“In the course of my work on the ‘Life’ I have had occasion to examine and consider several forms of censure and disparagement which, first and last, have been a good deal circulated about you. One of these is the statement (which I, personally, have heard made by some who ought to have known better) that you have not ‘produced Shakespeare’ because you have been afraid the public would then ‘find you out.’ This has led me to make a very careful study of the subject and an exposition of the quality of your early experience and training as bearing upon competency to produce and direct Shakespeare in revivals. This, in turn, has kept the suggestion I ventured to make to you, some time ago, about ‘King Henry IV.,’ much in my mind. And turning over that subject and looking at it from many points, I have formulated a plan, fulfilment of which would give you an absolutely unique position among producers of Shakespeare, and I venture to lay it before you, in the hope that perhaps it may be of use, and that, at least, you will not think me presumptuous. “It is as follows: “‘King Henry IV.,’ both parts, is a sequel to ‘King Richard II.’ The latter is one of the most eloquent and beautiful of all Shakespeare’s plays. All three of the plays named could well and conveniently be acted _by the same company_. The actual expense of putting on all three of them would not be much more than that of putting on one. You could make an IMMENSE impression by bringing out those three plays as a ‘Shakespeare Trilogy.’ Thus: “Mondays and Thursdays; ‘King Richard II.’ “Tuesdays and Fridays; ‘King Henry IV., Part One.’ “Wednesdays and Saturdays; ‘King Henry IV., Part Two.’ “Thus, every week, you could give two full ‘cycles’ of the trilogy; and, on matinée days, the ‘First Part of King Henry IV.,’ or a modern play. “In presenting such a thing you would undertake and accomplish a more distinctive, original, and impressive managerial enterprise than any single venture of any of the representative Shakespearean producers,--Garrick, Kemble, Macready, Phelps, Kean, Booth, Irving, Daly, or Beerbohm-Tree. “_I_ feel confident that, in a _business_ way, it could be made profitable. If you got through even at cost, or at a small loss, it would (in _my_ view) be, in a _business_ way (wholly aside from the immense and incontestable service to art and the public), a profitable investment. And I _am sure_ it would ‘make money,’ too. “I would do anything and everything in my power to help so fine a scheme,--would arrange the plays, write notes, etc., etc., if you should desire it. “Please do not think me intrusive with my suggestions. And please give this very careful consideration.