on the lines followed at the Irving Place would succeed, if by success he meant something besides wealth. For the public this would mean that we might see in our own language every year not only all the plays of the great national dramatist, but selections from the other Elizabethans, and from Dryden, Sheridan, Goldsmith, from the best dramas of our contemporaries, which might not be fit for long runs or performance by illbalanced companies, and translations from foreign dramatic literature; and that we should see these plays acted as well as Die versunkene Glocke, Iphigenie auf Tauris and Die Journalisten have recently been acted at the Irving Place. From September 30 last, sixty-five dramas were played in Irving Place, and this number is smaller than it should have been; as Carl Wagner's failure led to an early closing of the theatre and the abandonment of several productions. On the list are plays by Schiller, Goethe, Lessing, Sudermann, Hauptmann, Freytag, and Shakespeare. Such names appear every year interspersed with those that

stand for earlier stages of fame or for lighter work. This is the kind of theatre that we need in English. I once suggested to Mr. Conried that all good American actors expected higher salaries than could be paid in such a company, which must be so large that many members are idle on any given night. "Nonsense," said he. "We do not need reputation. I could pick up the actors I needed in Terre Haute." That is one quality necessary for the man without whom such a theatre cannot exist. He must be able to discover actors for himself, not pay the prices of those whom the world has already made expensive. He ought to be a retired actor, as Mr. Conried is; for if he is still seeking histrionic honours, he will be an ordinary actor-manager, practically a star. Where is the man? Perhaps, in spite of his being a German, Mr. Conried will be the first manager to establish a high-class English stock company in New York. Who knows? His German theatre has pointed the way. Norman Hapgood.

When a full-fledged and lusty error sets forth upon its journey through the world, some malevolent fairy appears to bestow upon it the seven-leagued boots of Hop-o'-my-Thumb, equipped with which it makes such rapid strides that sober-minded and slower paced truth is seldom, if ever, able to overtake it. This deplorable fact is well exemplified by the singularly persistent repetition of erroneous statements in regard to the first map of this city printed in New York which is known to exist.

ford, from a survey made by James Lyne. Only two impressions from the original copperplate of this engraving are known -one in the possession of the writer, and the other in the New York Historical Society, presented to it in 1807 by John Pintard, an eminent merchant and public-spirited citizen of New York, who died in 1844 at the advanced age of eighty-five.

The following note, endorsed upon the copy in the New York Historical Society, is signed by Mr. Pintard:

Col. Lurting (whose name appears in the shield in the upper right-hand corner of the map) was appointed Mayor, Sept. 29, 1726, O. S. (old style). He died July 23, 1735, O. S. This plan therefore was taken between these

Govr Montgomerie arrived April 15, 1728. Died July 1, 1731.

Now, with this statement made in 1807 by John Pintard before their eyes, why should the copyists guess at the date of 1728? At the same time (1807) Mr. Pintard presented to the society, of which he was the originator and founder, a copy of "A Plan of the City of New York from an actual Survey Anno Domini MDCCLV. By F. Maerschalk, City Surveyr"-Printed, Engraved and Sold by G. Duyckinck and dedicated by him to the "Honourable James De Lancey, Esqr, Lieutenant-Governor and Commander-In-Chief. In and over the Province of New York and Territories Depending thereon in America."

This map is of even greater rarity than the Bradford map, as one of the two copies known is in a very imperfect condition. The left-hand portion of the Duyckinck resembles the Bradford map so closely in size and in the style of the engraving that it is not a wild conjecture that Gerardus Duyckinck, limner and picture dealer at the sign of the Two Cupids, near the Old Slip Market, may have obtained possession of Bradford's copper-plate, pieced it out, and thus on the ruins of the Bradford map constructed his own. This appears to have been a favourite contrivance of these early engravers, for the Burgis copperplates of New York City and Harvard College were, we know, thus manipulated.

In 1834, twenty-seven years after the gift of Mr. Pintard to the Historical Society was made, the Bradford map was, apparently for the first time, reproduced by lithography, but not with exactness, and a date, 1728, for which there is no authority whatever, was added. The sins of both omission and commission are to be laid at the door of the draughtsman of the tracing by means of which the first copy was necessarily made, as photography was not then in use. The words "Ledge of Rocks" which appear in the original are omitted in the copies. The fifteen boats and ships displayed in the original are reduced to ten, and the height of the copies is about five-eighths of an inch less than the original. There are other characteristics-the eighteenthcentury paper and the delicate copper

plate effects-which mark the original map, and some minor points besides those mentioned, in which it differs from the copies—for instance, some of the letters in the inscription on the scroll below the City Arms, all of which are sharp and clear in the original, are in many of the copies obliterated by the shading to such an extent that the words cannot be deciphered; but the simple statement that a so-called Bradford map bears a date is sufficient to condemn it at once as an original impression and brand it as a

copy.

Following with a blind and simple faith this reproduction of 1834, various other copies of this noted survey of James Lyne have been made from time to time, and nearly every writer upon our local history who has pictorially embellished his work has inserted in it a facsimile of a lithographic map, purporting to have been made in 1728 (regardless of the fact that the art of lithography was not invented by Alois Senefelder of Munich until 1792, and not introduced into this country until about the year 1819), and presented it to his readers as a true and faithful reproduction of William Bradford's copper-plate. It has remained, however, for Mr. John Fiske to go farther and fare worse in this matter than his predecessors, inasmuch as he essays to be more explanatory of the situation by suggesting that there may have been different states of the original map.

Referring in his table of contents to the map, which appears in Vol. II., p. 258 of his work, Mr. Fiske writes:

James Lyne's map of New York in 1728From an original kindly lent by General James Grant Wilson. I am informed by Mr. Wilberforce Eames that Mr. W. L. Andrews has an original without the date, which corroborates a suspicion that the date 1728 may have been absent from the map as first issued. Montgomeries Ward, which appears on the map, was not created until 1731.*

Turning to the map on page 258 of Vol. II. of Mr. Fiske's book, I found a reduced copy of the lithograph with the date 1728, which has masqueraded on so many previous occasions as the original

A fact to which the writer of this article believes he was the first to draw attention as one evidence of the incorrectness of the date of 1728 attached to the copies of the map.

on the lines followed at the Irving Place would succeed, if by success he meant something besides wealth. For the public this would mean that we might see in our own language every year not only all the plays of the great national dramatist, but selections from the other Elizabethans, and from Dryden, Sheridan, Goldsmith, from the best dramas of our contemporaries, which might not be fit for long runs or performance by illbalanced companies, and translations. from foreign dramatic literature; and that we should see these plays acted as well as Die versunkene Glocke, Iphigenie auf Tauris and Die Journalisten have recently been acted at the Irving Place. From September 30 last, sixty-five dramas were played in Irving Place, and this number is smaller than it should have been; as Carl Wagner's failure led to an early closing of the theatre and the abandonment of several productions. On the list are plays by Schiller, Goethe, Lessing, Sudermann, Hauptmann, Freytag, and Shakespeare. Such names appear every year interspersed with those that

stand for earlier stages of fame or for lighter work. This is the kind of theatre that we need in English. I once suggested to Mr. Conried that all good American actors expected higher salaries than could be paid in such a company, which must be so large that many members are idle on any given night. "Nonsense," said he. "We do not need reputation. I could pick up the actors I needed in Terre Haute." That is one quality necessary for the man without whom such a theatre cannot exist. He must be able to discover actors for himself, not pay the prices of those whom the world has already made expensive. He ought to be a retired actor, as Mr. Conried is; for if he is still seeking histrionic honours, he will be an ordinary actor-manager, practically a star. Where is the man? Perhaps, in spite of his being a German, Mr. Conried will be the first manager to establish a high-class English stock company in New York. Who knows? His German theatre has pointed the way. Norman Hapgood.

When a full-fledged and lusty error sets forth upon its journey through the world, some malevolent fairy appears to bestow upon it the seven-leagued boots of Hop-o'-my-Thumb, equipped with which it makes such rapid strides that sober-minded and slower paced truth is seldom, if ever, able to overtake it. This deplorable fact is well exemplified by the singularly persistent repetition of erroneous statements in regard to the first map of this city printed in New York which is known to exist.

This map, the historical and topographical importance of which is shown by the fact that scarcely any account of our city has ever been written that does not refer to or reproduce it, was published probably in 1731 by New York's first established printer, William Brad

ford, from a survey made by James Lyne. Only two impressions from the original copperplate of this engraving are known -one in the possession of the writer, and the other in the New York Historical Society, presented to it in 1807 by John Pintard, an eminent merchant and public-spirited citizen of New York, who died in 1844 at the advanced age of eighty-five.

The following note, endorsed upon the copy in the New York Historical Society, is signed by Mr. Pintard:

Col. Lurting (whose name appears in the shield in the upper right-hand corner of the map) was appointed Mayor, Sept. 29. 1726, O. S. (old style). He died July 23, 1735, O. S. This plan therefore was taken between these periods-presumed from tradition in 1730.

Govr Montgomerie arrived April 15, 1728. Died July 1, 1731.

Now, with this statement made in 1807 by John Pintard before their eyes, why should the copyists guess at the date of 1728? At the same time (1807) Mr. Pintard presented to the society, of which he was the originator and founder, a copy of "A Plan of the City of New York from an actual Survey Anno Domini MDCCLV. By F. Maerschalk, City Surveyr-Printed, Engraved and Sold by G. Duyckinck and dedicated by him to the "Honourable James De Lancey, Esqr, Lieutenant-Governor and Commander-In-Chief. In and over the Province of New York and Territories Depending thereon in America.'

This map is of even greater rarity than the Bradford map, as one of the two copies known is in a very imperfect condition. The left-hand portion of the Duyckinck resembles the Bradford map so closely in size and in the style of the engraving that it is not a wild conjecture that Gerardus Duvckinck, limner and picture dealer at the sign of the Two Cupids, near the Old Slip Market, may have obtained possession of Bradford's copper-plate, pieced it out, and thus on the ruins of the Bradford map constructed his own. This appears to have been a favourite contrivance of these early engravers, for the Burgis copperplates of New York City and Harvard College were, we know, thus manipulated.

In 1834, twenty-seven years after the gift of Mr. Pintard to the Historical Society was made, the Bradford map was, apparently for the first time, reproduced by lithography, but not with exactness, and a date, 1728, for which there is no authority whatever, was added. The sins of both omission and commission are to be laid at the door of the draughtsman of the tracing by means of which the first copy was necessarily made, as photography was not then in use. The words "Ledge of Rocks" which appear in the original are omitted in the copies. The fifteen boats and ships displayed in the original are reduced to ten, and the height of the copies is about five-eighths of an inch less than the original. There are other characteristics-the eighteenthcentury paper and the delicate copper

plate effects-which mark the original map, and some minor points besides those mentioned, in which it differs from the copies-for instance, some of the letters in the inscription on the scroll below the City Arms, all of which are sharp and clear in the original, are in many of the copies obliterated by the shading to such an extent that the words cannot be deciphered; but the simple statement that a so-called Bradford map bears a date is sufficient to condemn it at once as an original impression and brand it as a copy.

Following with a blind and simple faith this reproduction of 1834, various other copies of this noted survey of James Lyne have been made from time to time, and nearly every writer upon our local history who has pictorially embellished his work has inserted in it a facsimile of a lithographic map, purporting to have been made in 1728 (regardless of the fact that the art of lithography was not invented by Alois Senefelder of Munich until 1792, and not introduced into this country until about the year 1819), and presented it to his readers as a true and faithful reproduction of William. Bradford's copper-plate. It has remained, however, for Mr. John Fiske to go farther and fare worse in this matter than his predecessors, inasmuch as he essays to be more explanatory of the situation by suggesting that there may have been different states of the original map.

Referring in his table of contents to the map, which appears in Vol. II., p. 258 of his work, Mr. Fiske writes:

James Lyne's map of New York in 1728From an original kindly lent by General James Grant Wilson. I am informed by Mr. Wilberforce Eames that Mr. W. L. Andrews has an original without the date, which corroborates a suspicion that the date 1728 may have been absent from the map as first issued. Montgomeries Ward, which appears on the map, was not created until 1731.*

Turning to the map on page 258 of Vol. II. of Mr. Fiske's book, I found a reduced copy of the lithograph with the date 1728, which has masqueraded on so many previous occasions as the original

"A fact to which the writer of this article believes he was the first to draw attention as one evidence of the incorrectness of the date of 1728 attached to the copies of the map.