The First London Theatre 9 
some 800/. to g00/., by building the George Inn, in Whitechapel, 
to which, rather than to the Theatre, many of the financial diffi- 
culties that involved the Theatre seemed traceable, as Burbage, 
attorney Bett, former bailiff James, John Hynde and others in 
their depositions of 1591-92, indicate? In 1597, Brayne and 
Burbage were indebted in another sum of 5/. 13 d. to John Hynde, 
the haberdasher. On the afternoon of June 23, about two o’clock, 
Burbage was arrested for the debt in Gracious street as he was 
on his way to a play at the Cross Keys there, and was able to 
free himself only by at once paying the Sergeant at Mace the 
whole amount. 
In spite of the apparent general prosperity of the Theatre, 
laudly complained of by the puritanical in pulpit, pamphlet, and 
City orders, the partners could not get out of debt. On Septem- 
ber 26, 1579, through the intermediacy of a money-broker, John 
Prynne, and by mutual agreement of the partners, Brayne and 
Prynne got of John Hyde, grocer, 125/. 8s. 11 d., for which James 
Burbage at the same time signed a mortgage of the lease in 
security for one year. At the end of the year, the amount was 
not paid, and the mortgage was accordingly forfeited to Hyde on 
September 27, 1580. Then Hyde, as he relates, agreed with the 
proprietors to extend the loan, on condition that they pay him 5. 
a week until all should be paid. This they carried out for only 
four or five weeks, and the mortgage was again forfeited. 
Thereby, Hyde became legal owner of the lease of the Theatre. 
By agreement he allowed Burbage and Brayne to continue the 
business. But he was greatly dissatisfied with the results, as he 
received no profits from it. He threatened to put them out, and 
thereupon in June, 1582, arrested Burbage, who, upon payment 
of 20/. and the signing of a bond to appear at Hyde’s house at 
an hour’s notice to be subject to his action, was allowed to go on. 
3 Numerous documents—enough to fill a small volume—have been found 
by the writer in different courts concerning the George Inn, of White- 
chapel, relating its troublous early history from the first. They are of no 
immediate interest beyond showing the financial relations of Brayne, Bur- 
bage, and Myles in the business, through which the interests of the 
Theatre were jeopardized, as-here sufficiently observed for the present. 
9 
