Early in the very next year (1593) 

 Shakespeare's "Venus and Adonis" ap- 

 peared, and in 1594 his "Lucrece," both i 

 of which were extremely popular, rap- 

 idly passing' through many editions. 

 His earliest original plays — as distin- 

 guished from mere revisions — also be- 

 gan to appear, and he became famous J 

 as dramatist no less than poet. Hon- 

 ors came to him from men of rank — the 

 Earl of Southampton, to whom his 

 two poems had been dedicated — and 

 irom Elizabeth, before whom he acted 

 at court in December, 1594, and often 

 af tier-warn}. 



Fortune accompanied fame, and he 

 soon became a rich man. In the spring 

 of 1597 he made his first investment in 

 real estate by the purchase of New 

 Place, the best mansion in Stratford, 

 with nearly an acre of land in the 

 center of the town. Sir Hugh Clopton, 

 for whom it was built, referred to It 

 as Ms "great house," a title by which 

 it was popularly known for more than 

 two centuries. Shakespeare improved 

 it, and it was doubtless occupied by 

 his family before he returned to share 

 it with them — probably as early as 

 1611. 



Previous to that time, according to 

 tradition, he visited Stratford every 

 year. He must have been there at the 

 deat of his eon Hammet in August, 

 1596, and probably when his father 

 died in September, 1601, and his moth- 

 er in 1608; also at the marriage of his 

 daughter, Susanna, to Dr. John Hall 

 in June, 1607, and on sundry occasions 

 when his personal presence was neces- 

 sary in connection with legal and other 

 business transactions. The journey from 

 London to Stratford, now made in be- 

 tween two and three hours, then re- 

 quired ordinarily as many days 



Whetlher or not Shakespeare was 

 happy in his domesttic relations has 

 been the subject of much discussion. 

 There is no positive evidence what- 

 ever on the negative side, and no cir- 

 cumstandal evidence — whether based 

 on the disparity in age, the history of 

 , the marriage, the relations with the 1 

 "dark lady" of the "Sonnets" (if those . 

 perplexing poems are assumed tD be 

 partially or wholly autobiographical) ! 

 or on any grounds drawn from facts, 

 traditions, or conjectures— which jus- 

 tifies the theory that the married life 

 of William and Anne was not on the 

 whole a happy one. 



Transient alienation, as in many of 

 the happiest unions, there may have 

 been, although we have no proof of 

 it. Admitting that such there was, 

 the main question, to my thinking, 

 I is absolutely settled by indisputable 

 facts to which I have already referred 

 — particuarly the fact that Shake- 

 speare, notwiths tan dins all the at- 

 tractions of the metropolis, began, as 

 soon as Sis success brought him wealth 

 to invest it in making a home for his 

 family and "himself in the little pro- 

 vincial town of his birth. 



This was no transient whim or fan- 

 cy, but the aim that he kept steadily 

 in view from the time he bought New 

 Place in 1597— and doubtless much ear- 

 lier, while he was earning and saving 

 money for that investment— to the tim 3 

 fourteen years later, when, after ad- 

 ding- to his real estate, buying the j 

 tithes of Stratford and neighboring 

 parishes', and ot'herjwise identifying' 

 himself with local interests, he finally j 

 settled there for the remainder of his 

 ■life. 



Can we imagine that he looked for- 

 ward to sharing that home with a wife 

 whom he did not love? His father 

 and mother and his only eon were dead, 

 his elder daughter was married and 

 settled in a home of her own. His 

 wife and his daughter Judith — then j 

 twenty-six years old and liahle to mar- ! 

 ry soon— were to be his only compan- 

 ions in New Place. He was only forty- i 

 seven, apparently in good health, and 

 likely to live at least as long as his 

 wife did— which, as we have seen, was 

 until 1623. 



; As it was, they were permitted to 

 spend but five years together, but I 

 "believe they were years of unalloyed 

 domestic happiness. Mrs. Shakespeare 

 was a Puritan, as her daughter Sus- 

 anna and Doctor Hall also were; but 

 there is no reason to suppose that the 

 fact seriously troubled Shakespeare. 

 IN SHAKESPEARE'S WILL 

 After the death of her husband in 



1616, his widow undoubtedly continued 

 to make her home at New Place with 

 the Halls, who are referred to in town 

 records as living there in 1617. The 

 house had been devised by will to Sus- 

 anna, and the household furniture, etc., 

 to her and her husband. After the 

 death of Doctor Hall in 1635, his wid- 

 dow remained there till her own death 

 in 1649. The estate continued in the 

 family until the death of the poet's 

 last descendant, Lady Barnard, in 1670. 



The only reference that Shakespeare 

 made in his will to his wife is the in- 

 terlined bequest of his "second-best 

 bed with the furniture" thereof: and 

 this has been repeatedly and strenu- 

 ously dwelt upon by those who believe 

 that they were unhappy in their con- 

 jugal relations as indisputable proof of 

 that theory. Indeed, it is the single 

 fast in their family history which at 

 first sight seems to support that mis- 

 taken contention; but in view of oth- 

 er well-established facts, it furnishes 

 decisive evidence to the contrary. 



In the first place, Mistress Shake- 

 speare was amply provided for by her 

 rights of dower in the estate, to which, 

 as proved by an examination of hund- 

 reds of wills of that time, no reference 

 is made in many such documents. On 

 the oter hand, bequest of beds and 

 persona.! articles of less value — kettles 

 chairs, gowns, hats, pewter cups, and 

 the like are often made as marks of af 

 fection. One John Shakespeare, of 

 Budforth, near Warwick, leavts hi3 

 father-in-law his "best boots" as a suf- 

 ficient token of his respest. The young 

 er Sir Thomas Lucy, in 1600, givec his 

 son Richard his "second best hor=*j and 

 fjumvture." Bartholomew Hathway, 

 brother, in 1621 gives his son Thomas 

 his "second brass pot." John Harris, a 

 notary of Lincoln, while leaving his 

 wife a freehold estate, specifies, in ad • 

 dition, "the standing bedstead in the 

 little chamber, with the secand best 

 feather bed with o whole furniture 

 thereto belonging." The first-best re - 

 was the one reserved for visitors, and 

 was oftn regarded as a family heir- 

 loom. 



Shakespeare's "second-best bed" was 

 doubtless the one in their own cham- 

 ber, and the gift of it was a token of 

 tender affection, instead of the gross 

 insult that these blind critics have ta- 

 ken is to be; an insult which we can- 

 not imagine William Shakespeare to « 

 have inflicted on the wife of his youth 

 — and that, too, upon his death bed, | 



when this interlineation was added to 

 his will. 



He had apparently been in falling 

 health in January, 1616, and the rough 

 draft of the will is dated January 

 25th of that, year, but two months la- 

 ter, when he was attacked by the fe.- 

 ver that carried him off, the "Janua- 

 ry" was crossed out and "March" sub- 

 stituted. The "25th" was left— per haps 

 through carelessness, although it may- 

 have happened to be the right date. 

 Late he grew worse and his lawyer, 

 Francis Collins, was hastily summone! 

 from Warwick. 



A HASTY TESTAMENT. 



It was not thought advisable to wait 

 for a regular transcript of the origi- 

 nal draft and the three sheets of ordi- 

 nary paper, after a few alterations hur- 

 riedly made, were separately signed 1 . 

 The unusual number of five witnesses 

 was called in to secure the validity of 

 the informally prepared document. 

 Some awkward repetitions and other 

 inaccuracies had been crossed out, one 

 small bequest had been transferred to 

 another person, while several for other 

 friends had been interlined, together 

 with the one to his wife. 



One alteration strikingly illustrates 

 the haste and carelessness In wrjtihg 

 the will. The paragraph concealing 

 his daughter Judith— who married on 

 February- 10th, after the draft was be- 

 j gun in January — began thus: "Item. 

 I gyve and bequeath unto my sonne in 

 L"; but "sonne in L" was crossed out, 

 and "daughter Judyth" substituted; 

 and "in discharge of her marriage por- 

 tion" was interlined further on. So far 

 as I am aware, this has not been noted 

 in any former comments on the will. 



In spite of its informalities and de- 

 feos, including the absence of the tes- 

 tator's seal— the word •■seal" being 

 crossed out, and "hand" interlined in 

 the closing sentence, "I have hereun- 

 to put my hand," etc., — the will was 

 duly probated, and is still preserved 

 In the registry in London. 



Such is briefly te history of the very 

 last writing to which the dramatist 

 affixed his signature with the trem- 

 bling hand of a dying man; and the 

 very last edition made to it— a few 

 lines before the end — has been inter- 

 preted as a delibera/te and unfeeling 

 attempt to disgrace the mother of his 

 children! 



Of Anne Shakespeare we know noth- 

 ing except the bare facts of her marri- 

 age and her death. Tradition says 

 that she earnestly desired to be buried 

 in the same grave with her husband, 

 and her tombstone is beside his. The 

 Latin epitaph, evidently placed by her 

 elder daughter upon it and probably 

 written by Doctor Hall, describes her 

 as a gentle, pious, and affectionate 

 mother. 



Of her daughter, Susanna Hall, we 

 know nothing more than has already 

 been mentioned, and the recorded facts 

 concerning her sister Judith are like- 

 wise few and slight. She was married, 

 February 10, 1616, to Thomas Quiney, 

 she being thirty-one years old, while 

 he was only tweny-seven. The wed- 

 ding appears to have been hastened 

 on account of Shakespeare's falling 

 health, as it took place without a lic- 

 ence, for Which Irregularity the couple 

 a few weeks later were fined and threat- 

 end with excommunication by the ec- 

 clesiastical court at Worcester. 



There is no reason to suspect any 

 opposition to the match on the part 



