rohman, as is well known, would never make a contract with his stars.
When some one urged him to make written agreements, he said:

"No, I won't do it. I want them to be in a position so that if they ever
become dissatisfied they know they are free to leave me."

Like all his other stars, William Collier had no contract with Charles,
merely a verbal understanding extending over a period of years. After
this agreement expired and another year and a half had gone by, Collier
one day asked Frohman if he realized that their original agreement had
run out. Frohman looked up with a start and said:

"Is that so? Well, it's all right, Willie, you know."

"Of course," said Collier, and that ended it.

The next Saturday when Collier got his pay-envelope he found inside a
very charming letter from Frohman, which said:

_I'm sorry that I overlooked the expiration of our agreement. I
hope that you will find a little increase in your salary
satisfactory._

There was an advance of one hundred dollars a week.

Frohman literally loved the word "star," and he delighted in the
so-called "all-star casts." He had great respect for the big names of
the profession; for those who had achieved success. He liked to do
business with them.

In speaking about "all-star casts," he once said to his brother:

"I have to look after so many enterprises that I have no time to conduct
a theatrical kindergarten in developing actors or playwrights save where
the play of the unknown author or the exceptional talents of the unknown
actor or actress appeal to me strongly. There is an element of safety in
considering work by experts, because the theaters I represent need quick
results."

In reply to the oft-repeated question as to why he took his American
stars to London when they could play to larger audiences and make more
money at home, he said:

"In the first place, such exchanges constitute the finest medium for the
development of actress or actor and the liberalizing of the public. Face
to face with an English audience the American actress finds herself
confronted by new tastes, new appreciations, new demands. She must meet
them all or fail. What does this result in? Versatility, flexibility,
and, in the end, a firmer and more comprehensive hold upon her art."

When Frohman was asked to define success in theatrical management he
made this answer:

"The terms of success in the theater seem to me to be the co-operating
abilit