rish out his showy promising to pay them liberally, and withall desired them he would favor him so much as to gather him his money at his doore; (for he thought his best course to imploy them, lest they should it spie out his knaverie; for they have perillous heads;) they willingly yeeld to doe him any kindnes that lyes in them; in briefe, carry their apparell to the hall, place themselves at the doore, where George, in the mean time, with the tenne shillings he had of the Maior, delivered his horse out of purgatorie, and carryed him to the towndes end, and there placed him, to be redy at his comming. By this time, the audience were come, and some forty shillings gathered, which money George put in his purse, and putting on one of the players silk tobes after the trumpet had sounded thrice, out he comes, makes low obeysaunce, forward with his prologue, which was thus:

A trifling toy, a jest of no account pardie.

The Knight, perhaps, you thinke for to bee 1:

Thinke on so still: for why you know that thought is free,
Sit still a while I'll send ths actors to ye.

Which being said, after some fire workes, that he had made of purpose, threw out among them, and downe stayres goes he, gets to his horse, and so with forty shilfings to London: leaves the players to aunswerre it: who, when the jeste was knowne, their innocence excused them, being as well gulled as the Maior and the audience.

THEATRICAL PROPERTY.

THE Proprietors of the Winter Theatres have come to * resolution to put an immediate stop to the encroachments daily made on their property, under the supposed authority of the Lord Chamberlain; their Counsel are decidedly of opinion, that his Majesty having graciously made his election by patent appointment, as to what Theatres should exist in Westminster, the Lord Cham berlain cannot infringe on those patents, or legally licence any other place for theatrical representation, without the consent of the patented Theatres; and certain it is, that from the day the first Royal Patent was granted to Old Drury, through the whole of Mr. Garrick's time, and

ever since, until the Chamberlainship of Lord Salisbury, the uniform practice at the Chamberlain's Office was to refuse even to listen to an application for a single night, though for a charity benefit, unless the party applying brought with them the previous consent in writing of the proprietors of the established Theatres. But beside the question of legal right, the proprietors also refer to their title in equity, that the Lord Chamberlain, even if the sight were with him, is bound by positive covenant not to grant any new licence for any dramatic exhibition.

so

There having been executed a regular deed, styled "The final Arrangement," the result of a long discussion and arbitration, recognizing and guaranteeing the exclu sive rights of the three established Theatres, which deed received the express sanction of his Majesty, and was signed under his Royat pleasure by his Chamberlain, the Marquis of Salisbury. It was also honoured by the concurrence of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, who signed it himself, as did also his Grace the late Duke of Bedford. On the faith of this settlement,'s guaranteed, the proprietors of Covent-Garden Theatre received fifteen thousand pounds from the Proprietors of Drury-Lane Theatre, for their dormant patent; the King's Theatre contributed thirty thousand pounds on recovering its licence, to the losses of the Pantheon Opera undertaking; and, finally, this deed formed the whole foundation for the rebuilding of Drury-Lane Theatre, in which undertaking a property of not less than three hundred thousand pounds have been embarked, and all in the confidence and on the faith of this ar rangement, secured under such high authority,

To suppose, therefore, that the present Lord Cham berlain has or will, knowingly and intentionally, coun tenance and authorise any exhibition of a dramatic kind, would be as great a disrespect to him, as it would be an injury to the property placed by the law and his Majesty's will under his express protection.

Should the difficulties of the present, Opera-House not be overcome, instead of looking to a new scheme or project, contrary to all faith and justice, we understand that resort will be had to the dormant patent, with the consent and for the benefit of both the winter Theatres, which patent is at present only withheld from being ope rative through respect to the established Opera House, and the terms of the agreement before referred to,

The first step, we have reason to believe, which will be taken for the assertion of the claims of the established Theatres, will be by an humble petition to his Majesty, who has ever been a most gracious and firm protector of their just rights. Such a petition, signed by all the numerous and respectable individuals whose property is involved in the established Theatres, on the pledge of a settlement which never could be expected to be questioned, will no doubt meet as it merits the Royal attention.

THEATRICAL PATENTS AND LICENCES.

Tu, quid ego et populus mecum desideret, audi.- -HORACE.

MR. CONDUCTOR,

AN article, apparently official, has appeared in the several papers, stating it to be the intention of the proprietors of Drury Lane and Covent Garden, to petition His Majesty to restrain the hitherto considered just rights of the Chamberlain in licencing public places of theatrical amusement, and also intimating that, in case of no favourable notice being taken of this application, they shall try their rights in a court of law.

In the same article it is asserted, that in case the disputes of the Opera House occasion the destruction of that concern, the said proprietors intend to bring forward a dormant patent, which, by the final arrangement, has for a series of years, laid snugly in the hands of the proprietors of the winter theatres,

Permit me, Sir, to make a few observations on these hostile movement on the part of the rather unreasonable patentees. First, if any person will only look at the act which concerns the licences for theatrical amusements, he will be at once convinced that an undoubted right is lodged in the Lord Chamberlain to licence as many theatrical places of amusement as he shall deem sufficient for the use of the society at large, This act expressly says no person shall set up a theatre, or act, or cause plays to be performed, unless by virtue of His Majesty's patent, or a licence granted by the Lord Chamberlain, Now, if this is not a clear explicit recognizement of the

right of a Lord Chamberlain, to licence a theatre, I know not what would be deemed so; neither did it ever enter before into the heads of the patentees to dispute this authority.

Rich, indeed, the patentee of Covent Garden, once doubted the right of even the king himself to grant a fresh patent; but the royal licence was notwithstanding granted. And several subsequent acts of parliament acknowledge the power of the Lord Chamberlain to grant licences, and what is more, to suppress the performances of the patent theatres whenever he shall think proper. The proprietors should therefore be careful how they commence an attack.

The public has a right to demand, why, if a third patent did exist, evidently given to advantage them, and not as a monopoly to satisfy the cupidity of any individual, why that patent was to be buried, merely be cause it suited the interest of both theatres that the public should be deprived of it. They will also naturally ask, if only two patents exist, which is the case, and one is locked up, how it comes that Drury Lane and Covent Garden both perform plays. I will tell you, Sir, how this is done-Drury Lane opens under the authority of a license from that very power, whose rights she would now question; not satisfied with magnifying the theatre in Drury Lane to an extent destructive of the very amusement for which it procured originally its patent, the proprietor now insinuates that he shall draw his dor mant patent out of the snug retreat where he has secured it, and erecting another Colesceum, shall convert to his own use all the superfluous cash, which is destined to be spent by theatrical amateurs in the pursuit of a favourite and very popular amusement.

What then have been the acts of the present Lord Chamberlain, which have drawn upon his long acknow ledged authority, this violent, sudden, and indecent attack? Has he ever lisensed a new playhouse?-neverthough the town is four times as large now as it was 50 years ago, and consequently the distances from the theatres immensely extended; though the hours of social life are all eutirely changed, while those for theatrical representation remain the same; though the theatres, particularly Drury Lane, have been so enlarged, (for very obvious reasons) as to render spectacles, where scenery and screaming are alone necessary, to supply the want of those delicacies of voice and action, which

would be lost in such immensity of space; while the real drama sinks daily, more and more into disrepute; though the internal regulations of the bouses are so faulty, as to render passages to boxes an absolute service of dan ger, yet has the Lord Chamberlain carefully avoided injuring the patentees, by exercising his indubitable right of licensing any other theatre, on a less, though on a more appropriate scale; nay, to such a degree has he extended his forbearance, that he would not even license a summer theatre, for the use of the principal performers of Drury Lane and Covent Garden, although it is well known that Colman's Theatre is quite inadequate to the service of the cominunity.

What then has the present Lord Chamberlain done? he has licensed a few musical entertainments-Mr. Astley's, chiefly for horses and tumblers; Mr. Scott's Little Theatre of the Sans Pareil; and the Rooms in Argyll Street. The latter open on a plan totally dif ferent from what playhouses adopt, and for a different order of society, and in which there is a stage by his lordship's license for plays only if confined to children, and recitative burlettas.

Much stress is laid on the late Lord Chamberlain, Lord Salisbury, having bound himself by positive covepant not to grant any new license for dramatic exhi bitions. Does he then conceive that the act of one Lord Chamberlain can abrogate, like docking an entail, the inheritance of another? Or does he imagine that the Lords Chamberlains, from one generation to another, are bound to assist the eager grasp of monopoly, by refusing to gratify the public in this widely extending city, with other more conveniently situated, and more pro perly conducted, scenes of public entertainment.

These, Sir, are hasty observations drawn from my pen on perusing this article; and if any more steps are taken to check the operation of the Chamberlain's Licensed Theatres, I shall not fear again appealing to the sense of the public, in aid of efforts to resist such ob vious monopoly on the part of two very lucrative concerns, and which would shackle the taste and the spare hours of all the individuals of this great, populous, and increasing metropolis.

I have only to add to these remarks, that the following theatres, which have long enjoyed an undisturbed freedom of performance, all open under the license of