James H. Wallick, the Bandit and Cattle King – An Owner of Hollyrood Farm (Part 4)

James Henry Wallick & his wife Mary (McInnis) Wallick  

(Owners of Hollyrood Farm for 7+ Years, 1888-1895, 1897, 1903)

Continued from PART 3

Eleanor Merron Cowper, friend of James H. Wallick, with whom he later made a suicide pact. Photo and article from The Chicago Tribune, Saturday, 28 November 1908, page 2.

 ELEANOR MERRON––ACTRESS, WRITER, AND FRIEND
Even with all of their financial troubles, James and Mary seemed to be making their way and were considered to be quite successful. An article in Brooklyn Life in 1898 still listed James Wallick as one of the wealthiest actors with a fortune worth over $100,000. In the middle of this success, however, three events occurred in 1898 and 1899 that may have caused James H. Wallick to begin questioning the purpose of life. First, in late March his beloved wife, Mary––his companion, fellow performer, and financial advisor––became seriously ill and for several days lay in the Oriental Hotel in Middletown, New York in a semi conscious state; she passed away at the age of 50 years on the 4th of April. Mrs. Wallick was well-liked in the Middletown area where they lived after selling Hollyrood farm when they were not on the road with the acting company. She was described as “warm-hearted, generous..., and [someone who] did many acts of kindness and charity.” Later that same year, on the 5th or 6th of November, James’s mother, Susan Ellsworth of Rondout, Ulster County, New York, died and was brought to Middletown to be buried near his wife. Finally, a year later on November 9, 1899 his sister, and last surviving member of his immediate family passed away.

With no children of their own––with the possible exception of an adopted niece, Violet (Barney) Williams, who was married and living in Washington, D.C.––James was left with only two close friends, Archie and Eleanor (Merron) Cowper, both of whom were actors. James was particularly close to Eleanor, who acted in some of his plays and with whom he collaborated, producing her successful play, The Dairy Farm, and less successful play, Her Wedding Day. The collaboration may have begun in earnest, when James showed her he script of a play he was considering. Eleanor commented that she could certainly write a better one. James encouraged her to do so and the result was her play, The Dairy Farm. James managed the production and both he and Eleanor acted in the play. The play opened in September 1899 and was quite well liked by the critics and drew fairly good audiences over the next few years. For example, the Washington, D.C. Evening Times, said of the play that “The Dairy Farm last night [at the Columbia theater] presented one of the very best pieces of its class that has come to Washington this year and the excellent production won the hearty commendation of a large gathering,” while the Hazleton, Pennsylvania Plain Speaker stated that “Miss Eleanor Merron, the author of The Dairy Farm, has received over seven hundred letters from all the prominent clergymen in New York commending its merit as inspiring worthy ideas and affording much innocent amusement.” By October of 1901 the play had already been performed 109 times in New York City, 137 times in Philadelphia, and 133 times in Chicago.

Poster for the Dairy Farm a play by Eleanor Merron with James H. Wallick as manager. Both James and Eleanor also acted in the play. Reproduction of the poster courtesy of the U.S. Library of Congress.

Eleanor was born in New Gloucester, Maine in 1858 as Dora Ellen Merrow to John Merrow and Elizabeth Ellen Knight. When she made the decision to become and actress, she took on the stage name of Eleanor Merron and also seems to have distanced herself from her family. She later added her own details to her youth and birth. In her version, she was born in England in 1867 to American parents who returned to the United States when she was 3 months old where she was raised in Gorham, Maine. Her Maine birth record, however, shows that she was born in 1858 in New Gloucester, about 25 miles from Gorham, not in England. Both the 1860 and 1870 U.S. Censuses confirm her birth in Maine and show the family still living in New Gloucester, not Gorham.

Advertisement with the cast for a play titled La Tosca by Victorien Sardou later adapted as an opera by Giacomo Puccini. The performances were at the Broadway Theater in New York City. This notice was published in The Theatre, an illustrated magazine of drama, music, and art (22 March 1888, v. IV, no. 8, p. 156, courtesy of Google Books).

Eleanor states that she left home and began acting with the Boston Theater Company when she was 14 years old (about 1872 if we use her correct birthdate) in a play called The Hidden Hand. Her career may have received a boost in 1888 and 1889 when, according to her own account, she was mentored by the famous actress Fanny Davenport when they performed together for two seasons in Sardou’s play La Tosca. Many other plays came and went over the years, including All The Comforts of Home, The Lights o’ London, The Private Secretary, and Gloriana. The first newspaper report of an appearance of Eleanor on stage that I have been able to find was published in September of 1882 when she would have been about 24 years old. That month, a new popular play by Paul Merritt and Augustus Harris from London, called Youth, opened in Boston with Eleanor Merron in the role of Alice Wenlock, one of the minor characters. Sometime around 1883, Eleanor met an actor by the name of Archibald “Archie” Cowper. Archie was part of an acting family which included his father, John C. Cowper,  a brother, Will C. Cowper,  a sister, Clara Cowper, and Archie himself. It was perhaps during 1884, while they were both acting in a play called The Lights o’ London, that they fell in love and decided to marry. The ceremony took place in Manhattan on 2 July 1885. Even with a busy acting career, Eleanor found time during this stage of her life to write a novel, As the Wind Blows, first published in 1895. The book received mixed reviews, with some finding it a nice moral story and others complaining that it showed all the marks of a novice writer.

Eleanor was described in contemporary reports as bright and clever, an interesting talker, plump with golden-hair, and “a stunning looking woman with a pair of blue eyes full of tenderness and sympathy and a keen sense of a jolly situation”; she was also considered a fine actress and writer. In recalling her early days of working with James H. Wallick she recounted the following in an interview in 1902:

I think the greatest strain I was ever in for mental and financial resources was about four seasons ago when I was about to appear in a new production under James H. Wallick’s management. Mr. Wallick had asked me to buy some things for the stage. I started out just after breakfast to select draperies, table covers, etc., and have them sent to the theater that evening before the performance, so that we could see the effect by electric light. They were to be paid for upon delivery. I could not find what I wanted at a reasonable price, so I decided to purchase the goods and make the articles myself. Then I remembered that I had not enough money to pay for them. I got into a cab, took the things along with me accompanied by a young man with the bill. I thought as it was only a matter of $50 they would certainly pay that at the hotel and charge it to me, but the manager did not appear to be used to such things. I explained and offered my ring for security. He said, “If you will bring me an order from Mr. Wallick, I will pay it.” “Good Lord man,” I interrupted, “if I could see Mr. Wallick I would not need to ask you.” So I drove over to the hotel where Mr. Wallick was staying, but he was not in. I swore a great big swear that those curtains should play in a star engagement that night. On my travels I had noticed a loan office. I had with me only two rings and a gold locket, but I dashed in and said, “I must have $50.” The man looked so astonished that I had to laugh in my excitement. I explained that I had lost my money and he gave me the cash. I had only four hours to cut, decorate and line the things, but I finished and was at the theater at a quarter before seven. When everything was arranged I felt thoroughly repaid and the effect delighted Mr. Wallick. The next day I confessed. Mr. Wallick looked stern. “In heaven’s name,” he said, “why did you do a thing like that?” I said in my chilliest manner, “I am very sorry to have offended you. I promised you to have the things for the scene in time and I thought I had redeemed my promise as few women would. Kindly take the money out of my salary, give me the things and consider the incident closed.” But I was wrong. I had made a big hit with Mr. Wallick. He was amazed and very much pleased.

In 1891, an actor friend of Archie and Eleanor’s, Henry Aveling, committed suicide. The night before, Aveling had met Cowper and told him he was going to end his life, but Archie did not believe him, even though he accompanied Aveling to the drug store to discuss the use of cyanide with the clerk. Apparently, Aveling had attempted suicide or stated his intent to attempt it a number of times before until it had become somewhat of a joke among his friends. This time it was not a joke. Again in 1894 a friend of the Cowpers, actress May Brookyn used carbolic acid to commit suicide. Did the suicides of these friends later play into Eleanor’s own decision to take her life? If nothing else, they may have planted a seed of an idea that later bloomed into reality.

Continued in PART 5

NOTES and REFERENCES
91. Brooklyn Life, Brooklyn, New York, Saturday, 30 April 1898, p. 32.
92. The Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Monday, 28 March 1898, p. 5 and Monday, 4 April 1898, p. 5.
93. The Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Monday, 4 April 1898, p. 5.
94. Gravestone in Hillside Cemetery, Middletown, Orange Co., New York; The Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Tuesday, 8 November 1898, p. 5.
95. Gravestone in Hillside Cemetery, Middletown, Orange Co., New York.
96. The New York Dramatic Mirror, New York City, Saturday, 25 November 1899, p. 2.
97. The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Tuesday, 5 September 1905, p. 26.
98. The Chicago Daily Tribune, Chicago, Illinois, Monday, 14 May 1900.
99. The Scranton Republican, Scranton, Pennsylvania, Thursday, 7 September 1899, p. 3; The Times, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Tuesday Morning, 19 September 1899, p. 2; The Democrat & Chronicle, Rochester, NY, Sunday, 1 October 1899, p. 14; The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Brooklyn, New York, Tuesday, 9 January 1900, p. 9; The Boston Herald, Boston, Massachusetts, Tuesday, 18 September 1900, p. 9; The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Brooklyn, New York, Tuesday, 9 October 1900, p. 5; The Morning Herald, Lexington, Kentucky, Wednesday, 13 February 1901, p. 2; The Cleveland Leader, Cleveland, Ohio, Sunday, 16 February 1902, p. 28; The Reading Times, Reading, Pennsylvania, Tuesday, 11 September 1906, p. 8.
100. The Plain Speaker, Hazleton, Pennsylvania, Friday, 20 April 1900, p. 4.
101. The Wilkes-Barre Times, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, Monday, 14 October 1901, p. 5.
102. “Maine Births and Christenings, 1739-1900,” database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/FW19-8ZZ : accessed 23 February 2016), Dora Ellen Merrow, 31 Oct 1858; citing ; FHL microfilm 11,587. Several newspaper articles use the name Merrow, rather than Merron when reporting on Eleanor. See for example, The Courier, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Sunday, 29 November 1908, p. 1, The Reno Gazette-Journal, Reno, Nevada, Wednesday, 2 December 1908, p. 2, or The Boston Post, Boston, Massachusetts, Saturday, 17 September 1892, p. 5.
103. The North American, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Monday, 25 September 1899, p. 9.
104. “Maine Births and Christenings, 1739-1900,” database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/FW19-8ZZ : accessed 23 February 2016), Dora Ellen Merrow, 31 Oct 1858; citing ; FHL microfilm 11,587.
105. 1860 US census, New Gloucester, Cumberland, Maine, p. 34 and 35, dwelling 267, family 288; 1870 US census, New Gloucester, Cumberland, Maine, p. 5 and 6, dwelling 42, family 33.
106. The North American, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Monday, 25 September 1899, p. 9; New York Dramatic Mirror, New York City, Saturday, 25 November 1899, p. 2.
107. See the included advertisement and playbill for La Tosca from 1888 and 1889 performances of Eleanor with Fanny Davenport, as well as her own account of this time reported in The North American, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Monday, 25 September 1899, p. 9 and in the New York Dramatic Mirror, New York City, Saturday, 25 November 1899, p. 2.
108. Most of this information comes from her own account published in the New York Dramatic Mirror, New York City, Saturday, 25 November 1899, p. 2; also The Boston Sunday Post, Boston, Massachusetts, Sunday, 27 May 1894, p. 11.
109. Boston Evening Transcript, Boston, Massachusetts, Wednesday, 20 September 1882, p. 4; The Boston Herald, Boston, Massachusetts, Sunday, 12 November 1882, p. 5; Eleanor may have played other parts in plays for the Boston Theater Company that year as she was listed as one of the members of the company (see The History of Boston Theater, 1854-1901 by Eugene Tompkins, Houghton-Mifflin Co., Boston and New York, 1908, p. 295.
110. The Boston Daily Globe, Boston, Massachusetts, Thursday Morning, 21 December 1876, p. 8; The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Brooklyn, New York, Sunday, 15 October 1893, p. 7; Portland Daily Press, Portland, Maine, Wednesday, 3 January 1877, p. 3; The Detroit Free Press, Detroit, Michigan, Sunday, 19 July 1896, p. 15.
111. The Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, Sunday, 20 January 1884, p. 4; The Buffalo Courier, Buffalo, New York, Tuesday Morning, 15 January 1884.
112. “New York, New York City Marriage Records, 1829-1940,” database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:24SN-42X : accessed 16 February 2016), Archibald Cowper and Dora Me...Ron, 02 Jul 1885; citing Marriage, Manhattan, New York, New York, United States, New York City Municipal Archives, New York; FHL microfilm 1,570,465.
113. The Salt Lake Tribune, Salt Lake City, Utah, Tuesday, 12 November 1895, p. 4; The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Brooklyn, New York, Saturday, 19 October 1895, p. 10 and Thursday, 1 October 1896, p. 4; The Tennessean, Nashville, Tennessee, Monday, 21 October 1895, p. 4; The San Francisco Call, San Francisco, California, Sunday, 10 November 1895, p. 23 and Sunday, 1 December 1895, p. 21.
114. The Buffalo Courier, Buffalo, New York, For the Week Ending, 9 February 1902, p.2.; The Morning Times, Washington, D.C., Tuesday, 12 March 1901, p. 5; The North American, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Monday, 25 September 1899, p. 9; Titusville Herald, Titusville, Pennsylvania, Saturday, 31 March 1900.
115. The Minneapolis Journal, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Saturday, 19 April 1902, p. 18.
116. The Evening World, New York City, Friday, 20 March 1891, p. 3.
117. The Sun, New York City, Friday, 20 March 1891, p. 8.
118. The World, New York City, Sunday, 25 February 1894, p. 38.

James H. Wallick, the Bandit and Cattle King – An Owner of Hollyrood Farm (Part 3)

Poster advertising James H. Wallick’s Cattle King staring Kate Paxton courtesy of the Huntington Digital Library, Jay T. Last Collection of Lithographic and Social History.

James Henry Wallick & his wife Mary (McInnis) Wallick  

(Owners of Hollyrood Farm for 7+ Years, 1888-1895, 1897, 1903)

Continued from PART 2

MORE MELODRAMAS, PERSONAL SUCCESS, AND FINANCIAL STRUGGLES
Even though the play continued to be a success for the next decade, James Wallick wanted a second play to perform along with it. Starting in 1886, a new romantic melodrama, The Cattle King, written by William H. Young, was added to the company’s repertoire. [64] The new drama was set in the Rocky Mountains and was similar in style and form to the Bandit King and featured “four trained horses and a trick donkey.” [65] When the play opened in Cleveland in November, a full house of 2,342 were on hand and several hundred others had to be turned away. [66] A review of the performance stated that, “rarely, if ever, has there been heard such shouting and demonstrations of approval, even within the walls of the Cleveland theater. Every act was followed with a curtain call, and the hero was frequently called upon to acknowledge the plaudits of the public with a bow. The drama was excellently staged with new and appropriate scenery, and for a play of that character no fault can be found with the acting.” The negative reviews that had accompanied the performances of the Bandit King were essentially non-existent for the Cattle King.

Advertisement placed by James H. Wallick in the Kingston Daily Freeman, Thursday Evening, 10 January 1889, courtesy of Newspapers.com. The ad is typical of those placed in papers around the country advertising the traveling showman and his productions.

The success of these two plays allowed Wallick to climb out of debt by about 1888 for the first time in many years. [67] During 1888 these two plays were performed almost continuously across the country in over fifty cities (see 1888 travel schedule earlier in this chapter). By the year’s end, Wallick was ready to move on and in December that year he offered the two plays for sale [68], but apparently he did not get the offer he wanted as he continued to perform them in future years.

  Other romantic melodramas followed over the next two decades, including: The Mountain King, Sam Houston, The Blue Grass King, Devil’s Island, When London Sleeps, Queen of the Highway, King of Rogues, The Guilty Mother, She Dared Do Right, Her Wedding Day, Held for Ransom, and The Dairy Farm. None were quite as successful as the first two plays. It was said that, “When Wallick, the Bandit King actor, wants a new play, he turns one of his horses around, changes the name of one of his old plays, and there you are.” [69] By 1902, Wallick was one of the wealthiest stage performers and managers in the country and had accumulated about $250,000 from the success of his plays. [70] But this was perhaps the height of his success and wealth.

Although James Wallick was good at making money, he was even more skilled at spending it. First, just as he was rising out of debt, he plunged back into it. It was in May 1888 that James and Mary purchased the 264 acres that became Hollyrood Farm near Circleville, New York from Henry Low for $32,000. [71] Later that same month he purchased a large quantity of trotter racing stock to begin breeding his own horses at Hollyrood. [72] The plan was to make the farm a breeding ground for trotters, and Wallick had some limited success. During these years, the Wallick’s seemed to enjoy the time each year that they were able to spend at Hollyrood and the local papers loved to report on their comings and goings. [73]

But horse breeding and raising stock turned out not to be the ‘golden goose’ for the Wallicks. Three years after buying the farm in 1891, Wallick began advertising his breeding stock, the most famous of which was his stallion Millionaire (see included advertisement published in Wallace’s Monthly, a leading horse breeding journal). He shipped six of his finest horses to Chicago in May of that year to be sold at auction. [74] Unfortunately, the auction was very disappointing and “none of the horses brought the prices they should have. There were several bad features that were against [the sale]. The first two or three days it was so cold that purchasers could hardly stand around where the sale was going on.” [75] Still, in 1892, the Los Angeles Times listed James H. Wallick as one of the wealthiest actors in the country making $20,000 to $30,000 annually. [76]

Advertisement placed by James H. Wallick in Wallace’s Monthly, May 1891 (available from Google Books).

Notwithstanding their published wealth, James and Mary Wallick were often near the edge of their financial limits. In August of 1893, James and Mary deeded Hollyrood farm to James H. Rogers of New York City for $1 and the assumption of their $16,000 mortgage. [77] Rogers also purchased the stock on the farm, including the trotters. The farm at the time of the sale was described as containing “a lot of fine buildings and a half-mile track.” [78] The Wallicks may have also been given some other property by Rogers in trade. To diversify the farm, Rogers purchased from a Mr. James Houston “100 sheep of a very fine breed” to raise. [79] But he was apparently not much of a sheep man and no better with his money that Wallick. He lost the farm a year later. [80] At the foreclosure sale, the trotter horses that James Wallick had so carefully bred and cared for were sold at cut rate prices, including his prized stallion, Millionaire, who was won with a bid of $1,700. [81] Following the sale in the fall of 1894 or perhaps early in 1895, James and Mary Wallick once again became the owners of the property, and, in fact, in October of 1894 they were doing well enough financially to purchase a second large house and adjoining property with other buildings in Newport, Rhode Island. [82]

However, the next Spring, April of 1895, they were again close to losing Hollyrood Farm to foreclosure. The local paper, The Middletown Argus, reported that: “Hollyrood farm was advertised by B. M. Cox, referee, to be sold under foreclosure of a mortgage held by the Middletown Savings Bank at 2 p. m., at the Russell House, to-day, but at the request of Mrs. Wallick and of the attorney for the holder of a second mortgage, the sale was adjourned until Wednesday, April 24th, at the same place and hour.” [83] When the property was finally auctioned on the 24th, James and Mary Wallick once again maintained their ownership of the property (now at 276 acres, 12 more than what they purchased from Henry Low) with a bid of $17,608.32. [84] Shortly after this foreclosure auction, on the 1st of May 1895, the Wallicks sold the farm, all 276 acres, to Morris Robinson, a Polish immigrant for $20,000. Part of the sale included Robinson taking on the remaining $12,000 in mortgage debt owed by the Wallicks. [85]

But James and Mary were not through with Hollyrood. Morris Robinson was not able to meet his obligations to the Wallicks and to the farm creditors. The Wallicks filed suit against Robinson in the Orange County Supreme Court in September of 1896 over a disagreement related to promissory notes, jewelry, and the farm property. [86] The case was decided the next April in favor of the Wallicks [87] and on the 2nd of June 1897, Hollyrood was once more on the auction block, and once again James and Mary Wallick put in the winning bid. [88] The property was deeded back to them the next day. [89] This time they held onto the farm for two months before selling it to Moses and Elizabeth Crow for $22,000 on August 7th [90]; this was ten thousand dollars less than they had paid for it in 1888. After the sale of the farm, James and Mary continued to make their home in Middletown, near James boyhood home that lay just a few miles to the northeast in Ulster County.

Continued in PART 4

NOTES and REFERENCES
64. The Patriot, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Wednesday, 8 September 1886, p. 4.
65. The Patriot, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Wednesday, 1 September 1886, p. 4.
66. The Cleveland Leader, Cleveland, Ohio, Tuesday, 2 November 1886, p. 3.
67. The Indianapolis News, Indianapolis, Indiana, Saturday, 2 June 1888.
68. The New York Dramatic Mirror, New York City, Saturday, 29 December 1888, p. 11.
69. Al Thayer, 1894, Ah There: Pickings from Lobby Chatter in the Cincinnati Enquirer, p. 170 (available online through Google Books).
70. Philharmonic: A Magazine Devoted to Music Art Drama, v. 2, p. 222 (available online through Google Books).
71. Orange County, New York Deeds Book 358, p. 593.
72. The Cleveland Plain Dealer, Cleveland, Ohio, Wednesday, 30 May 1888, p. 6.
73. The Middletown Times Press, Middletown, New York, Thursday, 14 July 1892, p. 7; Tuesday, 23 August 1892; Monday, 27 March 1893, p. 3; and Tuesday, 25 April 1893, p. 3.
74. The Middletown Times Press, Middletown, New York, Tuesday, 5 May 1891, p. 2.
75. The Middletown Times Press, Middletown, New York, Tuesday, 12 May 1891, p. 3.
76. Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, Sunday, 22 May 1892, p. 12.
77. Orange County, New York Deeds, Book 401, p. 567.
78. The Middletown Times Press, Middletown, New York, Wednesday, 23 August 1893, p. 3. See the chapter on Rogers and his partner Rowe for more on these short-term owners of the farm.
79. The Middletown Daily Times, Middletown, New York, Monday, 13 November 1893.
80. The Middletown Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Monday, 23 July 1894, p. 8 and Wednesday, 1 August 1894. p. 5. 
81. The Middletown Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Wednesday, 1 August 1894, p. 5.
82. The Newport Mercury, Newport, Rhode Island, Saturday, 20 October 1894, p. 1.
83. The Middletown Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Wednesday, 3 May 1895, p. 5.
84. Orange County Deeds, Book 415, p. 219.
85. Orange County, New York Deeds, Book 415, p. 222, dated 1 May 1895.
86. The Middletown Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Friday, 25 September 1896, p. 3; Thursday, 14 January 1897, p. 8; and Monday, 1 February 1897.
87. The Middletown Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Monday, 5 April 1897, p. 8.
88. The Middletown Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Wednesday, 2 June 1897, p. 5.
89. Orange County New York Deeds, Book 431, p. 271; Orange County New York Mortgages, Book 353, p. 449.
90. Orange County, New York Deeds, Book 431, p. 275; The Daily Argus, Middletown, New York, Monday, 28 June 1897, p. 8. 

James H. Wallick, the Bandit and Cattle King – An Owner of Hollyrood Farm (Part 2)

Poster advertising James H. Wallick’s production of The New Bandit King, probably from about 1902-1903. Posed in the image are Wallick and his famous acting horses.

James Henry Wallick & his wife Mary (McInnis) Wallick  

(Owners of Hollyrood Farm for 7+ Years, 1888-1895, 1897, 1903)

Continued from PART 1

THE WALLICK COMBINATION
The Wallack/Wallick Combination, James group of traveling actors, existed at least between the years 1874 and 1879. Combination groups differed from repertory groups in that they only offered one play, not several and they generally included a famous, headline actor/actress and more elaborate scenery than a repertory company. [26] James Wallick’s troupe performed plays in small and large cities across the country to generally favorable reviews. In 1878, his company, with Charlotte Thompson playing the lead, performed the classic Jane Eyre and received rave reviews. The Atchison Daily Champion reported, “Notwithstanding the inclemency of the evening, and the steady, drizzling rain that prevailed all day, Corinthian hall was almost packed to see and hear Charlotte Thompson’s rendition of Jane Eyre, in the drama of that name, supported by Wallack’s splendid theatrical combination. Never, in the theatrical history of Atchison, has such homage been paid a star as was bestowed upon Miss Thompson last evening. Many of the finer emotional parts of the drama were lost to the audience by the continued applause that met her better efforts, and when she assayed her strongest dramatic powers, the death like stillness that immediately proceeded the prolonged and enthusiastic applause told how acutely the audience were moved by her superb acting. It was a treat which our amusement lovers ever remember, and Mr. Wallack has the thanks of our Atchison people for his enterprise in bringing so brilliant a theatrical star to our city...Of Mr. James Wallack as a manager we cannot say too much. His companies have invariably been the best that have ever visited Atchison. It is a favorite scheme with many combination managers to bolster up a season’s business on the name of a popular star with a low salaried and inferior company to get the rag tail of the profession, which could be had for a song, fill in with anything, and come through the west, with what he calls a money making snap. It is such managers that bring the show business into bad repute. Mr. Wallack has never yet deceived our people. Only the strongest professional people are employed by him, and when his name heads a combination, it is sufficient guarantee that his people are actors and actresses. [27]

Advertisement published in the Daily Arkansas Gazette, Little Rock, Arkansas on Thursday, September 10, 1874.

In late 1879 and early 1880, however, while performing in the Midwest, the group began to fall apart, due most likely to financial troubles. [28] James and his company were disbanded by May 1880 and he took employment with Sells Brothers Circus as a “business manager.” [29] His stint with Sells Brothers was a short one for by March of 1881 he was working for Hilliard and Demott’s Great Pacific Circus and Menagerie as a “newspaper man.” [30] In this position it was likely that his duties included producing the advertisements for the circus and getting them into the appropriate newspapers as the company traveled.

But life was about to change for James H. Wallick. A playwright by the name of James J. McCloskey had written a play called the “Bandit King” about the exploits of Jesse and Frank James and in March of 1882 he sold the play to Wallick and a prominent, but unnamed, circus manager, likely Sheldon Hopkins Barrett, brother-in-law to the Sells brothers and manager of their No. 2 show that became known as Barrett’s Circus. [31] The New York Clipper reported:

J. J. McCluskey [sic.] has sold to Jas. H. Wallick and a prominent circus manager the entire rights of his sensational equestrian drama entitled “Jesse James, the Bandit King,” founded upon incidents in the lives of the noted James Brothers. The horses introduced in it will be, it is said, the best ever trained by George Bartholomew. There are fifteen strongly-drawn characters, and the scenery and mechanical effects will be new. It will receive its first representation in September next, and J. H. Wallick will be the general business manager. [32]

The timing of this purchase could not have been better. The James gang and their associates had been successfully terrorizing banks and trains for more than a decade and had become national icons. But about a month after the purchase of McCloskey’s play by Wallick, on the 3 April 1882, Jesse James was shot and killed by one of his own gang members, Robert Ford. [33] The nation was primed for the release of the play. Almost immediately Wallick tried to obtain the horses, garments, and firearms used by the outlaw. [34] He also inquired of the local press in Missouri for additional details on the life and character Jesse James. [35] In June, the press reported that Wallick had completed the purchase of two horses from the estate of Jesse James and that these horses would appear in the play. [36] The horses were shipped to New York in July where they were put into training under the direction of Barrett’s Circus (a subsidiary of Sells Brothers) equestrian trainer. [37]

THE BANDIT KING
James H. Wallick set about vigorously organizing a company of actors and preparing to debut the play. [38] However, while he and his circus partners were preparing to launch the play, other enterprising individuals also saw the possible financial advantage of cashing in on Jesse James and began to put on McCloskey’s play or something like it using a similar name. Wallick, supported by the playwright McCloskey took these as serious infractions of their ownership of the work and let it be known that such infractions would not be tolerated. [39]

By September the play was ready. Wallick kicked off the inaugural tour by linking up with the Ford brothers––one of whom it will be remembered killed Jesse James––for a showcase at Bunnell’s Broadway Museum in New York City from September 18th to the 23rd. [40] Although it does not appear that the play was performed at the museum during this week, part of the attraction for people to come to the museum was to see Jesse James’ horses, called in the museum advertisement Roan Raider and Light Bay (later renamed Bay Raider and Roan Charger). Even though questions were raised about the authenticity of the horses, Wallick had from the Ford brothers a signed affidavit stating that these were indeed the steeds that had belonged to Jesse James [41], and Wallick advertised them as such across the country. [42]

Jesse (25y) and Frank James (29y) taken in 1872 at Carolinda, Illinois. Photo courtesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Digital Visual Library.

Jesse James in April 1882 after he was shot and killed by his own gang member, Bob Ford. Photo by R. Uhlman, St. Joseph, Mo. reproduced courtesy of the U.S. Library of Congress.

After the closure of this grand opening show at the museum, Wallick and his company embarked on a whirlwind tour of at least 37 cities throughout the Midwest over the last three months of 1882. During the one month stretch between November 13th and December 12th, they appeared in at least nineteen cities with no performance stop lasting longer than two days. Reviews of the play were generally negative, sometimes strongly negative. The Chicago Daily Tribune in a lengthy review called the play a “hot and highly-spiced dish,” but noted that the Olympic Theater was packed every night and police had to be called in to keep the “eager crowds” from breaking down the doors. [43] The review goes on to lament that the “managers will probably make a barrel of money with it, while first-class attractions are forced to the wall for want of public support.” In Milwaukee, the play again drew an overflowing audience, but the critics viewed it as “idiotic slush” attracting the “cattle-yard critics, who when they indulge in the slow and laborious pastime of reading, tackle flashy literature of the dime novel or “penny-dreadful’ order.” [44] In Des Moines, Iowa the play was labeled as immoral and “respectable people” were advised to refuse to patronize it and particularly to keep their youth from attending. [45] The play was also panned by the Cleveland Leader as being trash put on as “a succession of scenes from the life of the outlaw strung together in a bungling way, so utterly bad that they could not save it.” [46] Nonetheless, the theater in Cleveland was full, with only a few empty seats. The Cleveland Herald commenting on the production stated that, “It matters very little whether newspapers do all in their power to discourage the production of such plays as Jesse James, the Bandit King...there will always be found in every large city a certain element who gloat in plays of that description, people so imbued with hero-worship that they will not stop at anything, and even go so far as to applaud and approvingly shout at a stage reproduction of the dastardly deeds that Jesse James was noted for.” The review goes on to say that, “...the character of James is drawn in such a heroic light, train robbery and thieving is put in such a tempting form before the eyes and minds of the young, that we consider it dangerous.” [47]

Show cities for the “Bandit King” after it first opened in September of 1882. The tour cites have been reconstructed here from reports in newspapers found on several websites, including: Genealogy Bank, Newspapers.com, Chronicling America (Library of Congress), and Newspaper Archive. Some cities may have been missed in this search.

The play was banned from being performed in late November in Battle Creek, Michigan because of its perceived immoral character. [48] But on November 29th, it was performed anyway under the name of “Old Kentuck.” The Marshall Daily Chronicle reported that, “On the evening of the play, the manager (James Wallick) simply changed the name to “Old Kentuck” and altered the names of some of the characters. The mayor and a squad of 20 extra policemen sworn in for the special occasion were promptly on hand to squelch the immoral ‘Jesse James,’ but were powerless against ‘Old Kentuck.’ They therefore made the best of it, and the mayor found an excuse for sitting through the play.” [49]

St. Louis was one of the few places where the play received a favorable review. The St. Louis Globe-Democrat reported that:

"The largest audience that has ever assembled in the People’s Theater was there last night to witness the opening representation of Jesse James, the Bandit King, a red-hot, blood-and-thunder drama from the pen of J. J. McCloskey, the author of Across the Continent and other extraordinary romantic plays. There were fully 2,400 persons in the house, which was crowded up and down stairs to the very last inch of standing room. The play was found to be all that the hearts of its patrons could desire. Nearly everybody in it, except the females and an inoffensive barkeeper, was a walking arsenal, and every act teemed with thrilling incidents beside which the works of recent English melodramatists...grow absolutely pale. There was the wildest enthusiasm from beginning to end of the performance, and the demonstration was perfectly justified by the situations, which were base upon the bloodiest and most daring events in the career of the James boys.” [50]

Advertisement from the Daily Gazette, Xenia, Ohio (Friday, 28 November 1884, p. 3).

The cast of the play in this inaugural season consisted of about thirteen male actors and three females, including both James H. Wallick, as Jesse James, and his wife Mary Wallick, in a minor role as a character named Sarah Jane. [51] In addition, there were approximately fifty others in supporting roles as highwaymen, railroad men, stage drivers, passengers, soldiers, and guards, as well as the two trained horses.

The success of the play, notwithstanding the negative reviews, attracted the attention of playwright Frank Lavarnie and his partner Sidney C. France. Lavarnie and France filed a lawsuit in November in the U.S. Circuit Court of Philadelphia asking that James H. Wallack, S. H. Barrett, and James J. McCloskey be restrained from continuing to produce Jesse James, the Bandit King because the play was plagiarized from their play entitled The James Boys, Jesse and Frank, the Missouri Outlaws. [52] However, the similarities between the two plays were not compelling enough for Judge Ludlow who heard the complaint; he dismissed the suit. [53]

The problem of negative reviews and perceptions of portraying immoral behavior as heroic continued to follow the traveling company into 1883. In March, after a performance in Newburyport, Massachusetts, the “Rev. Melville Smith, pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church caused the arrest of James H. Wallick, W. H. Hamilton, F. H. Quick, and Hewitt Smith, members of the troupe, for corrupting the morals of the young by making vice attractive.” [54] Wallick was held over for Grand Jury trial and a performance that was scheduled for  March 22 in Lowell, Massachusetts, two days after the arrest of the actors, was apparently cancelled. But these disruptions did not substantially slow down performances of the play. By early April, the decision on the immorality of the play was still undecided in the Massachusetts courts [55], but the show was again on the road with performances in towns and cities across New York and Pennsylvania. [56]

Even though ticket sales were brisk and Wallick was making money on the play, he may have been concerned by these accusations of immorality. So in new advertisements that appeared in 1883, he and his partners began to claim that the play was good, wholesome, family entertainment. “A play you can take your family to without the least hesitation. Not an immoral sentiment or action,” proclaimed the new ads. This may have helped some, but on through the rest of 1883 and into 1884, the play was still not welcomed in a number of communities. For example, it was not allowed to play or was performed under protest in Madison, Wisconsin [57], Jacksonville, Illinois [58], Rockford, Illinois [59], Leavenworth, Kansas [60], Huntington, Indiana [61], Emporia, Kansas [62], Mansfield, Ohio, and undoubtedly other communities. The Mansfield, Ohio Herald on 27 March 1884 reported:

The equestrian drama of the Bandit King, in which J. H. Wallick personated the character of the murderer and cut-throat, Jesse James, was advertised to be produced at Miller’s Opera House on Thursday evening last. That the tendency of such performances, by familiarizing the youth of the city with scenes of bloodshed, robbery and other crimes, and by making heroes out of outlaw and desperadoes, was corrupting to their morals, was the feeling of a number of people, and that the city might be saved from the disgrace of an exhibition so injurious to the minds of the rising generation, the following remonstrance, as signed, was placed in the hands of the Mayor on the morning of that day:

March 20, 1884 -- To His Honor, Mayor Stough: SIR: The undersigned respectfully request you to exercise your authority as Mayor, by suppressing the intended exhibition of the Jesse James Co. to-night and by directing further that hereafter all minstrel shows composed of women performers shall not be permitted at Mansfield. We ask you to do this, not because we object to any reasonable or proper form of amusement, but to prevent indecent and demoralizing exhibitions. We want to protect the young, and the old for that matter, from all shows, exhibitions or performances which are vicious or which present crime in a romantic and attractive form.

    James Reynolds           Charles Herr           George Brinkerhoff
    L.A. Armentrout           F.J. Kalmerten         John W. Jenner
    F.E. Tracy                     Simon Grove           H.M. Weaver
    Geo. W. Blymyer           Willis M. Sturges    A.D. Knapp
    Geo. F. Carpenter         A. Kallmerten         Jos. S. Hedges
    Benj. Blair                    N.N. Leyman           R.R. Maxwell
    Hiram R. Smith             J.E. Brown             S.A. Bronson
    F.M. Iams                      R. Lean                  P. Bigelow
    Martin Hammond         W.P. Clarke            F.A. Gilbert
    Ben Hurxthal                Jacob Steinrock      Chas. M. Lain
    James White                 Albert Berno           A.J. Gilbert
    A. Anderson                 J.M. Waugh             Geo. Knofflock
    Chas. F. Harding         S.A. George             B.L. Bevington
    J.A. Anderson              A. Scattergood        Henry Schiret
    Hobart Scattergood     A.P. Seiler              M.D. Harter

Later in the day one of the most prominent petitioners sought a personal interview with the Mayor and put the question direct to him: “Do you mean to stop the performance?” The Mayor said he thought he would, but intimated at the same time that he did not wish to involve the city in any litigation that might result unless the petitioners backed up their remonstrance with a bond. This, signed by a dozen or more wealthy citizens, was forthcoming, and the gentleman left the presence of His Honor with the assurance that the play should not be allowed.

Acting under the instructions of his superior, Marshall Weil in the afternoon called upon M.L. Miller, lessee of the Opera House, and notified him verbally that should they attempt to produce the drama, he would be compelled to exercise his authority. Mr. Miller referred the Marshall to Mr. Wallick, who demanded “the papers” usual in such cases. These could not be produced, and the Marshal, having obeyed the orders of His Honor, retired.

The Mayor, in his endeavors to retain the good will of Mr. Harter (the long list of other petitioners was ignored), then hunted up and asked the advice of two or three different lawyers as to the most effective way to bring about the desired result. He was told to examine the statutes covering the case in point, and that the best plan to pursue would be to serve an injunction on the manager of the show. Near the hour for ringing up the curtain, the Mayor ran across Mr. John A. Connolly, the City Solicitor -- “my legal adviser”, as referred to by the Mayor when found in consultation with that gentleman in an uptown grocery by a HERALD reporter -- and the two proceeded to the Solicitor’s office to hunt up authorities and to get out the necessary warrants. The reporter went directly to the Opera House to await developments and tarried until the performance was well under way, but no officer armed with power to hustle Jesse James and troupe headlong down the stairway appeared, and the play proceeded to the end undisturbed.

The Mayor, after passing the greater part of the day at some saloons, finally wandered into the Opera House -- to judge for himself of the immorality of the play -- and was a deeply interested spectator of the blood and thunder scenes there depicted.

Notwithstanding the success of the play, these calls of immorality and the uproar it created, seemed to have some effect. In 1885, James H. Wallick changed the main character’s name from Jesse James to Joe Howard and dropped Jesse James from the title so that it became simply The Bandit King. [63]

Advertisement (highlights added) that includes claims of clean, family oriented drama for the Bandit King. Clipping is from the Decatur, Illinois Daily Review (Wednesday, 24 October 1883, p. 1).

Continued in PART 3

NOTES AND REFERENCES
26. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination_company.
27. The Atchison Daily Champion, Atchison, Kansas, Friday, 15 February 1878, p. 4.
28. The Inter Ocean, Chicago, Illinois, Saturday, 13 December 1879, p. 6; The Chicago Daily Tribune, Sunday, 14 December 1879; The Chicago Daily Tribune, Thursday, 25 December 1879, p. 8; New York Dramatic Mirror, Saturday, 17 January 1880, p. 3; The Inter Ocean, Chicago, Illinois, Saturday, 24 April 1880, p. 6.
29. New York Dramatic Mirror, Saturday, 8 May 1880, p. 4; Daily Arkansas Gazette, Little Rock, Arkansas, Saturday, 28 August 1880, p. 8.
30. Galveston Daily News, Galveston, Texas, Sunday, 27 March 1881.
31. William L. Slout, Olympians of the Sawdust Circle: A Biographical Dictionary of the Nineteenth Century American Circus: The Borgo Press, San Bernardino, California, 1998, p. 19. S. H. Barrett and his circus appear in several advertisements and news articles about James H. Wallick in 1882 and 1884. He is undoubtedly the unnamed partner mentioned in the New York Clipper article.
32. The New York Clipper, New York City, Saturday, 4 March 1882, p. 829.
33. The Saint Paul Globe, Saint Paul, Minnesota, Tuesday, 4 April 1882, p. 1.
34. Fort Wayne Sentinel, Fort Wayne, Indiana, Saturday, 8 April 1882.
35. The Atchison Globe, Atchison, Kansas, Monday, 10 April 1882.
36. The Bloomington Daily Leader, Bloomington, Indiana, Saturday, 24 June 1882.
37. Cincinnati Daily Gazette, Cincinnati, Ohio, Saturday, 15 July 1882, p. 6.
38. The Topeka Daily Capital, Topeka, Kansas, Tuesday, 18 April 1882, p. 3; St Louis Globe-Democrat, Saint Louis, Missouri, Sunday, 9 April 1882, p. 9; The Atchison Globe, Atchison, Kansas, Monday, 10 April 1882, p. 3.
39. The Times Picayune, New Orleans, Louisiana, Sunday, 9 July 1882, p. 10.
40. New York Herald, New York City, Wednesday, 20 September 1882, p. 3.
41. New York Herald, New York City, Wednesday, 20 September 1882, p. 3; Kansas City Times, Kansas City, Missouri, Wednesday, 9 March 1892, p. 4.
42. Daily Republican-Sentinel, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 10 October, 1882, p. 4; Globe-Democrat, Saint Louis, Missouri, 6 November 1882, p. 3; Bloomington Daily Leader, Bloomington, Indiana, Saturday, 24 June 1882.
43. Chicago Daily Tribune, Chicago, Illinois, Sunday, 8 October 1882, p. 20.
44. The Daily Republican-Sentinel, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Tuesday, 10 October 1882, p. 4.
45. The Daily Nonpareil, Council Bluffs, Iowa, Friday, 27 October 1882, p. 8.
46. The Cleveland Leader, Cleveland, Ohio, Tuesday, 19 December 1882, p. 7.
47. The Cleveland Herald, Cleveland, Ohio, Tuesday, 19 December 1882.
48. Detroit Free Press, Detroit, Michigan, Thursday, 23 November 1882, p. 4 and Thursday, 30 November 1882, p. 4.
49. Marshall Daily Chronicle, Marshall, Michigan, Friday, 1 December 1882.
50. St. Louis Globe-Democrat, St. Louis, Missouri, Monday, 6 November 1882, p. 3.
51. The Cincinnati Inquirer, Cincinnati, Ohio, Sunday, 31 December 1882, p. 13.
52. The Times Philadelphia Sun, Sunday, 12 November 1882, p. 6.
53. The North American, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Wednesday, 15 November 1882.
54. National Republican, Washington, D.C., Monday, 26 March 1883, p. 1.
55. The Arizona Weekly Citizen, Tucson, Arizona, Sunday, 8 April 1883, p. 1.
56. See for example, The Olean Democrat, Olean, New York, Tuesday, 17 April 1883, p. 1, and The Daily City News, New Castle, Pennsylvania, Friday, 3 April 1883, p. 1. The play also performed in April in a number of other cites including Jamestown, NY, Port Jervis, NY, and Titusville, PA.
57. The Evening Gazette, Pittston, Pennsylvania, Friday, 9 October 1883, p. 1.
58. The Daily Republican, Decatur, Illinois, Wednesday, 31 October 1883, p. 3.
59. The Rockford Register, Rockford, Illinois, Monday, 15 October 1883.
60. The Holton Recorder, Holton, Kansas, Thursday, 22 November 1883, p. 2.
61. The Indiana Herald, Huntington, Indiana, Wednesday, 21 November 1883, p. 1. 
62. The Iola Register, Iola, Kansas, Friday, 23 November 1883, p. 9.
63. The Boston Herald, Boston, Massachusetts, Sunday, 12 April 1885, p. 14.