Part 1 (1/2)

The Fall of British Tyranny.

by John Leac.o.c.k.

JOHN LEAc.o.c.k

Among the elusive figures of early American Drama stands John Leac.o.c.k, author of ”The Fall of British Tyranny,”[1] published in 1776, in Philadelphia. Even more elusive is the identification, inasmuch as his name has been spelled variously Leac.o.c.k, Lac.o.c.k, and Layc.o.c.k. To add to the confusion, Watson's ”Annals of Philadelphia,” on the reminiscent word of an old resident of that town, declares that Joseph Leac.o.c.k penned ”The Medley.”[2] ”He wrote also a play, with good humour,” says this authority, ”called 'British Tyranny.'” On careful search of the files, no definite information in regard to Leac.o.c.k has been forthcoming. The dedication to ”The Fall of British Tyranny” was signed ”d.i.c.k Rifle,” but there is no information to be traced from this pseudonym.

Searching the Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, I discovered no less than three John Leac.o.c.ks mentioned, all of whom were Coroners, as well as a Joseph Leac.o.c.k, who occupied the same position. Examining the Records of the Pennsylvania Soldiers of the Revolution, I found several John Leac.o.c.ks in the ranks as privates, and also one John Layc.o.c.k.

Professor Moses Coit Tyler, in his ”Literary History of the American Revolution” (ii, 198), giving a list of the characters in the play and the names of those supposed to be lampooned, a.n.a.lyzes the piece thoroughly, and says, ”From internal evidence, it must be inferred that the writing of the play was finished after the publication of 'Common Sense' in January, 1776, and before the news had reached Philadelphia of the evacuation of Boston, March 17, 1776.” Though Sabin takes for granted that Leac.o.c.k wrote ”The Fall of British Tyranny,” Hildeburn, in the ”Issues of the Press” (ii, 249), states that it is ”said to have been written by Mr. Layc.o.c.k of Philadelphia.” If the John Leac.o.c.k, whose name appears in the Philadelphia Directory of 1802, is the one who wrote ”The Fall of British Tyranny,” following that clue we find his name disappearing from the Directory in 1804. Hence, he must either have died, or have moved away from Philadelphia.

The elusive name of Leac.o.c.k is to be considered also in connection with an opera ent.i.tled, ”The Disappointment; or, The Force of Credulity,”

signed by Andrew Barton,[3] supposed to be a pseudonym, and attributed variously to ”Colonel” Thomas Forrest and to John Leac.o.c.k. I already have had occasion to mention ”The Disappointment” in connection with G.o.dfrey's ”The Prince of Parthia.” The reader will remember that in 1767 ”The Disappointment” was put into rehearsal, but was suddenly withdrawn in preference to G.o.dfrey's piece. This play has been fully and interestingly a.n.a.lyzed by O. G. Sonneck, who gives the reasons for the withdrawal of the play from rehearsal by the American Company of Philadelphia, 1767. These reasons are definitely stated in the _Pennsylvania Gazette_ for April 16, 1767, which contains this warning in the American Company's advertis.e.m.e.nt of ”The Mourning Bride”: ”N.B.

'The Disappointment' (that was advertised for Monday), as it contains personal Reflections, is unfit for the Stage.”

The reason why this piece is attributed to ”Colonel” Thomas Forrest is that there is a memorandum in substantiation on the t.i.tle-page of a copy owned by the Library Company of Philadelphia.

Mr. Sonneck gives further and more extensive treatment of the subject in his excellent book on ”Early Opera in America,” (Schirmer, 1915) as well as in ”Sammelbande der Internationale Musik Gesellschaft,” for 1914-1915.

We mention the matter here, because, although Sonneck enters into a long discussion of the life of Forrest, he fails to give any satisfactory account of John Leac.o.c.k. In fact, he says in closing, ”If Andrew Barton, Esq., is to be a pseudonym, it seems to me that John Leac.o.c.k, claimed (by Mr. Hildeburn) to have written the tragi-comedy of 'The Fall of British Tyranny,' should not be cast aside so cheerfully in favour of Thomas Forrest.”

Seilhamer and Durang, referring to the matter, mention Joseph Leac.o.c.k as a claimant for the authors.h.i.+p of ”The Disappointment,” and say that he was a jeweler and a silversmith in Philadelphia; they also mention John Leac.o.c.k, the Coroner. Durang, in the ”History of the Philadelphia Stage,” throws all weight in favour of Thomas Forrest. Sonneck says further, regarding the matter,--”We may dispose of Joseph by saying that he seems to have been among the dead when, in 1796, the second edition of 'The Disappointment,' revised and corrected by the author, was issued. On the other hand, Coroner John Leac.o.c.k figures in the Philadelphia Directories even later.”

So the matter stands. The play, however, is a very definite contribution, ill.u.s.trating how quickly the American spirit changed in the days preceding the Revolution. Imagine, in 1762, the students of the College of New Jersey giving a piece ent.i.tled ”The Military Glory of Great Britain;”[4] and so short a time afterwards, only fourteen years, in fact, a piece with the t.i.tle, ”The Fall of British Tyranny,” being greeted by the theatre-going public! Leac.o.c.k's attempt may be taken as the first example that we have of an American chronicle play. And it is likewise significant as being the first literary piece in which George Was.h.i.+ngton appears as a character. In the advertis.e.m.e.nt, the play is thus described (see Ford):

”A pleasing scene between Roger and d.i.c.k, two shepherds near Lexington.

”Clarissa, etc. A very moving scene on the death of Dr. Warren, etc., in a chamber near Boston, the morning after the battle of Bunker's Hill.

”A humorous scene between the Boatswain and a Sailor on board a man-of-war, near Norfolk in Virginia.

”Two very laughable scenes between the Boatswain, two Sailors and the Cook, exhibiting specimens of seafaring oratory, and peculiar eloquence of those sons of Neptune, touching Tories, Convicts, and Black Regulars: and between Lord Kidnapper and the Boatswain.

”A very black scene between Lord Kidnapper and Major Cudjo.

”A religious scene between Lord Kidnapper, Chaplain, and the Captain.

”A scene, the Lord Mayor, etc., going to St. James's with the address.

”A droll scene, a council of war in Boston, Admiral Tombstone, Elbow Room, Mr. Caper, General Clinton and Earl Piercy.

”A diverting scene between a Whig and a Tory.

”A spirited scene between General Prescott and Colonel Allen.

”A shocking scene, a dungeon, between Colonel Allen and an officer of the guard.