The erection of the Globe on the Bankside within a few hundred yards of the Rose was hardly gratifying to the Admiral's Men. Not only did it put them in close competition with the excellent Burbage-Shakespeare organization, but it caused their playhouse (now nearly a quarter of a century old, and said to be in a state of "dangerous decay") to suffer in comparison with the new and far handsomer Globe, "the glory of the Bank." Accordingly, before the Globe had been in operation much more than half a year, Henslowe and Alleyn decided to move to another section of London, and to erect there a playhouse that should surpass the Globe both in size and in magnificence. To the authorities, however, they gave as reasons for abandoning the Rose, first, "the dangerous decay" of the building, and secondly, "for that the same standeth very noisome for resort of people in the winter time." The new playhouse was undertaken by Henslowe and Alleyn jointly, although the exact arrangement between them is not now clear. Alleyn seems to have advanced the money and to have held the titles of ownership; but on April 4, 1601, he leased to Henslowe a moiety (or one-half interest) in the playhouse and other properties connected with it for a period of twenty-four years at an annual rental of L8--a sum far below the real value of the moiety.[431] [Footnote 431: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 25; Wallace, _Three London Theatres_, p. 53. Later, Alleyn rented to the actors the playhouse alone for L200 per annum. In the document, Alleyn _v._ William Henslowe, published by Mr. Wallace in _Three London Theatres_, p. 52, it is revealed that this annual rental of L8 was canceled by Alleyn's rental of a house from Henslowe on the Bankside; hence no actual payments by Henslowe appear in the Henslowe-Alleyn papers.] Whatever the details of the arrangement between the two partners, the main outlines of their procedure are clear. On December 22, 1599, Alleyn purchased for L240 a thirty-three-year lease[432] of a plot of ground situated to the north of the city, in the Parish of St. Giles without Cripplegate. This plot of ground, we are told, stood "very tolerable, near unto the Fields, and so far distant and remote from any person or place of account as that none can be annoyed thereby";[433] and yet, as the Earl of Nottingham wrote, it was "very convenient for the ease of people."[434] [Footnote 432: Later, by a series of negotiations ending in 1610, Alleyn secured the freehold of the property. The total cost to him was L800. See Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, pp. 14, 17, 108.] [Footnote 433: _Ibid._, p. 50.] [Footnote 434: _Ibid._, p. 49; cf. p. 51.]