im, namely, the prospect of "great gains to ensue
therefrom."[212]
[Footnote 212: Possibly the fact that Burbage had just secured control
of the Curtain, and hence had a monopoly of playhouses, was one of the
reasons for a new playhouse.]
For the site of his proposed playhouse he allotted a small parcel of
ground ninety-four feet square and lying in the corner formed by Rose
Alley and Maiden Lane (see page 245). Then he interested in the
enterprise his tenant Cholmley, for, it seems, he did not wish to
undertake so expensive and precarious a venture without sharing the
risk with another. On January 10, 1587, he and Cholmley signed a
formal deed of partnership, according to which the playhouse was to be
erected at once and at the sole cost of Henslowe; Cholmley, however,
was to have from the beginning a half-interest in the building, paying
for his share by installments of L25 10_s._ a quarter for a period of
eight years and three months.[213] The total sum to be paid by
Cholmley, L816, possibly represents the estimated cost of the
building and its full equipment, plus rental on the land.
[Footnote 213: The deed of partnership is preserved among the Henslowe
papers at Dulwich College. For an abstract of the deed see Greg,
_Henslowe Papers_, p. 2. Henslowe seems to have driven a good bargain
with Cholmley.]
The building is referred to in the deed of January 10 as "a playhouse
now in framing and shortly to be erected and set up." Doubtless it was
ready for occupancy early in the summer. That performances were given
there before the close of the year is at least indicated by an order
of the Privy Council dated October 29, 1587:
A letter to the Justices of Surrey, that whereas the
inhabitants of Southwark had complained unto their Lordships
declaring that the order by their Lordships set down for the
restraining of plays and interludes within that county on
the Sabbath Days is not observed, and especially within the
Liberty of the Clink, and in the Parish of St.
Saviours....[214]
[Footnote 214: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XV, 271.]
The Rose was in "the Liberty of the Clink and in the Parish of St.
Saviours," and so far as we have any evidence it was the only place
there devoted to plays. Moreover, a distinct reference to it by name
appears in the Sewer Records in April, 1588, at which date the
building is described as "new."[215]
[Footnote 215: Discovered by Mr.
|