[521] Fleay, Murray, and others are wrong in assuming that this troupe was merely a continuation of the Paul's Boys. So far as I can discover, there is no official record of the patent issued to Drayton; but that such a patent was issued is clear from the lawsuits of 1609, printed by Greenstreet in The New Shakspere Society's Transactions (1887-90), p. 269.
[522] He was part proprietor of the Red Bull. In the case of Witter v. Heminges and Condell he was examined as a witness (see Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 74), but what connection, if any, he had with the Globe does not appear.
[523] Greenstreet, The New Shakspere Society's Transactions (1887-90), p. 275.
[524] The stipple walls, in the original survey colored gray, were of stone; the thinner walls of the adjoining "tenements," in the original colored red, were of brick.
[525] By a stupid error often called Lodowick Barry. For an explanation of the error see an article by the present writer in Modern Philology, April, 1912, ix, 567. Mr. W.J. Lawrence has recently shown (Studies in Philology, University of North Carolina, April, 1917) that David Barry was the eldest son of the ninth Viscount Buttevant, and was called "Lording" by courtesy. At the time he became interested in the Whitefriars Playhouse he was twenty-two years old. He died in 1610.
[526] At this time the Children of Blackfriars had lost their patent, so that the Children at Whitefriars were the only Revels troupe.
[527] Also spelled Slater, Slaughter, Slather, Slawghter. Henslowe often refers to him as "Martin."
[528] Mr. Wallace (The Century Magazine, 1910, lxxx, 511) incorrectly says that Whitefriars was held by "six equal sharers."
[529] Letter of M. De La Boderie, the French Ambassador to England; quoted by E.K. Chambers, Modern Language Review, iv, 159.
[530] Greenstreet, The New Shakspere Society's Transactions (1887-90), p. 283.