It is an adaptation of Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, an 1886 novella by the Scottish author Robert Louis Stevenson.

The story upsets Utterson because Jekyll recently made a new will that gives his estate to a mysterious friend named Edward Hyde.

In later versions (revised after its premiere), the second act contains an additional scene[1] in which Jekyll returns home; his friends think he is protecting Hyde.

The play was produced at the Boston Museum, Broadway's Madison Square Theatre and the Lyceum Theatre in London's West End with the following casts:[2] The Scottish author Robert Louis Stevenson wrote Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde in 1885 when he was living in Bournemouth, on England's south coast.

[10] Although he doubted that the novella would make a good play, he agreed to help Mansfield with the project, and they worked quickly to complete the adaptation before other, unauthorized versions could be staged.

[17] The tour began at the Chestnut Street Theatre in Philadelphia[18] and visited over a dozen cities, including several returns to Boston and New York.

Although the play was scheduled to premiere in September 1888, Mansfield discovered that Bandmann planned to open his competing version in August, and he rushed to recall his company from vacation.

Longmans brought legal actions against the unauthorized versions; its efforts blocked a William Howell Poole production from opening at the Theatre Royal in Croydon on July 26.

That day, Fred Wright's Company B presented one performance of its adaptation at the Park Theatre in Merthyr Tydfil before it was also closed.

[33] On August 7, 1888, three days after the Lyceum opening of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Martha Tabram was discovered stabbed to death in London's Whitechapel neighborhood.

Some press reports compared the unidentified killer with the Jekyll and Hyde characters, suggesting that the Ripper led a respectable life during the day and became a murderer at night.

The letter writer, who had seen him perform as Jekyll and Hyde, thought that Mansfield could easily disguise himself and commit the murders undetected.

[37] Although some press reports suggested that Mansfield stopped performing Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in London because of the murders, financial reasons are more likely.

[55][56] As Hyde, Mansfield was hunched over with a grimacing face and claw-like hands; he spoke with a guttural voice and walked differently than he did as Jekyll.

Theories included claims that Mansfield had an inflatable rubber prosthetic, that he applied chemicals, and that he had a mask hidden in a wig, which he pulled down to complete the change.

[61] In contrast to the novella, in which the physical transformation of Jekyll into Hyde is revealed near the end, most dramatic adaptations show it early in the play, because the audience is familiar with the story.

[64] Although making the story more straightforward and less ambiguous was not necessary for a theatrical adaptation, Sullivan's approach was typical of the era's stage melodramas and made the material more acceptable to audiences.

[70] Mansfield's portrayal of Jekyll is less stereotypically good than later versions, and he thought that making the characterizations too simplistic would hurt the play's dramatic quality.

[63][72] Hyde behaved lecherously towards Agnes and cruelly towards his landlady, and his behavior towards women in this and later adaptations led to new interpretations of the character.

[73] However, Stevenson denied that this was his understanding of the character in his original story;[74] he said Hyde's immoralities were "cruelty and malice, and selfishness and cowardice", not sexual.

[7][80] When it opened at the Madison Square Theatre, a New York Times reviewer complimented Mansfield for his acting and for overcoming the difficulty of presenting the story's allegorical material onstage.

[81] According to a New-York Daily Tribune reviewer, Mansfield gave excellent performances as Jekyll and Hyde despite a few technical production flaws.

[82] A Life review praised Sullivan's adaptation, particularly his addition of a love interest for Jekyll, and complimented the performances of Mansfield, Cameron and Harkins.

[39] A Sunday Times reviewer appreciated Mansfield's performance as Hyde and in the transformation scenes, but not as Jekyll, and called the overall play "dismal and wearisome in the extreme".

[84] According to a Daily Telegraph review, Stevenson's story was unsuitable for drama and Sullivan had not adapted it well, but the performances of Mansfield and his company were praiseworthy.

[91] As the most successful early adaptation of Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, Sullivan's play influenced subsequent versions.

[100][101] Weltman says the design for Hyde's residence in the movie may have been influenced by Mansfield's set decoration choices, based on descriptions given in contemporary reviews of the play.

[102] The first sound film based on Sullivan's play was a 1931 version, produced and directed by Rouben Mamoulian and distributed by Paramount Pictures.

[107] This version was nominated for three Academy Awards: Joseph Ruttenberg for Best Cinematography, Black-and-White; Harold F. Kress for Best Film Editing, and Franz Waxman for Best Score of a Dramatic Picture.

[110] However, many later adaptations diverged from the model established by Sullivan and the early films; some returned to Stevenson's novella, and others spun new variations from aspects of earlier versions.