Frohman and Wilson met at the Savoy Hotel in London one day. Frohman had often urged him to quit musical comedy, and he now said he was ready to make the plunge.
"All right," said Frohman. "I will give you so much a week and a percentage of the profits."
"It"s done," said Wilson.
"Do you want a contract?" asked Frohman.
"No."
This was about all that ever happened in the way of arrangements between Frohman and his stars, to some of whom he paid fortunes.
During these years Charles had watched with growing interest the development of a young girl from Bloomington, Illinois, Margaret Illington by name. She had appeared successfully in the old Lyceum Stock Company when it was transferred by Daniel Frohman to Daly"s, and had played with James K. Hackett and E. H. Sothern. Charles now cast her in Pinero"s play "A Wife Without a Smile." Afterward she appeared in Augustus Thomas"s piece "Mrs. Leffingwell"s Boots," and made such a strong impression that Frohman made her leading woman with John Drew in Pinero"s "His House in Order."
Just about this time Charles, whose interest in French plays had constantly increased through the years, singled out Henri Bernstein as the foremost of the younger French playwrights. He secured his remarkable play "The Thief" for America. He now produced this play at the Lyceum with Miss Illington and Kyrle Bellew as co-stars, and it proved to be an enormous success, continuing there for a whole season, and then duplicating its triumph on the road, where Frohman at one time had four companies playing it in various parts of the country.
XI
THE CONQUEST OF THE LONDON STAGE
Great as were Charles Frohman"s achievements in America, they were more than matched in many respects by his activities in England. He was the one American manager who made an impress on the British drama; he led the so-called "American invasion." As a matter of fact, he _was_ the invasion. No phase of his fascinatingly crowded and adventurous career reflects so much of the genius of the man, or reveals so many of his finer qualities, as his costly attempt to corner the British stage.
Here, as in no other work, he showed himself in really Napoleonic proportions.
Behind Charles"s tremendous operations in London were three definite motives. First of all, he really loved England. He felt that the theater there had a dignity and a distinction far removed from theatrical production in America. There was no sneer of "commercialism" about it.
To be identified with the stage in England was something to be proud of.
He often said that he would rather make fifteen pounds in London than fifteen thousand dollars in America. It summed up his whole att.i.tude toward the theater in Great Britain.
In the second place, he knew that a strong footing in England was absolutely necessary to a mastery of the situation in America. Just as important as any of his other reasons was the conviction in his own mind that to produce the best English-speaking plays in the United States he must know English playwrights and English authors on their own ground, and to produce, if possible, their own works on their home stages.
This latter desire led him to the long and brilliant series of productions that he made in London, and which amounted to what later became an almost complete monopoly on British dramatic output for the United States.
The net result was that he became a sort of Colossus of the English-speaking theater. Figuratively, he stood astride the mighty sea in which he was to meet his death, with one foot planted securely in England and the other in New York.
Charles"s first visits to England were made in the most unostentatious way, largely to look over the ground and see what he could pick up for America. His first offices in Henrietta Street were very modest rooms.
Unpretentious as they were, they represented a somewhat historic step, because Frohman was absolutely the first American manager to set up a business in England. Augustin Daly had taken over a company, but he allied himself in no general way with British theatrical interests.
When Frohman first engaged W. Lestocq as his English manager, as has already been recorded, he made a significant remark:
"You know I am coming into London to produce plays. But I am coming in by the back door. I shall get to the front door, however, and you shall come with me."
No sooner had he set foot in London than his productive activities were turned loose. With A. and S. Gatti he put on one of his New York successes, "The Lost Paradise," at the Adelphi Theater. In this instance he merely furnished the play. It failed, however. Far from discouraging Frohman, it only filled him with a desire to do something big.
This play marked the beginning of one of his most important English connections. The Gattis, as they were known in England, were prominent figures in the British theater. They were Swiss-Italians who had begun life in England as waiters, had established a small eating-house, and had risen to become the most important restaurateurs of the British capital. They became large realty-owners, spread out to the theater, and acquired the Adelphi and the Vaudeville.
Charles Frohman"s arrangement with them was typical of all his business transactions. Some years afterward a well-known English playwright asked Stephen Gatti:
"What is your contract with Frohman?"
"We have none. When we want an agreement from Charles Frohman about a business transaction it is time to stop," was his reply.
With the production of a French farce called "A Night Out," which was done at the Vaudeville Theater in 1896, Frohman began his long and intimate a.s.sociation with George Edwardes. This man"s name was synonymous with musical comedy throughout the amus.e.m.e.nt world. As managing director of the London Gaiety Theater, the most famous musical theater anywhere, he occupied a unique position. Charles was the princ.i.p.al American importer of the Gaiety shows, and through this and various other connections he had much to do with Edwardes.
Frohman and Edwardes were the joint producers of "A Night Out," and it brought to Charles his first taste of London success. This was the only play in London in which he ever sold his interest. Out of this sale grew a curious example of Frohman"s disregard of money. For his share he received a check of four figures. He carried it around in his pocket for weeks. After it had become all crumpled up, Lestocq persuaded him to deposit it in the bank. Only when the check was almost reduced to shreds did he consent to open an account with it.
It remained for an American play, presenting an American star, to give Charles his first real triumph in London. With the production of "Secret Service," in 1897, at the Adelphi Theater, he became the real envoy from the New World of plays to the Old. It was an amba.s.sadorship that gave him an infinite pride, for it brought fame and fortune to the American playwright and the American actor abroad. Frohman"s envoyship was as advantageous to England as it was to the United States, because he was the instrument through which the best of the modern English plays and the most brilliant of the modern English actors found their hearing on this side of the water.
Frohman was immensely interested in the English production of "Secret Service." Gillette himself headed the company. Both he and Frohman were in a great state of expectancy. The play hung fire until the third act.
When the big scene came British reserve melted and there was a great ovation. It was an immediate success and had a long run.
One feature of the play that amused the critics and theater-goers generally in London was the fact that the spy in "Secret Service," who was supposed to be the bad man of the play, received all the sympathy and the applause, while the hero was arrested and always had the worst of it, even when he was denouncing the spy. Gillette"s quiet but forceful style of acting was a revelation to the Londoners.
It was during this engagement that an intimate friend said to Terriss, the great English actor who was distinguished for his impulsiveness:
"Chain yourself to a seat at the Adelphi some night and learn artistic repose from Gillette."
Concerning the first night of "Secret Service" is another one of the many Frohman stories. When a London newspaper man asked the American manager about the magnificent celebration that he was sure had been held to commemorate Gillette"s triumph, Frohman said:
"There was nothing of the sort. Mr. Dillingham, my manager, and I joined Mr. Gillette in his rooms at the Savoy. We had some sandwiches and wine and then played "hearts" for several hours."
This episode inspired Frohman to give utterance to what was the very key-note of his philosophy about an actor and his work. Talking with a friend in England shortly after the opening of "Secret Service," about the modest way in which Gillette regarded his success, he said:
"Nothing so kills the healthy growth of an actor and brings his usefulness to an end so soon, as the idea that social enjoyment is a means to public success, and that industrious labor to improve himself is no longer necessary."
[Ill.u.s.tration: _ELSIE FERGUSON_]
Frohman always regarded the success of "Secret Service" as the corner-stone of his great achievements in England. Once, in speaking of this star"s. .h.i.t, he said:
"You know, what tickles me is the fact that it was left for England to discover that Gillette is a great actor. It"s one on America."
A few years later, Frohman made his first Paris production with "Secret Service." The masterful little man always regarded the world as his field; hence the annexation of Paris. He had a version made by Paul de Decourcelle, and the play was put on at the Renaissance Theater. Guitry, the great French actor, played Gillette"s part. A very brilliant audience saw the opening performance, but the French did not get the atmosphere of the play. They could not determine whether it was serious or comic. The character of _General Nelson_ was almost entirely omitted in the play because the actors themselves could not tell whether it was humor or tragedy. Besides, the French actors wanted to do it their own way.
Dillingham, who had charge of the production in Paris, realizing on the opening night that it would be a failure, and knowing that he had to send Frohman some sort of telegram, cabled, with his customary humor, the following:
_The tomb of Napoleon looks beautiful in the moonlight._
As was the case in England, Charles was the only American manager who made any impression upon the French drama. From his earliest producing days he had a weakness for producing adapted French plays. From France came some of his hugest successes, especially those of Bernstein. He "bulled" the French market on prices. The French playwright hailed him with joy, for he always left a small fortune behind him.
Having established a precedent with Gillette, he now presented his first American woman star in England. It was Annie Russell in Bret Harte"s story "Sue." He was very fond of this play, having already produced it in the United States, and he was very proud of the impression that Miss Russell made in London.