ALS: Saturday, September 27, 1919

Provincetown, Mass.
Sept. 27, 1919.

My dear Madden:

Williams' split-week idea sounds like a bum deal to me. And Chicago at that! Chicago means nothing in my young life. I am as unknown out there as Moses. While in New York a play of mine will have some advance standing, with the critics, at least. Suppose the Rice play is a big financial success and "Beyond" does not draw in comparison to it. You will find the split-week plan will immediately go by the board and "Beyond" will be lost without ever having had a fair chance. Is he -- W -- willing to give a guarantee in black and white that this will not be the case? And will he also guarantee that "Beyond" will receive a production this season in New York as per contract no matter what the results of the Chicago affair are? He must understand that my interests demand a showing in New York where I am known and have a certain amount of reputation; and unless N.Y. gets a chance to praise or pan "Beyond" I consider its production an unfair thing to me personally, and I would prefer having the script right home in the old desk -- should there be no market for it elsewhere which I by no means believe is the case.

If Williams will go on record with the guarantees I mention above, then the Chicago fiasco (I think it will prove to be one) may take place. If not, I will hold out for the letter of our contract.

Here is where I stand: I have no confidence in this two-a-week scheme. I firmly believe it will react disadvantageously on both Rice's play and mine. There is no money in it for me for devil knows how long even if "Beyond" were a success. I think my interest requires a N.Y. hearing where the critics know my work and have lauded it in the past, and have expressed curiosity regarding my long plays. (Does W. ignore this asset which the play will not have in Chi.?)

Then again, rehearsals for "Chris" will start before long. Tyler has written me I will be wanted in the near future. How can I be in Chi & N.Y. at one time? And who is to pay my freight to Chi? The W. contract makes no allowance for this, and I am damned sure I cannot afford it in these days of inflated fares.

Added to all this, I am exasperated to the last pitch with W. and his methods. Why doesn't he go ahead with the play on its own feet? He certainly thought it good enough to stand alone when he bought it. He can hardly deny that I have some artistic standing and he ought not to humiliate my play by making it dependant on another. (I think he'll find the public will be adversely influenced against "Beyond" by this same idea).

So there you are! Knowing how I feel, can you wonder I'm giving no cheers for the Chi. stuff? Let W. know that I don't give one tinker's damn for this Chi. production as fifty-fifty arranged. (He's even picked out a Jonah theatre -- the Studebaker!). I'd rather give "Beyond" to the Theatre Guild, if they wanted it, without royalty -- or put it on myself down at the Provincetown Players. In the latter case, I'm darn sure I could get every critic in N.Y. to come and see it, anyway.

Now you know all my objections and you can see if W. will effectually meet them by iron-bound guarantees. He cannot say I'm upsetting his plans at the last moment. I've never been consulted, or you, either. On his own head be it!

With very best regards,

Very sincerely yours,

Eugene O'Neill.

P.S. (over)

If W. "comes clean" in satisfying my objections, will you kindly get the exact dates from him as to when rehearsals will start in Chi., when the company leaves, etc.? Under present circumstances, with so many things threatening at once, I want to know all dates as far in advance as possible -- and even then it depends a lot on things up here whether I'll be able to meet them or not.

As for "The Straw", I don't know anything about Selwyns. I'd like to sell it immediately, of course, but if the other plays go on this year, I could well afford to have "The Straw" held over in the contract if the prospect of a fine production by some big man was in question. What do you think?