_Vera Herbert_ Sophie Eyre.
On June 7 Belasco’s “Valerie” was presented, the parts being distributed
as follows:
_Sir Everard Challoner_ Joseph Haworth.
_Walter Trevillian_ W. J. Ferguson.
_Mons. Xavier_ Charles Vandenhoff.
_Hon. George Alfred Bettly_ Rowland Buckstone.
_Dr. Rushton_ W. H. Crompton.
_Roberts_ E. J. Holden.
_Helena Malcom_ Sophie Eyre.
_Valerie de Brian_ Louise Dillon.
_Lady Bettly_ Kate Denin.
_Julia Trevillian_ Sydney Cowell.
_Agnes_ Trella Foltz.
“Valerie” was received with favor and played for one week. It was
succeeded, June 14, by a revival of “The Marble Heart,”--in which
Mantell played _Phidias_ and _Raphael_, Ferguson _Volage_, and Miss Eyre
_Marco_. “Anselma” was acted on the 21st; “The Lady of Lyons” on the
24th, and “Alone in London” on the 28th. A particularly rich setting was
provided for the last named presentment, which was warmly commended for
the perfection of Belasco’s stage management, the excellence of the
acting and “beautiful and bewitching scenery and stage effects.” Mme.
Modjeska appeared on July 12, supported by members of the Hayman
company, in Maurice Barrymore’s nasty play of “Nadjezda”: this, however,
appears to have been brought forth under the stage management of its
author and without any assistance from Belasco. On July 18 the latter
took a benefit at the Baldwin, at which the theatre was densely crowded
by a wildly enthusiastic audience. The occasion was made a general
testimonial of the cordial admiration and high personal esteem in which
Belasco had come to be held in his native city, by the public as well as
by fellow-members of his profession. It was directed by a committee of
which Charles Bozenta (Modjeska’s husband and manager) was the President
and Clay M. Greene and Maurice Barrymore the Vice-Presidents, many
distinguished men and women of the Theatre and of public life in
California being members. The programme included the names of more than
sixty-five players and the principal features of it were as follows:
“Clothilde,” One Act of, by Jeffreys-Lewis and Company.
M. B. Curtis Recitations.
McKee Rankin Recitations.
“The Private Secretary,” One act of, with John N. Long
as the _Rev. Spaulding_, and the original cast.
Helene Dingeon Songs.
Maurice Barrymore Recitations.
“Carrie” Swan “Specialties.”
Edwin Foy Imitations.
“Called Back,” One Act of,
_Macari_ Joseph R. Grismer.
_Gilbert Vaughan_ Maurice Barrymore.
_Pauline_ Phœbe Davies.
_Mary_ Louise Dillon.
[Illustration:
Photograph by Sarony. Belasco’s Collection.
ALBERT M. PALMER]
E. J. Buckley “‘Ostler Joe.”
“Shadows of a Great City,” Last Act of, by the original cast.
On July 26 Belasco left San Francisco for New York,--where immediately
after his arrival he did some unacknowledged tinkering and readjusting
of a play by Archibald Clavering Gunter, called “A Wall Street Bandit,”
which was produced, September 20, at the Standard Theatre, under the
management of Charles Frohman. Belasco’s next employment was at the
Lyceum Theatre.
AFFAIRS OF THE LYCEUM.
Wallack’s company did not last much more than a year after the time when
Belasco was offered an opportunity to join it as stage manager: it was
disbanded on May 30, 1887, after giving a final performance, at Daly’s
Theatre, in “The Romance of a Poor Young Man.” Thus Belasco’s decision
not to ally himself in any permanent capacity with that organization
proved fortunate for him. Meantime Mackaye’s administration of the
Lyceum Theatre was not successful. “Dakolar” ran there from April 6 to
May 23 (1885), when the house was closed. On September 15, following, a
re-opening was effected, with a new version, by Mackaye, of Victorien
Sardou’s “Andrea,” presented under the name of “In Spite of All,”--the
chief parts of it being acted by Minnie Maddern (now Mrs. Fiske), Eben
Plympton, Richard Mansfield, and Selina Dolaro. That play held the stage
till November 7, when Mackaye relinquished his lease of the Lyceum and
control of that theatre was obtained by Daniel Frohman. “In Spite of
All” was taken to Boston by Charles Frohman, Belasco going with it as
stage-manager. After the presentment of it in Boston Belasco returned to
New York, and soon entered into the engagement with Wallack which has
been described. Having finished “Valerie,” he renewed his association
with Sargent, in the School of Acting, thus coming into indirect
connection with the Lyceum Theatre. On November 10, 1885, that house had
been opened under the direction of Helen Dauvray (“Little Nell, the
California Diamond”), Daniel Frohman being the lessee, in a play written
specially for her by Bronson Howard, called “One of Our Girls,” in which
she made a success as _Kate Shipley_. That play was acted for 200
nights, the run closing on May 22, 1886, when Miss Dauvray retired from
the direction of the Lyceum. Daniel Frohman then announced himself as
the manager of that theatre, opening it, on May 24, with Frank Mayo, in
the play of “Nordeck,” which ran for two weeks, when the season ended.
It was reopened on September 18, following, with Henry C. De Mille’s
play of “The Main Line; or, Rawson’s Y.” Belasco, through his indirect
connection with the Lyceum, came into employment in rehearsal of various
plays for the English actress May Fortesque (Finney), who, on October
18, 1886, began a brief engagement at the Lyceum, appearing in W. S.
Gilbert’s “Faust,” acting _Gretchen_, and later, November 8, played
_Frou-Frou_, and, November 29, _Iolanthe_, in “King Rene’s Daughter,”
and _Jenny Northcott_, in “Sweethearts.” Miss Fortesque was not
successful in America and on March 23, 1887, she sailed for England.
While Belasco was rehearsing her company Daniel Frohman engaged him at
the Lyceum, at a salary of $35 a week, as stage manager, adviser, and
general assistant, and that position he held till early in the year
1890. Meanwhile Belasco, besides his activities as a teacher in the
Lyceum School of Acting (the pupils of that school, under his direction,
gave a creditable performance of a translation of Molière’s “Les
Précieuses Ridicules,” March 23, 1887, at the Lyceum), was at work on
the revision of a play by John Maddison Morton (1811-1891) and Robert
Reece, called “Trade,” which was written for Edward A. Sothern and had
been inherited by his son, Edward Hugh Sothern, whose contract with Miss
Dauvray had been assumed by Daniel Frohman, and who was soon to figure
at the Lyceum as leading man and, practically, as star. The play of
“Trade,” in its original form, was defective. The elder Sothern, an
intimate friend of mine, consulted me about it, I remember, and at his
request, and as a friendly act, I suggested some changes and wrote into
it one scene. My work, however, was not important. Belasco practically
rewrote the play, and, under the name of “The Highest Bidder,” his
version of it was produced at the Lyceum, May 3, 1887, with E. H.
Sothern as _Jack Hammerton_, the leading part.
“THE HIGHEST BIDDER.”
“The Highest Bidder” is one of the many plays which are correctly
designated as “tailor-made.” Such things do not spring from an original
dramatic impulse. Morton and Reece aimed to fit the elder Sothern with a
part that would suit him, and they did not accomplish the purpose, nor
did that accomplished comedian, who did much work on their play.
Belasco, revising it for the younger Sothern, considerably improved it,
telling the story more fluently and making the central character more
piquant and flexible. _Jack Hammerton_ is an amiable young man, of
abundant wealth, by profession an auctioneer, by nature diffident in
general
[Illustration:
Photograph by Sarony. Belasco’s Collection.
EDWARD H. SOTHERN
About 1888]
society, impulsive in temperament and prone to entangle himself in
foolish embarrassments, but capable of calm, decisive action in
situations of danger. An old friend of his, resident in the country, has
become involved in financial difficulties and a valuable estate is to be
sold to relieve him. The young auctioneer is employed to conduct the
sale, and he finds that his old friend has a charming young daughter,
supposed to be an heiress, who is being courted by a specious baronet
who is a dishonest gambler and a forger. In trying to unmask this rascal
the amiable auctioneer involves himself in a distressing tangle of
misapprehension, but eventually he discomfits the wily schemer (who
incidentally makes an abortive attempt to murder him), frees himself
from suspicion, and proves at once the rectitude of his intentions and
the ardor of his devotion to the lady whom he loves and whom he wishes
to rescue from the toils of a villain. At the climax of the auction
scene he “knocks down” his friend’s estate to himself, in the capacity
of “the highest bidder,” and then lays it, with his heart, at the feet
of the object of his adoration,--who, after an excess of hesitancy,
accepts him and his property.
“The Highest Bidder” was set in handsome scenery and the parts in it
were judiciously cast:
_Lawrence Thornhill_ J. W. Piggott.
_Bonham Cheviot_ William J. LeMoyne.
_Jack Hammerton_ Edward H. Sothern.
_Muffin Struggles_ Rowland Buckstone.
_Evelyn Graine_ Herbert Archer.
_Joseph_ Walter Clark Bellows.
_Parkyn_ William A. Faversham.
_Rose Thornhill_ Belle Archer.
_Mrs. Honiton Lacy_ Alice Crowther.
_Louise Lacy_ Vida Croly.
LeMoyne and Miss Archer, on this occasion, made their first appearance
at the Lyceum. The play was well acted, Sothern animating the
serio-comic part of _Hammerton_ with earnest feeling and sustained and
winning vivacity. The success had not been expected. Dismal
forebodements had preceded its production. “We had a small private
audience at a dress rehearsal,” said Belasco, “and it was ghastly;
everybody was unresponsive and chilly, they pretty well took the starch
out of all the actors, and made us all nervous, despondent, and
miserable. We had another ’go’ at the piece, with nobody in front, and
it seemed a little better; but we were all stale on it; we couldn’t tell
what would happen. What a difference when we had a friendly audience,
fresh to the piece and willing to be pleased!” “The Highest Bidder” held
the stage from May 3 to July 16, when the Lyceum was closed for the
season, but it was revived on August 29, and it ran till September 17.
Then, on September 20, under Belasco’s stage direction, Cecil Raleigh’s
neat farce of “The Great Pink Pearl” was brought out, together with the
drama in one act called “Editha’s Burglar.” The latter is an adaptation
of a story by Mrs. Frances Hodgson Burnett, and its production is
specially notable as being that of the first play by the brilliant and
representative American dramatist Augustus Thomas, and because of the
instant success achieved in its central character by Elsie
Leslie,--certainly the most remarkable child actor of the last sixty
years and one of the loveliest and most enchanting children ever seen
anywhere. To her captivating personality, and to her instinctive
histrionic talent, judiciously fostered and elicited by Belasco, was due
the success of the “double bill”: it held the Lyceum stage until October
30, and thereafter was acted in many other cities. In New York the
principal adult part, that of the _Burglar_, was assumed by E. H.
Sothern: “on the road” it was played by William Gillette.
“PAWN TICKET 210.”
Another venture, made in 1887, that was important to Belasco, was the
production, by his friend of early days, the fay-like little Lotta, of a
play which he wrote for her in collaboration with Clay M. Greene,
entitled “Pawn Ticket 210.” In the summer of that year, after those
authors had submitted their play to her, Lotta expressed herself as
favorably impressed by it but as being doubtful as to whether the public
would care for her in its central character, which contains some touches
of serious feeling. “I play and dance and sing,” she said, “and that
seems to be about all my audience expects of me.” Her interest in the
piece, however, finally overcame her hesitation; she agreed to buy it
outright, for $5,000, and produce it, provided that Belasco would direct
the rehearsals. To that stipulation he readily consented; a first
payment of $2,500 was made, and the play was prepared for public
representation on the stage of the Lyceum, immediately prior to the
rehearsals there of “The Great Pink Pearl” and “Editha’s Burglar”: it
was first acted at McVicker’s Theatre, Chicago, September 12, 1887.
“Pawn Ticket 210” is a melodrama, in four acts, based in part on an idea
in the novel of “Court Royal,” by Baring-Gould, and containing two
characters derived therefrom. The story is extravagant to the point of
absurdity. The mother of an infant girl, being in desperate need of
money, leaves her babe with a Jewish pawnbroker, as security for a loan
of $30, and then disappears. The child, _Mag_, attains to young
womanhood and is about to be, practically, forced into marriage with the
old pawnbroker, _Uncle Harris_, who holds her as “collateral,” when her
mother returns and, with the assistance of a youth named _Saxe_, redeems
the girl and provides for her happiness. Spectators of this amazing
medley might well have been puzzled to divine its purpose, since they
were at one moment required to contemplate scenes of violence and
bloodshed and the next were regaled with the capers of
burlesque,--Lotta, abandoning all endeavor at serious portrayal of
character, skipping over barrels, frisking upon tables, kicking off her
slippers, grimacing, dancing, and singing as only Lotta could.
That play was greeted by the writers for the Chicago newspapers with
extreme and derisive censure. Belasco and Greene, reading the adverse
reviews, were much disheartened and expected that Lotta would withdraw
their play and revive one of her early and successful vehicles. “I had
been in Chicago, for the dress rehearsal,” writes Belasco, in a
memorandum, “but my duties as stage manager at the Lyceum required me to
return to New York before the first performance. The rehearsals hadn’t
been satisfactory to me. And when, on top of the scathing notices, I
received a wire from Lotta [after “The Pearl” and “Editha’s Burglar”
had been produced] asking us to come out to Chicago again, I felt sure
it meant that our play was to be dropped.” When, however, in company
with Greene, he called on the actress, his dismal forebodings were
happily dispersed. “Don’t pay any attention to the criticisms,”
admonished the sensible little Lotta; “I have just had word from my
manager saying there is a line that extends around the block, trying to
get to the box office. The house has been packed to the roof, at every
performance. None of my plays has ever received good notices--but the
public comes. We have a great big success in this piece!” Lotta’s
mother, who was present, by way of confirming this auspicious view,
said, “We’ll show you what _we_ think of it,” and forthwith handed to
the delighted authors a check for the second payment of
$2,500,--although, writes Belasco, “it was a month ahead of the
stipulated time.” “Pawn Ticket 210” was the chief reliance of Lotta
during the season of 1887-’88, and thereafter it was utilized by several
of the various performers who sought to emulate her,--conspicuous among
them Amy Lee. This is the cast of the original production at McVicker’s:
_Mag_ Lotta.
_Uncle Harris_ John Howson.
[Illustration:
Photograph by Sarony. Belasco’s Collection.
LOTTA (CHARLOTTE CRABTREE)
About the time of “Pawn Ticket No. 210”]
_John Sternhold_ Charles L. Harris.
_Montague Flash_ G. C. Boniface.
_Charles Saxe_ Cyril Scott.
_Osiah Gregg_ J. W. Hague.
_Postman_ F. Waldo Parker.
_Ruth_ Augusta Raymond.
_Alice Sternhold_ Lilian Richardson.
_Aunt Dorothy_ Ernestine Floyd.
“BARON RUDOLPH” AND GEORGE S. KNIGHT.
The continuous, energetic, productive industry of Belasco is further
signified by the fact that during the interval between “The Highest
Bidder” and “The Wife” (May to November, 1887) he found time to do an
important piece of work in association with Bronson Howard. That author
had, several years earlier, written a play for Mr. and Mrs. William J.
Florence, called “Only a Tramp.” Mrs. Florence was not satisfied with
the part, _Nellie Dashwood_, designed for her, and the Florences,
accordingly, rejected the play. In 1886 it was bought from Howard by
George S. Knight (George Washington Sloan,--1850-1892), who chanced to
meet Howard in London and to whom it was offered.
The play of “Baron Rudolph” (or “Rudolph,” as, finally, it was
denominated) is not a distinctive or important one, but it contains,
chiefly as the result of Belasco’s revision (it was earlier acted in
New York, as Howard left it, so this statement rests on direct
comparison), effective elements of comedy and some amusing incidents and
fluent dialogue. Knight was a competent comedian,--nothing more: he
lacked personal magnetism, delicacy, and the rare and precious faculty
of taste.
The story of the play is trite and it is artificial; it belongs to the
category typified by “Struck Oil,” in which James C. Williamson and his
wife, “Maggie” Moore, were widely successful, many years ago, gaining a
fortune with it. It depicts the vicissitudes and sufferings of a kind
and loving, though weak and imprudent man, _Rudolph_, and of his wife
and child. _Rudolph_, who has been prosperous, is pitifully poor, and
his wife and their child are on the verge of starvation. The husband
returns, slightly intoxicated, to their squalid abode, and the wife,
stung to bitter resentment, leaves him, taking their child, and intent
to earn a living by her own labor. In this purpose she succeeds, and
after an interval of about two years she obtains a divorce from
_Rudolph_,--who, meantime, has become a gin-sodden “tramp,” abject and
wretched,--and she weds a swindling scoundrel, the secret agent of
_Rudolph’s_ ruin. That specious villain is detected, apprehended, and
exposed as a forger, in the moment of the wretched _Rudolph’s_ accession
to a fortune and a baronetcy, in Germany, and then a scene of
recognition and reconciliation ensues,--containing possibilities of
pathetic effect,--between the wretched father, “only a tramp,” and his
daughter. This story is jumbled with the wooing of a sprightly widow,
named _Nellie Dashwood_, a sort of _Mrs. General Gilflory_ (in “The
Mighty Dollar”); an attempted burglary; a secondary story about two very
young lovers, and a tedious tangle of literal detail and “outward
flourishes.”
Persons who care to observe how disruption wrought by poverty,
suffering, and weakness, in the home of an affectionate husband, wife
and child, can be treated with poignant dramatic effect should study the
old play of “Belphegor; or, The Mountebank,”--in which, as _Belphegor_,
Charles Dillon gave one of the most beautiful and touching performances
it has ever been my fortune to see. The triumphant use of such material
can also be studied in the late Charles Klein’s “The Music Master,” as
augmented, rectified, and produced by Belasco, with David Warfield in
its central part, _Herr von Barwig_. When revived, as altered and
amended by Belasco, “Rudolph” was handsomely set on the stage, but
Knight’s method of dressing and acting the principal part ruined any
chance of success which it might have had.
Knight became infatuated with the part of the _Tramp_, and he produced
“Rudolph,” for the first time, in the Fall of 1886, at the Academy of
Music, Cleveland. In 1887 Howard rewrote the play--receiving, as I
understood, $3,000 for doing so,--and it was then produced at Hull,
England, with Knight and his wife as stars, supported by members of
Wilson Barrett’s company, from the Princess’ Theatre, London. In its
revised form it was called “Baron Rudolph.” Knight was still
dissatisfied with the structure of it, and, returning to America,
desired that Howard should again revise it, but this Howard was unable
to do, being preoccupied with labor on “The Henrietta,” for Robson and
Crane (that play was produced for the first time at the Union Square
Theatre, September 26, 1887), but, at his request, Belasco undertook a
second revision. “My object,” he said, “was to do the work as nearly as
possible in Howard’s way, and I must have succeeded pretty well, because
when I took the script to him he said: ’You’ve caught my style,
exactly!’ And he would not allow the piece to be produced as ’By Bronson
Howard’; he insisted that I should have public credit as a co-author.”
In its final form it bore Howard’s second title, “Baron Rudolph,” and,
under the direction of Charles Frohman, representing Knight, and the
stage management of Belasco, it was produced at the Fourteenth Street
Theatre, New York, on October 24, 1887. “There was the chance for an
immense popular success and a fortune in the piece,” Belasco said to me,
“but Knight threw it all away. He insisted on making-up’ _Rudolph_, the
tramp, in such a literal, dirty, repulsive manner that, in the
recognition scene where the girl learns he is her father and has to
embrace and kiss him, the audience, instead of being sympathetic, was
disgusted. We argued and entreated with Knight: I told him, over and
over and over, what would happen. But he couldn’t, or he wouldn’t, see
it--and it happened!” The play failed, utterly; it was kept on the stage
for four weeks and then withdrawn. Knight, first and last, lost a modest
fortune on that play, and its ultimate failure broke him down. He and
his wife went on a tour, after ending their engagement at the Fourteenth
Street Theatre, in an early success of theirs, a farce called “Over the
Garden Wall,” but Knight’s brain was affected; within a few months he
suffered a shock of paralysis, and, on July 14, 1892, after much
suffering, he died, in Philadelphia. During his illness he was
maintained and cared for, with exemplary devotion, by his wife.
This was the cast of “Baron Rudolph,” at the Fourteenth Street Theatre:
_Rudolph_ George S. Knight.
_Whetworth_ Frank Carlyle.
_Rhoda_ Carrie Turner.
_Owen_ Lin Hurst.
_Sheriff_ Frank Colfax.
_Ernestine_ Jane Stuart.
_General Metcalf_ Charles Bowser.
_Judge Merrybone_ M. A. Kennedy.
_Geoffrey Brown_ Henry Woodruff.
_Allen_ George D. Fawcett.
_Nellie Dashwood_ Mrs. George S. Knight.
“THE WIFE.”