( 364 ) 

 THE DRAMATIC PATENTS EXAMINED. 



THE players are once more stirring. The opening of Parliament 

 nas aroused them to the necessity of fresh exertions ; and they are 

 now again mustering their best energies and arguments, and prepar- 

 ing to battle hard for emancipation. The question of "free-trade in 

 the drama/' will very speedily come under re-consideration in the 

 Commons ; and we, therefore, seize this moment as the fitting one for 

 presenting, " to all whom it may concern," the following examination 

 of the dramatic patents, and their effects upon dramatic interests. 



That the national drama has long been in a declining state is ad- 

 mitted by every body, and that it has at length been reduced to the 

 lowest state of degradation is proved by its being almost wholly ex- 

 cluded from the boards of the two great houses. 



The progress of the assumed monopoly, which led to the erection 

 of the two great houses, may be related in a short space. 



In the year 1662, King Charles II. granted two patents, one to 

 Sir William Davenant, and one to Thomas Killegrew, Esq., for the 

 performance of tragedies, comedies, and other stage entertainments, 

 each of whom formed a company and opened separate play-houses. 

 After many dissensions between the proprietors, they coalesced, and 

 in 1684, formed one company under the title of the King's Com- 

 pany, and performed at Drury-lane. The two patents being in the 

 hands of the same persons, great oppressions were exercised over the 

 performers, the principal of whom, with the eminent actor Thomas 

 Betterton at their head, in the year 1690 petitioned King William III. 

 to grant them a special patent or licence to open a new house and 

 perform by themselves. The petition was referred to the law officers 

 of the crown, who, after due deliberation, advised the king to comply 

 with the prayer of the petition, and a licence or patent was granted 

 to Betterton and his associates. Queen Anne also granted a patent to 

 Sir Richard Steele, which was renewed by George I., and under 

 which, the holder of it, one William Collier, took a lease of Drury- 

 lane play-house, forcibly ejected therefrom the holder of both the 

 patents granted by Charles II., and caused dramatic performances to 

 be carried on as usual. John Birch, who held both the patents, had 

 been prohibited by Queen Anne from using either, or of causing any 

 dramatic performance by virtue of these patents. The performance 

 of the drama was therefore carried on by Collier at Drury-lane, and 

 by .Sir John Vanburgh at a house he built in the Haymarket, on the 

 patents originally granted by William III. and Queen Anne. 



George I. subsequently granted another patent or licence to 

 Sir Richard Steele, for the Drury-lane company, which was now 

 styled the Royal Company of Comedians, under which licence, re- 

 newed from time to time, Drury-lane house was left open ; not at all 

 in conformity with the patents granted by Charles II., but in direct 

 opposition to the exclusive right which the holders of Davenant's and 

 Killegrew's patents have since claimed. The licences for Drury-lane 

 play-house have usually been for twenty-one years; the last was 



