DISPOSING OF THE LEASE OF THE MUSEUM SITE--THE BARGAIN WITH MR.
BENNETT--BARNUM'S REFUSAL TO BACK OUT--A LONG AND BITTER WAR WITH
"THE HERALD"--ACTION OF THE OTHER MANAGERS--THE RETURN OF PEACE.
After the destruction of his museum by fire, Barnum determined to
open another and still finer establishment. It would not be on
the old site, however, but further up town. The unexpired lease
of the two lots at Ann Street and Broadway he proposed to sell;
and he quickly had numerous offers for it. This lease still had
about eleven years to run, and the annual rental was only
$10,000; and there was a provision that, in case of the burning
of the building, the owner was to spend $24,000 in aiding Barnum
to rebuild, and then, at the expiration of the lease, was to pay
Barnum the appraised value of the building, not exceeding
$100,000. This lease had seemed extravagant when Barnum had made
it, but the great growth of the city had so increased the value
of property in that vicinity, that now the rental of $10,000
seemed ridiculously small. An experienced real estate broker,
whom Barnum engaged for the purpose, estimated the value of the
lease at $275,000. Barnum was so anxious, however, to get the
matter settled at once that he decided to offer the lease for
sale at $225,000.
The next day he met James Gordon Bennett, the elder, the owner of
the New York Herald. Mr. Bennett told him that he thought of
buying both the lease and the fee simple of the property itself,
and erecting there a fine building for his great newspaper.
Barnum therefore, offered him the lease for $200,000, and after a
few day's consideration Mr. Bennett accepted the offer. His
attorney thereupon handed to Mr. Barnum a check on the Chemical
Bank for $200,000, which Barnum immediately used in the purchase
of Government Bonds. Mr. Bennett had agreed to purchase the fee
of the property for $500,000. He had been informed that the
property was worth some $300,000 to $400,000, and he did not mind
paying $100,000 extra for the purpose of carrying out his plans.
But the parties who estimated for him the value of the land knew
nothing of the fact that there was a lease upon the property,
else of course they would in their estimate have deducted the
$200,000, which the lease would cost. When, therefore, Mr.
Bennett saw it stated in the newspapers that the sum which he had
paid for a piece of land measuring only fifty-six by one hundred
feet was more than was ever paid before in any city in the world
for a tract of that size, he discovered the serious oversight
which he had made; and the owner of the property was immediately
informed that Bennett would not take it. But Bennett had already
signed a bond to the owner, agreeing to pay $100,000 cash, and to
mortgage the premises for the remaining $400,000.
Supposing that by this step he had shaken off the owner of the
fee, Bennett was not long in seeing that, as he was not to own
the land, he would have no possible use for the lease, for which
he had paid the $200,000; and accordingly his next step was to
shake Barnum off also, and get back the money he had paid him.
In speaking of what followed, Mr. Barnum afterwards said: "My
business for many years, as manager of the Museum and other
public entertainments, compelled me to court notoriety; and I
always found Bennett's abuse far more remunerative than his
praise, even if I could have had the praise at the same price,
that is for nothing. Especially was it profitable to me when I
could be the subject of scores of lines of his scolding
editorials free of charge, instead of paying him forty cents a
line for advertisements, which would not attract a tenth part so
much attention. Bennett had tried abusing me, off and on, for
twenty years, on one occasion refusing my advertisement
altogether for the space of about a year; but I always managed to
be the gainer by his course. Now, however, when new difficulties
threatened, all the leading managers in New York were members of
the 'Managers' Association,' and as we all submitted to the
arbitrary and extortionate demands of the Herald, Bennett thought
he had but to crack his whip, in order to keep all and any of us
within the traces. Accordingly one day Bennett's attorney wrote
me a letter, saying that he would like to have me call on him at
his office the following morning. Not dreaming of the object, I
called as desired, and after a few pleasant commonplace remarks
about the weather, and other trifles, the attorney said:
" 'Mr. Barnum, I have sent for you to say that Mr. Bennett has
concluded not to purchase the museum lots, and therefore that you
had better take back the lease, and return the $200,000 paid for
it.'
" 'Are you in earnest?' I asked with surprise.
" 'Certainly, quite so,' he answered.
" 'Really,' I said, smiling, 'I am sorry I can't accommodate Mr.
Bennett; I have not got the little sum about me; in fact, I have
spent the money.'
" 'It will be better for you to take back the lease,' said the
attorney, seriously.
" 'Nonsense,' I replied, 'I shall do nothing of the sort; I don't
make child's bargains. The lease was cheap enough, but I have
other business to attend to, and shall have nothing to do with
it.'
"The attorney said very little in reply; but I could see, by the
almost benignant sorrow expressed upon his countenance, that he
evidently pitied me for the temerity that would doubtless lead me
into the jaws of the insatiable monster of the Herald. The next
morning I observed that the advertisement of my entertainments
with my museum company at Winter Garden was left out of the
Herald columns. I went directly to the editorial rooms of the
Herald; and learning that Bennett was not in, I said to Mr.
Hudson, then managing editor:
" 'My advertisement is left out of the Herald; is there a screw
loose?'
" 'I believe there is,' was the reply.
" 'What is the matter?' I asked.
" 'You must ask the Emperor,' said Mr. Hudson, meaning of course
Bennett.
" 'When will the "Emperor" be in?' I inquired. 'Next Monday,' was
the answer.
" 'Well, I shall not see him,' I replied; 'but I wish to have
this thing settled at once. Mr. Hudson, I now tender you the
money for the insertion of my museum advertisement on the same
terms as are paid by other places of amusement; will you publish
it?'
" 'I will not,' Mr. Hudson peremptorily replied.
" 'That is all,' I said. Mr. Hudson then smilingly and blandly
remarked, 'I have formally answered your formal demand, because I
suppose you require it; but you know, Mr. Barnum, I can only obey
orders.' I assured him that I understood the matter perfectly,
and attached no blame to him in the premises. I then proceeded to
notify the secretary of the 'Managers' Association' to call the
managers together at twelve o'clock the following day; and there
was a full meeting at the appointed time. I stated the facts in
the case in the Herald affair, and simply remarked, that if we
did not make common cause against any newspaper publisher who
excluded an advertisement from his columns simply to gratify a
private pique, it was evident that either and all of us were
liable to imposition at any time.
"One of the managers immediately made a motion that the entire
Association should stop their advertising and bill printing at
the Herald office, and have no further connection with that
establishment. Mr. Lester Wallack advised that this motion should
not be adopted until a committee had waited upon Bennett, and had
reported the result of the interview to the Association.
Accordingly, Messrs. Wallack, Wheatley and Stuart were delegated
to go, down to the Herald office to call on Mr. Bennett.
"The moment Bennett saw them, he evidently suspected the object
of their mission, for he at once commenced to speak to Mr.
Wallack in a patronizing manner; told him how long he had known,
and how much he respected his late father, who was a true English
gentleman of the old school,' with much more in the same strain.
Mr. Wallack replied to Bennett that the three managers were
appointed a committee to wait upon him to ascertain if he
insisted upon excluding from his columns the museum
advertisements--not on account of any objection to the contents
of the advertisements, or to the museum itself, but simply
because he had a private business disagreement with the
proprietor; intimating that such a proceeding, for such a reason,
and no other, might lead to a rupture of business relations with
other managers. In reply, Mr. Bennett had something to say about
the fox that had suffered tailwise from a trap, and thereupon
advised all other foxes to cut their tails off; and he pointed
the fable by setting forth the impolicy of drawing down upon the
Association the vengeance of the Herald. The committee, however,
coolly insisted upon a direct answer to their question.
"Bennett then answered: 'I will not publish Barnum's
advertisement; I do my business as I please, and in my own way.'
" 'So do we,' replied one of the managers, and the committee
withdrew.
"The next day the Managers' Association met, heard the report,
and unanimously resolved to withdraw their advertisements from
the Herald, and their patronage from the Herald job
establishment, and it was done. Nevertheless, the Herald for
several days continued to print gratutitously the advertisements
of Wallack's Theatre and Niblo's Garden, and inordinately puffed
these establishments, evidently in order to ease the fall, and to
convey the idea that some of the theatres patronized the Herald,
and perhaps hoping by praising these managers to draw them back
again, and so to nullify the agreement of the Association in
regard to the Herald. Thereupon, the mangers headed their
advertisements in all the other New York papers with the line,
'This establishment does not advertise in the New York Herald,'
and for many months this announcement was kept at the top of
every theatrical advertisement and on the posters and playbills.
"The Herald then began to abuse and villify the theatrical and
opera managers, their artists and their performances, which, of
course, was well understood by the public, and relished
accordingly. Meanwhile the theatres prospered amazingly. Their
receipts were never larger, and their houses never more thronged.
The public took sides in the matter with the managers and against
the Herald, and thousands of people went to the theatres merely
to show their willingness to support the managers and to spite
'Old Bennett.' The editor was fairly caught in his own trap.
Other journals began to estimate the loss the Herald sustained by
the action of the managers, and it was generally believed that
this loss in advertising and job printing was not less than from
$75,000 to $100,000 a year. The Herald's circulation also
suffered terribly, since hundreds of people, at the hotels and
elsewhere, who were accustomed to buy the paper solely for the
sake of seeing what amusements were announced for the evening,
now bought other papers. This was the hardest blow of all, and it
fully accounted for the abuse which the Herald daily poured out
upon the theatres.
"Bennett evidently felt ashamed of the whole transaction. He
would never publish the facts in his columns, though he once
stated in an editorial that it had been reported that he had been
cheated in purchasing the Broadway property; that the case had
gone to court, and the public would soon know all the
particulars. Some persons supposed by this that Bennett had sued
me; but this was far from being the case. The owner of the lots
sued Bennett, to compel him to take the title and pay for the
property as per agreement; and that was all the 'law' there was
about it. He held James Gordon Bennett's bond, that he would pay
him half a million of dollars for the land, as follows: $100,000
cash, and a bond and mortgage upon the premises for the remaining
$400,000. The day before the suit was to come to trial, Bennett
came forward, took the deed, and paid $100,000 cash, and gave a
bond and mortgage of the entire premises for $400,000.
"Had I really taken back the lease, as Bennett desired, he would
have been in a worse scrape than ever; for having been compelled
to take the property, he would have been obliged, as my landlord,
to go on and assist in building a Museum for me, according to the
terms of my lease, and a Museum I should certainly have built on
Bennett's property, even if I had owned a dozen Museums up town.
"In the autumn of 1868, the associated managers came to the
conclusion that the punishment of Bennett for two years was
sufficient, and they consented to restore their advertisements to
the Herald. I was then carrying on my new Museum, and although I
did not immediately resume advertising in the Herald, I have
since done so."
Such is the account Barnum gave, in his own words, of this
extraordinary quarrel. He was, it will be seen, unsparing of
criticism and denunciation. Kindly as was his nature, he was "a
good hater," and never was there a more relentless fighter. In
denouncing Mr. Bennett he was perfectly sincere, and believed
himself to be entirely in the right. At the same time he never
hesitated to give a full meed of appreciative praise to the great
journalist, for his extraordinary enterprise and commanding
talents. Both the men are now dead, after careers of marvellous
success, and the animosity that raged between them is also long
dead; it perished years before they did. It is here rehearsed
merely as an integral and essential part of this biography, to be
regarded in a spirit of philosophic contemplation, entirely
devoid of bitterness or acrimony,