Variety (December 1912)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

VARIETY. WEALTHY SHOW PEOPLE Theatricals embrace a large num- ber of wealthy people. Most made their money in the profession, and the list is not confined wholly to the man- agerial side of the business. Few, however, of those possessing the greatest fortunes acquired all of their possessions from exploiting or promoting box office attractions. Because of that the estimate given be- low of reputed wealth of $100,000 or over of theatrical persons is not claim- ed to be accurate, nor could a true line be gathered of the exact amount any- one of those mentioned may be worth, were anyone sufficiently interested to attempt it. The incomplete estimates have been gathered by a Vajuhtt representative MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR. WILBER C SWEATMAN. "The Original Ragtime Clarinetist." fea- turing the playing of 1 Bb Clarinets at once. Booked Solid. U. B. O. Direction JO PAIOB SMITH. from showmen fairly well acquainted with the subject. Several of the men whose wealth runs into seven figures have their money in theatres and .hows. Then there are some who, if they had been economical as theatrical man- agers, could have had vastly more in coin of the realm than they have. Others, who through economical and conservative streaks in their make-ups, have comparatively small fortunes in contrast with! their opportunities of many years in the show business. Of the money acquired outside the theatre, perhaps the Shuberts have been as fortunate as anyone who might be mentioned in this respect. The realty investments of the Messrs. Shu- bert (especially Lee Shubert) have been remarkably well placed, and while they are acknowledged to have been most successful for the past two sea- sons in presenting "hits" in their the- atres and in conjunction with their business associates, the solid portion of their wealth is represented by bricks and mortar not employed for the- atrical'use. The statement that E. D. Stair (Stair & Havlin) is the richest showman may be disputed by some, but it is said Mr. Stair's wealth is of such a fabulous sum that his properties outside the- atricals are so numerous as to be un- countable. The estimates are as follows: B. D. Stair 116.000,000 Percy O. Williams... 7,000,000 M. Meyerfeld, Jr. (San Francisco) 6,000,000 D O. Ollmore (Spring- field. Mass.) 6,000,000 Mr* B. C. Kohl (Kohl Estate) 6.000,000 Nixon 4b Zlmmermann 6,000,000 B. F. Keith 6.000,000 Chaa. 8paldlng (St. Louis) 6.000.000 Al Hayman 4.000.000 Tha Shuberta (Lee and. J. J.) 8.600,000 Henry W. Savag-e 1,000.000 A. L. Brlang-er..* 8,000.000 Jae. H. Moore (De- troit) 2,600.t>00 Jamea J. Butler (St. % >* Loula) 2.000.000 V Jacob Lltt Batate.... 2,000,000 Martin Beck 2.000,000 + John Cort 2.000,000 John Conaldlne 2.000.000 B. F. Albee 2.000.000 F. F. Proctor 1.760.000 John R. Stirling (Buf- falo) 1.760,000 John H. Havlin (Stair ft Havlin) 1,600.000 Sire Bros (Combined) 1.600,000 Lottie Crabtree 1.600.000 Marcus Loew 1.600,000 Marc Klaw 1,600,000 - , k Geo M. Cohan l,600,00(r A. Paul Keith 1.600,000 William Harris 1,260.000 A. Judah (Kansas * . City) 1,000.000', Peter McCourt (Den- ver) 1,000.000 ► A. H. Woods 1,000,000 William H. Crane 1,000,000 P. B. Chase (Wash- ington) 1,000.000 ''» John B. 8choeffel 1,000.000 A, L. Wllber 1,000.000 David Belasco 1.000.000 Sam H. Harris 1,000.000 Daniel Frohman 1,000,000 . Reginald De Koven... 1,000.000 W. A. Brady 000.000 John Drew 800.000 Alexander Pantages.. 800.000 M Rels 760.000 Sandy Din*wall 760.000 Chauncey Olcott 760,000 R D. McLean 760,000 R. K. Hynlcka (Cin- cinnati) 700,000 Phillip Bartholomae.. 600.000 Herman Fehr 600.000 Joseph Brooks 600,000 Jas. B. Fennessy (Cincinnati) 600,000 Joe Weber 600,000 Albert Wels 600.000 B. C. Whitney 400.000 Maxlne Elliott 400,000 Rose Melville ("Sis Hopkins") 400.000 Frank Daniels 400.000 Fred Whitney 860 000 David Warfield 860.000 Ous Hill 800.000 Nat C. Goodwin 800.000 Al G. Field 800.000 William Gillette 800.000 John J. Murdock 260.000 Harry Askln 260.000 Lee Boda (Columbus) 260,000 George Broadhurst... 260.000 George Primrose 260.000 Maude Adams 226,000 Oliver Morosco 200,000 Jake Gottlob 200.000 Henry Greenwall (New Orleans) 200.000 Fred Belasco 200.000 James T. Powers 200,000 Augustus Pltou 200.000 Fred Stone , ... 176.000 Alice Lloyd 160.000 Sam Bernard 160.000 Bernard Dyllyn 160,000 B. H. Sothern 160.000 Julian Bltlnge 126.000 Eddie Foy 100,000 Max Rogers 100,000 THE NEW MUSICAL COMEDY By HARRY A8KIN. (Mr. Askln la the managing-director of the La Salle Opera-house Co.. watch operates the Chicago La Salle and Its touring companies. He has been since 1886 associated with comic opera and musical comedy, and for the greater part of that time as a producer.) Musical comedy, in the season of 1912- 13, is become as highly conventionalized as was comic opera when, just twenty years ago, managers of the latter form of entertainment began to go broke with it Therefore, I know that a change in the form of light musical plays is due, just as it was due in the early '90s. What the new form will be I, alas! do not know; if I did, I should be making faces at J. Pierepont Morgan and panning John D. Rockefeller for the rotten game of golf he plays. The trouble with musical comedp, as the trouble was with comic opera, is it is all running to pattern. This one is just the same as that one. Comic opera cir- cumnavigated the globe in its search for the picturesque in vista and dresses. Then, with no more worlds to conquer, it, as a last resort, went into long pants, taking for its characters the conventional Americans or Europeans of every day, leaving to the comedian nothing save his red nose and red wig. Had anybody asked me, in 1892, when was emerging from the wreck of the once-supreme McCaull Opera Company— an organization which I took over on Colonel McCaull's death because I did not foresee that comic opera had run its course in this country—had anybody then wed" me what form musical plays of the comic kind would take, I should have said burlesque. I mean, of course, bur- lesque inthe sense of literary and artistic traveflfliftuid not the present trade-form that bears the classification "burlesque." But the man who was then the greatest producer of burlesque in the world is the same man who is now the greatest pro- ducer of musical comedy in the world— George Edwardes; and he, seeing no fu- ture for burlesque, tried the present form of so-called "musical comedy," and won out with it. Mr. Edwardes has, in his twenty years of musical comedy, learned things from this side—notajbly, from George W. Led- erer, who did more to create and perfect an American form of musical comedy than any other American manager. Mr. Lederer had the fate of many a pioneer— he blazed a perfect trail; then, when he sought to avail himself of it, he found it choked with imitators. Perhaps, the only other manager who has given to George Lederer the credit that belongs to him is the same George Edwardes, the king of the field in London. The great trouble with the two de- cades of musical comedy through which we have lived is that it has not developed a special class of talent It has been the rag-bag of the stage—a receptacle for the odds-and-ends of cleverness manifested by the occasional individual. It has ab- sorbed, digested, and gotten rid of pretty nearly everything—from lariat-throwers and jugglers to circus-clowns and motion- pictures. Comic opera, on the other hand, did develop a class of talent, and set a target for the aim of the ambitious. Just one example: in the cast of "The Girl at the Gate/' in the La Salle Opera House, Sept. 1, 1912, were eight of the most talented men and women of the American stage. All save one was sal- aried in excess of $200 weekly; the ex- ception got just that figure, and three of the others got double that figure. All —right 1! Not one of the six could carry a song through with any regard for the melody. True, not all were engaged to sing; but the fact remains. Now, when comic opera was at the height of its great vogue in the mid-'80s, a manager never dreamed of engaging a performer who could not sing. Even the comedians were singers first—as De Wolf Hopper, Digby Bell, W. H. Daboll, Charles H. Drew, the brilliant Fred Les- lie, Edwin Stevens, et al. without num- ber. The glittering exception was Francis Wilson; and the critics of a Tuesday morning were always indignant with Colonel McCaull or Rudolph Aaronson for permitting Wilson, the best-paid man of the day in light opera, to take part in the performances. A. PRINCE and DEERIE, Helen ORIOINATOR8 OF THE SPOTLIGHT TELEPHONE "The College Boy and the Maid.'*