SHAKESPEARE IN ATLANTIC CANADA DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

Mary Elizabeth Smith

While performances of Shakespeare were by no means frequent in Halifax and Saint John, except during the twenty year period 1857-1877 in the latter city, they were nevertheless an important part of the overall theatrical scene. This article describes the actors and companies who presented adaptations of Shakespearean plays in these two cities and examines audience reaction in the light of newspaper reviews.

Quoique des représentations des pièces de Shakespeare ne furent jamais fréquentes à Halifax et à Saint John, sauf entre 1857 et 1877 dans cette dernière ville, elles jouèrent néanmoins un rôle important dans le domaine du théâtre. Cet article décrit les acteurs et les troupes qui présentèrent des adaptions de pièces de Shakespeare dans ces deux villes et examine la réaction du public de par les revues des journaux.

Although the earliest theatrical performance in Halifax took place in 1768, and in Saint John did not occur until 1789 (Halifax had after all been founded in 1749 and Saint John in 1783), for most of the nineteenth century Saint John had a more lively and certainly a more continuous theatre. Before 1850, however, performances of all kinds were sporadic in both Saint John and Halifax. The few seasons offered by such managers as C.S. Powell, Mr Price, Cornelius Logan, and Henry W. Preston were interspersed with long periods of silence, only broken from time to time by amateur productions. The Taming of the Shrew, in Garrick's adaptation as Catherine and Petruchio, served as the introduction to Shakespeare in both cities. In Halifax it was acted by the American Company of Comedians on 2 September 1768, and in Saint John rendered on 27 May 1803 by a company from Halifax. In 1789 Gentlemen of the Navy, Army and Town opened Halifax's Grand Theatre with The Merchant of Venice. In 1789 the same theatre, now called the Theatre Royal, introduced The Tempest, or the Enchanted Island and in 1800 'the celebrated Historical Play of Richard the Third', allegedly 'Written by Shakespeare' but in fact Cibber's.¹ In these years, just prior to and at the turn of the nineteenth century, Saint John's Gentlemen Amateurs neglected Shakespeare entirely in favour of Everyone Has His Fault (Mrs Inchbald), The Gamester (Edward Moore), The Upholsterer (Antony Murphy), and other plays of their ilk, plays which also formed the bulk of the repertoire in Halifax. Price introduced Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet to Saint John in the summer of 1817, and in 1818 and 1819 Lear, Hamlet, Othello, Coriolanus, and Macbeth 'As altered by Kemble, with all the original Music', ² to Halifax. Apart from one performance of As You Like It in Saint John in 1840 and of Henry IVPart II in both cities in 1841, no other Shakespearean scripts were introduced. In all, records testify to just over three dozen performances in Saint John; Halifax's record is similar. ³

Before 1850 the most notable Shakespearean actors to tread the boards in Saint John were Thomas Cooper in 1830, John Vandenhoff with his daughter Charlotte in 1840, and Junius Brutus Booth and James H. Hackett in 1841. Vandenhoff and Hackett also visited Halifax.

Reports of Cooper's appearance as Othello at Hopley's Theatre, Saint John, are disappointingly vague. He was, we are told, 'received by a fashionable audience with all the applause to which his masterly performance so justly entitle him' - a performance in which the delineation of Othello's passions was 'correct and just' and 'the enunciation clear and emphatic'. ⁴

Vandenhoff, on the other hand, received considerable attention in the presses of both cities. The Nova Scotian declared that 'the impersonation of the single-minded but jealous Moore was chaste and beautiful', ⁵ although the writer complained that in Hamlet the 'sweetness of the poet was marred by the fastidiousness of the declaimer'. ⁶ The reviewer for Saint John's Morning News was ecstatic about the entirety of the production of Romeo and Juliet that he saw, seeming to bear out the Nova Scotian's opinion that the presence of a star raised the level of the whole company: 'We were transported as if by magic, across the wide Atlantic and up the expanded Mediterranean: and saw before us, not the imitators but the originals. We saw ROMEO and we saw JULIET; and MERCUTIO [played by Vandenhoffl, and CAPULET with OTHERS of equal merit yet of inferior note - but we saw no acting; we saw life as it was some hundreds of years ago, as it is now, and ever will be - and nothing else. This is what we call "holding the mirror up to nature".' ⁷ The New Brunswick Courier reported 'a large and fashionable house' for Vandenhoff's opening in Macbeth, while the Morning News confirmed that Joseph Hopley's converted circus had become 'quite a fashionable place of resort'. ⁸

One is tempted to view these and similar remarks as signs of widespread patronage until one reads a rather sarcastic article in the Morning News of 27 July, the day of the Vandenhoff's last appearance in Saint John:

It is somewhat strange that wherever these distinguished artists have appeared, they have met with the most cordial reception, always playing to full and fashionable houses - while in St. John, they have nearly met with (must we say it) - defeat .... and how is it that in our city he is not better understood when the intelligence of the community is not inferior to any other under the sun? Something is out of joint, and we will now endeavour to point that something out, according to our notions of things.
    'Tis true, on several occasions Mr. and Miss Vandenhoff have played to good houses - fashionable houses; but on those occasions, we believe, it was only FASHION, that drew the people together, and not taste for the play or the players. It is only necessary for the manager, to announce, that his Theatre is to be visited by some person of distinction, to insure for himself a good and FASHIONABLE house; he may rely upon a bumper as often as he has an opportunity of doing so. Apropos - How would it do for Mr. Preston to import a few Earls, Knights, or Squires, (not half-squires, for they are already as thick as hops about a Brew-house,) in the capacity of box STARS, (no doubt they would bring their own stars besides,) in order to have attraction in the house? They would draw well - aye, ten times better than those histrionic geniuses whose abilities are their only recommendation! The age is sadly out of repair.

Apparently, a similar disappointingly thin following was a reality in Halifax. To the preference of audiences for less intellectual fare than Shakespeare, as discerned by the Morning News, the Nova Scotian adds a complementary reason inherent in Vandenhoff's own acting style:

His style is too chaste to please, at a first representation, those who like to hear a passion torn to tatters. There is no rant - no senseless cleaving of the air - no overstrained attitude or expression, about Vandenhoff - the emotion displayed on the surface seems but the natural result of the pent-up and o'er-mastering passions within. For this, we praise his acting, and such a style never fails to win upon an informed and cultivated audience. To a person who values an intellectual above a mere sensual indulgence, it would be worth much more than the sum it costs to see a play, to hear Mr. Vandenhoff read any of Shakespeare's master-pieces; and we really cannot understand how many, who would give a pound to a ball, a dinner, or a picnic, can refrain from feasting their eyes and ears, and leave this fine actor to play to empty houses.⁹

Similar problems underlie the neglect of Junius Brutus Booth in July 1841. Many of Saint John's entertainment-seeking citizens chose to attend the circus, leaving Booth to open in Hamlet before nearly empty benches, and causing the reviewer for the Weekly Chronicle anxiety lest Booth be allowed to depart believing that the population preferred 'the roar of wild beasts in a menagerie' to 'the language of Shakespeare, delivered with the eloquence of a Cicero'. ¹⁰ Although James Hackett, in the same manner, was said to dress the character of Falstaff well and to play it 'with infinite spirit and drollery', his coming seems to have created no more of a stir: 'We are really at a loss,' complained the Nova Scotian, 'to account for the slender patronage which is given to the Theatre'. ¹¹

The middle part of the nineteenth century (1850-1877) is, if the number of performances is a guide, the one that held Shakespeare most in honour. This period spans the life of the Saint John Dramatic Lyceum (1857-1877) operated by James West Lanergan, the theatrical entrepreneur of the longest endurance in Saint John, and includes the simultaneous operation in the 1870s of the more splendid Academy of Music, managed mostly by Saint John native William Nannary. Halifax, meanwhile, was serviced inconsistently with companies, most of which were managed by one-time members of Lanergan's company, and was ill-provided with theatre facilities until its own Academy of Music opened under Nannary's management in 1877, an event which gave at least structural stability to that city's dramatic life.

Performance of Shakespeare was part of Lanergan's policy to promote the legitimate drama in an effort to restore the theatre to a level of respectability in the public eye that it did not enjoy in the rowdy years of Hopley's Theatre which preceded it. Numerous newspaper articles, of which the following excerpt is an example, attest to his success:

Mr. Lanergan, whose success in breaking down the prejudices which heretofore existed in the community against the legitimate drama, is now we are happy to say, reaping the reward of his untiring industry and good judgement. The drama under his management has now thousands of intelligent admirers, and continues to woo nightly fresh additions. The order and decorum which prevail from the commencement to the end of the play are marked characteristics; and show, more than anything else, the high intellectual and moral character of the audience. We think the demands of the age now are, that Mr. Lanergan should 'lengthen his stakes' - pull down his establishment and build greater, and fix himself here permanently, to reap, at all seasons of the year, the benefits to which he is justly entitled, and which a grateful public is ready to accord.¹²

The great tragedies were performed most frequently, in particular Hamlet, Othello, and Macbeth, followed by Romeo and Juliet and by Richard III (which was advertised as a tragedy), with Julius Caesar and King Lear well behind in popularity. The Merchant of Venice headed the comedies, followed by The Taming of the Shrew, As You Like It, and Much Ado About Nothing. Henry IV, Part One ranked between As You Like It and Much Ado About Nothing, a history play viewed essentially as a comedy because of the delight in the character of Falstaff. In Halifax the order of performance frequency was slightly different. The tragedies were again most popular, especially Othello, Hamlet, Macbeth, Richard III and Romeo and Juliet. Lear had just one performance, Julius Caesar none at all. Of the comedies, only The Taming of the Shrew, The Merchant of Venice, and As You Like It were produced. Even the scripts most commonly performed were done much less often in Halifax than in Saint John, the production ratio ranging from below half to near par with Richard III and Othello.¹³

Extant Saint John playbills confirm that performance texts for that city were generally adaptations. Macbeth was always produced with 'All of Matthew Locke's Original Incidental Music', apparitions, and singing witches.¹⁴ Richard III on 21 June 1866 was definitely Cibber's. The playbill shows Henry VI but no Clarence, Hastings, Edward, or Queen Margaret.¹⁵ Romeo and Juliet, minus the Montagues, was surely Garrick's, except for a 'garbled and clipped version' in six acts which starred actor Frank Roche in 1876. ¹⁶ In 1863 the Garrick text was presumably intended to inculcate a moral lesson, for the caption under the title on the playbill read, 'Fathers have flinty hearts, no tears can melt 'em -Children must be wretched'. ¹⁷ Garrick's three-act Catherine and Petruchio seems to have substituted for Shakespeare's text regardless of whether it or the Shrew was announced, while The Merchant of Venice regularly ended with the Court scene. All 'lovers of the moral drama' saw Othello sans Bianca in the Bell version, the version which was likely also responsible for a Hamlet that lacked Fortinbras, Francisco, Reynaldo, Voltemand, and Cornelius.¹⁸ C.W. Couldock's Lear in 1862 was Tate's.¹⁹

Lanergan's Dramatic Lyceum company, following the pattern of resident stock companies everywhere during the nineteenth century, routinely welcomed into its midst travelling stars to fill the leading Shakespearean roles. Though the middle years saw no Charlotte Cushman or Edwin Booth, they did bring the E.L. Davenports, Julia Bennett Barrow, Charles Dillon, Frank Mayo, Carlotta Leclercq, Frederic Robinson, C.W. Couldock, and Wyzeman Marshall, among others. In Halifax a young E.A. Sothern played Lear in 1857; Mrs Barrow had her own company there in 1861; and Davenport and Robinson each put in brief appearances, but for the most part the stars who visited Saint John did not go on to Halifax, with the consequence that leading roles there most often had to be taken by regular members of whatever company was in residence.

Although Saint John's theatre critics, who considered themselves representatives of an audience as discerning as any, could praise (indeed puff) handsomely, they were not slow to point out faults. Some objects of criticism were the paucity of musical talent in Lanergan's company, the difficulties created when an actor absented himself from Romeo and Juliet at the last moment and another, unfamiliar with the role, had to fill in, and, at a subsequent performance of the same play, the inappropriateness of Claude Hamilton's rough voice to imitate the 'dulcet strains of a lover'. The latter Romeo, the reviewer for the Morning News accused, was but a 'slasher with the sword' who disposed of Tybalt 'instanter'.²⁰ The greatest compliment bestowed upon an actor was that of naturalness - a judgment that be acted his role with such authenticity that he seemed to become the character he portrayed. The New Brunswick Courier illustrates this in its assessment of Mr Lanergan's conception of Iago: 'Mr. Lanergan exhibits the highest delineative power, which, aided by his fine physique and splendid voice, approaches the perfection of acting - which consists in the art of concealing art, and making the audience forget for the moment that the scene before them is not reality'.²¹ Frederic Robinson was similarly appreciated, because he 'acts, speaks, dresses and looks the part to perfection', his costumes being 'always faithful types of the costumes worn in the different epochs of the representations which he gives'. ²² Loud talking (rant) and violent gesticulation were unanimously frowned upon by the critics.

Saint John's Great Fire of 1877, which destroyed two-thirds of that city, including the Dramatic Lyceum and the Academy of Music, coincided with the trend in North America away from resident stock companies to travelling ones. From this point on, except for one abortive attempt in the 1890s to establish a resident company, Saint John's dramatic appetite was fed by companies the bulk of whose seasons lasted no more than a week. Halifax, which had never had a continuous theatrical operation comparable to that provided by Lanergan, was entertained by most of the same companies. In addition, with more efficient transportation, there came into being a Maritime touring circuit including Fredericton, Moncton, Sackville, Newcastle, Chatham, Woodstock, and Truro.

In the last twenty years of the nineteenth century, Shakespeare came less frequently to the stage. In 1878 E.A. McDowell, a favourite with both Saint John and Halifax audiences from the time of his initial collaboration with William Nannary at the Saint John Academy of Music in 1874, brought Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth, and The Merchant of Venice. In the same year Charlotte Thompson, a Yorkshire lass who had made the southern United States her home, included Romeo and Juliet in her more representative repertoire of Jane Eyre and Miss Multon, and in 1881 the Florence Gillette Combination offered the same tragedy. Before the century ended Romeo and Juliet, Othello, Hamlet, Richard III, Macbeth, The Merchant of Venice, As You Like It, and Much Ado About Nothing had been performed in Saint John by such diverse artists as Stafford and Foster, Claire Scott, W.A. Whitecar, Margaret Anglin, W.J. Butler, Thomas Keene, George Miln, Madame Rhea, and Madame Janauschek, numbering approximately two dozen productions in all, excluding dramatic recitals and amateur performances.

The slight attention paid to Shakespeare does not indicate a dearth of theatrical entertainment but a lack of taste for the legitimate drama. Through the 1880s and 1890s the public increasingly demanded comedy, variety, and 'realism with a big R'. ²³ Saint John's Daily Telegraph, in reprinting an article from the Washington Star, indicates the prevailing climate:

Mr. Shakespeare should have had the opportunity of submitting his Romeo and Juliet to a modern manager, who says: 'What the public wants is fun, see'. He would then have had the pleasure of rewriting his drama somewhat in accordance to the above idea. Romeo has just executed a song and dance, in which the Montagues and Capulets joined, making a scene of hilarity that was alone worth the price of admission. Romeo begins a serenade; enter the most intelligent trained dog in the profession today. Juliet, who is one of the handsomest ladies on the burlesque stage, and incidentally a queen of song and exponent of terpsichorean art, tries to rescue him, but he catches his waist-band on a nail in the porch and is suspended in statu quo or thereabouts while the curtain goes down amidst the thundering plaudits of a delighted throng. There is no doubt that Shakespeare missed a great deal by being born too soon.²⁴

Sadly, the sarcasm is not far removed from the truth; one can confirm this from box-office receipts as well as from a recital of repertoire, though it never reflected the attitude of newspaper reviewers.

Nevertheless, into this non-intellectual panoply of song and dance, moving panoramas, saw mills with real buzz saws cutting real logs, live horses and live bloodhounds, was interjected, as we have said, minimal production of the once familiar Shakespearean titles. Consideration of these as presented in Saint John and Halifax by three artists - George Miln, Madame Rhea, and Madame Janauschek - will serve as examples.

George Miln, a preacher-turned-actor who in 1882 had been offered $10,000 if he would retain his ministerial charge, came to Atlantic Canada in 1886, following tours elsewhere in Canada and the United States, and before tours as far abroad as Australia, India, China, and Japan. A powerful orator with a countenance, one of his agents said, that was 'such as any idealist would place upon Hamlet's shoulders', ²⁵ he presented that role with, the Saint John Sun believed, more 'noise' than Shakespeare had in mind even if, as the Halifax Morning Herald said more flatteringly, he tempered his dramatic force in 'the great speech at the end of the act' 'with a nice discretion which preserved the element of thoughtfullness throughout'. ²⁶ Critics from both cities agreed in their praise of his impersonation of Othello. This, which the Sun judged his strongest role, was pronounced an appropriate vehicle for his rhetorical powers. Said the Herald, 'In the display of rage and jealousy with which the tragedy abounds, the actor's wonderful force and powers were brought into play'. ²⁷ Less complimentary but more interesting is the assessment of Richard III. Although the Sun said only unhelpfully that he took the part 'in a manner never before seen in this city', the Herald ruthlessly termed his conception 'more laughable than realistic', even ridiculous, denouncing declamation that made him 'rant and tear like a madman'. ²⁸ To this Miln felt impelled to write a lengthy reply comparing the historical Richard with the Richard of Shakespeare and with Colly Cibber's Richard, concluding, 'Colly Cibber's is the only practical edition in use on the stage.... Richard, as adapted by Cibber is a man of most violent and tempestuous moods. These moods I tried to express in a manner suggested by the language of the play, and the atmosphere of the character'.²⁹

If the newspapers can be believed, the first of Miln's two visits in 1886 was marked by full houses drawn, it seems certain, by the same rhetorical skills that had formerly attracted many to his pulpit. Since snowy weather kept patrons at home during his second visit to Halifax, we cannot know with confidence whether his magnetism would have endured there. One has the impression, however, from the press in both cities, that audiences were tiring of a performer who was an elocutionist more than an actor.

Personal magnetism, which made both Madame Rhea and Madame Janauschek social lions wherever they went, was, as much as acting skill, what initially drew large numbers of Haligonians and Saint Johners to test the reputation that had preceded these two stars. On the arrival of Brussels-born Hortense Rhea in Saint John in August 1886, a 'crowd of distinguished people' gathered to pay their respects at the Dufferin Hotel where she resided, while the Band of the 62nd Fusiliers, in a singular tribute, serenaded her from the lawn.³⁰ For a week she enchanted audiences with her elegantly costumed and wholly non-Shakespearean repertoire, attracting to Saint John's Mechanics' Institute for her matinée box-office receipts that, the press said, were higher than the previous record set by Lily Langtry.³¹

Anticipating her return visit in September 1894, the Halifax Herald gushed: 'Everybody knows Rhea, and anything said in praise of her would only be wasting space, or "painting the lily".' ³² That time she opened in both cities in the part through which she had learned English, that of Beatrice, in a six-act version of Much Ado About Nothing whose scenes were as follows: Act I -Messina. The return from the wars. Act II - House of Leonato. The betrothal. Act III - Garden. Laying the traps. Act IV - Chapel in the house of Leonato. The marriage. Act V - Dogberry and Verges. 'Write me down as ass.' Act VI -House of Leonato. The dead alive.³³ The Herald was loyal as before in its praise of this as well as of the rest of her legitimate repertoire, while the Saint John papers alternately commended her talent and wardrobe and condemned what, in 1886, had been a charming accent and was now a painful handicap. Nothing could explain away the humiliation that in Halifax her audiences numbered only a few hundred and that in Saint John she was unable to pay expenses. The Herald's explanation that Rhea's visit was ill-timed to follow a dishonest opera company has a hollow ring. More in keeping with the truth ot the time is the complaint of the Saint John paper, Progress, that her repertoire was no longer familiar, that few society companies possessed the wardrobe for Shakespeare and, especially, that 'the public will have what the public wants', namely, 'farce comedy'. ³⁴

A biting note in the Halifax Mail would suggest that the latter reason could explain also Saint John's less than overwhelming response to Madame Janauschek in 1888: 'Halifax almost invariably gives first-class actors a substantial welcome, while it takes an entertainment like Peck's Bad Boy to draw a crowd in St John'. ³⁵ This over-simplification, which reflects so clearly the traditional rivalry between the two sea-ports, is, by itself, not enough. Another dimension is present in Progress' isolation of problems connected with the star system that may reveal more discrimination on the part of Saint John audiences if, indeed, it is true that the Halifax Academy of Music was consistently as full as the Morning Chronicle reports it was on the first night.

Janauschek, fifty-eight in 1888, was a woman of imposing presence, known for her 'lustrous dark eyes that smouldered with emotion', ³⁶ her sweeping gestures, and her rich, slightly accented voice. These were the qualities that could cause an electric thrill of delight to pass through an audience that had waited restlessly until her initial appearance in Act III of Meg Merrilies. 'Round her', reported Halifax's Morning Chronicle, 'naturally centres everything'.³⁷ This is a positive way of hinting, as the Chronicle does less obliquely elsewhere, that her support was weak. Saint John's Progress was much more blunt: 'Macbeth and Lady Macbeth had the stage virtually to themselves. Most of those who saw the play had seen it put on the boards in infinitely better shape in St. John theatres'.³⁸ The reviewer is not at all blind to the strength of the woman whom many saw as one of the leading tragic actresses of her day, for he devotes a lengthy column to a consideration of her performance, opening with a comprehensive evaluation: 'The Lady Macbeth of Janauscheck' is all earnestness - all action. It is almost diabolical at times in its intensity, and it never departs from the ideal of a determinedly wicked woman'. ³⁹ Rather, the reviewer is unwilling to accept the imbalance of the production. One is left with the impression that 'fashion' dictated some of the response in the Halifax papers. (The Chronicle did not bother to review Macbeth at all.)

Even as, in 1894 during Rhea's appearance at the Saint John Opera House, Progress bemoaned the distressing popular fads it saw dominating the theatre, it dared to hope that 'already there seems to be a revival of the old time and standard plays and a desire for them manifesting itself throughout the land'. ⁴⁰ And indeed, when the Valentine Company occupied the Opera House for four months from December 1899 to April 1900, many Shakespearean and other titles of the legitimate drama were revived.

To a large extent, the popularity of Shakespeare in the theatres of Halifax and Saint John rose and waned following trends prevalent elsewhere. At no time, however, could a well-known Shakespearean actor be sure that his reputation alone would ensure him a good house. Whether through ignorance or some other reason, Atlantic Canada was never noted for its strong support of one-time appearances. In order for the populace to give broad and wholehearted support, they had to have confidence in a manager (or company) who was familiar and trusted. Thus JW. Lanergan, who over the years won the affections of the people for his reliability and for his interest in their affairs, could raise an audience from widely distributed segments of the population which would take delight and pride in the stars he brought. Lanergan was involved in an educational process. Apart from this, the gods generally prevailed.

SHAKESPEARE IN ATLANTIC CANADA DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

Mary Elizabeth Smith

1 The Royal Gazette and Nova Scotia Advertiser of 27 May 1800 printed a description of the play as 'Containing among many other Historical Events the/distresses and Death of King Henry the 6th. The/ Usurpation of the Crown by the Duke of Glos/ter. The Murder of the Young Princes, in the/Tower of London. The landing of the Earl/of Richmond at Milford Haven. And the/Death of Richard the Third at the ever memo/rable Battle of Bosworth Field, which put an End to the Family Contest between the Houses/of York and Lancaster, and twined the Roses/Red and White together'.
Return to article

2 Weekly Chronicle 10 July 1818
Return to article

3 Clearly, since few playbills survive and not all performances were advertised, the early record is not (nor ever can be) wholly accurate. On the early years of theatre, see Y.S. Bains, 'The American Company of Comedians in Halifax in 1768', Dalhousie Review, LVI (Summer 1976), pp 240-246; S.M. Oland, 'Materials for a History of the Theatre in Early Halifax', M.A. thesis, Dalhousie University, 1966; Mary Elizabeth Smith, 'Theatre in Saint John: The First Thirty Years', Dalhousie Review, LIX (Spring 1979), pp 5-27. For general background on the theatre in Saint John, see Mary Elizabeth Smith, Too Soon the Curtain Fell: A History of Theatre in Saint John 1789-1900 Fredericton: Brunswick Press, 1981
Return to article

4 New Brunswick Courier 17 July 1830
Return to article

5 3 September 1840
Return to article

6 10 September 1840
Return to article

7 8 July 1840
Return to article

8 Courier I July 1840; Morning News 1 July 1840
Return to article

9 10 September 1840
Return to article

10 18 June 1941
Return to article

11 12 August 1841
Return to article

12 New Dominion and True Humorist 6 July 1867
Return to article

13 Playbills and newspapers indicate the following performance frequency: Saint John - Hamlet (25), Othello (23), Macbeth (21), Romeo and Juliet (19), The Merchant of Venice (15), Richard the III (14), The Taming of the Shrew (12), As You Like It (8), Julius Caesar (3), King Lear (2), Much Ado About Nothing (2), Halifax - Othello (21), Hamlet (16), Macbeth (15), Richard the III (14), Romeo and Juliet (10), The Taming of the Shrew (8), The Merchant of Venice (6), As You Like It (3), King Lear (1).
    A calendar of performance for Halifax is provided in Janet Maybee, 'Theatre in Halifax, 1850-1880', M.A. thesis, Dalhousie University, 1966. Very few Halifax playbills survive.
Return to article

14 New Brunswick Museum Archives Playbill for 24 July 1867
Return to article

15 New Brunswick Museum Archives
Return to article

16 Ralph Pickard Bell Library Stewart Scrapbooks, The Watchman
Return to article

17 Harvard Theatre Collection
Return to article

18 New Brunswick Museum Archives Playbill collection. Playbills for Vandenhoff, in the Harvard Theatre Collection, testify that he used the same adaptations.
Return to article

19 Colonial Empire 23 July 1862
Return to article

20 Saint John Morning News 28 June 1865
Return to article

21 18 July 1863. The New York Express of 10 November 1866 said Lanergan stood second to no American actor in the part of Iago.
Return to article

22 New Dominion and True Humorist 18 July 1874
Return to article

23 Progress 9 April 1892
Return to article

24 Philander Johnson, 'Shakespeare Modernized', quoted in Telegraph 10 November 1891
Return to article

25 New York Public Library Miln clipping file
Return to article

26 Sun 31 December 1886; Morning Herald 18 February 1886
Return to article

27 Sun 6 March 1886; Morning Herald 20 February 1886
Return to article

28 Sun 3 January 1887; Morning Herald 18 December 1886
Return to article

29 Morning Herald 20 December 1886
Return to article

30 Ibid 23 August 1886
Return to article

31 Telegraph 30 August 1886
Return to article

32 Herald 11 September 1894
Return to article

33 New Brunswick Museum Archives Tapley Scrapbook, Playbill
Return to article

34 Progress 22 and 29 September 1894
Return to article

35 Quoted in Progress 22 September 1888
Return to article

36 Indianapolis News 15 January 1910
Return to article

37 Morning Chronicle 8 September 1888
Return to article

38 Progress 15 September 1888
Return to article

39 Ibid
Return to article

40 Ibid 29 September 1894
Return to article