Event Comment: Mrs John Evelyn to Mr Terryll: The censure of our plays comes to ee at the second hand. There has not been any new lately revived and reformed, as Catiline, well set out with clothes and scenes; Horace, with a farce and dances between every act composed by Lacy and played by him and Nell, which takes; one of my Lord of Newcastle's, for which printed apologies are scattered in the assembly by Briden's order, either for himself who had some hand in it, or for the author most; I think both had right to them (The Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ed. Bray, IV, 14)

Event Comment: Benefit for Shuter and Miss Haughton. Tickets at stage door. [For criticism of Shuter and Miss Haughton, see Genest, IV, p. 363, from The Present State of the Stage in Great Britain and Ireland, 1753. Nineteen of the Fifty-five pages of this pamphlet defend the stage on classicial authority and moral grounds from attacks by the religious bigots, and present an ideal picture of a manager, laying under some contribution, it would seem, the character of a manager presented ten years earlier (1743) in Queries to be Answered. The author especially likes the moral of Tate's alteration of Lear. The remaining pages give a paragraph or two of criticism to the leading actors and actresses in some of their most affecting parts (sixteen pages to Drury Lane Performers, all of whom appear in the author's eye to be either "Excellent" or "Very Good.") The remaining space is devoted to the performers at Covent Garden and at the Theatre Royal in Dublin. All those spoken of fare well in the hands of this bound-to-be pleased critic. Shuter is here commended for ability to play an Old Man convincingly though he was but 22 years old, and to play at all considering his lack of education. He possesses a great fund of drollery, and bids fair to be as great in low comedy as it is possible for man to conceive.' Miss Haughton described as an actress of promise. Seems never to have got the better of a lisp, and a Newcastle manner of pronouncing the letter 'r.'] Receipts: #290 (Cross)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; CO 3]: Written by [John] O'Keeffe. The Music by Shield. With a new French Medley Overture, new Dresses, &c. The Words of the Songs to be had at the Theatre. [Mrs T. Kennedy was from the Newcastle theatre.]

Event Comment: [Miss Grist was from the Newcastle theatre.] Receipts: #294 7s

Event Comment: [Miss Campbell was from the Newcastle theatre.] Receipts: #276 4s. 6d. (174.12.6; 100.12.0; 1.0.0)

Event Comment: On this date, L. C. 5@16, p. 101 (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 10n) Nathaniel Lee's The Duke of Guise was banned. John Drummond to Marquis and Duke of Queensberry, 16 July 1682: Ther is a play hear to be acted that maks a great business, for the Duke of Munmuth has complained of it, and they say that notwithstanding it is to be acted sometime nixt weik. They call it the Duke of Guise, but in the play the true story is cheinged to the plott time hear (HMC, Buccleuch-Queensberry MSS., 1903, II 108). Newsletter, 29 July 1682: A play by Mr Dryden, termed the Duke of Guise, wherein the Duke of Monmouth was vilified and great interest being make for the acting thereof, but coming to His Majesty's knowledge is forbid, for though His Majesty be displeased with the Duke yet he will not suffer others to abuse him (HMC, 15th Report, Part VII, 1898, p. 108). Newdigate newsletters, 29 July 1682: A play having been made [by] Mr Dryden termed ye Duke of Guise supposed to Levell att the villifying the Duke of Monmouth & many other protestants & great Interest made for the Acting thereof but bringing to the knowledge of his Matie the same was forbidd for though his Maties pleasure is to be dissatisfyed and angry with the Duke of Monmouth, yet hee is not willing that others should abuse him out of a naturall affection for him (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 81)

Event Comment: On this day a quarrel occurred at lif between Henry Killigrew and George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, but the play is not named in the various accounts of the affair. For details, see HMC, 12th Report, Part VII, p. 51; and Carl Niemeyer, "Henry Killigrew and the Duke of Buckingham", Review of English Studies, XII (1936), 326-28. Pepys, Diary: 22 July: Creed tells me of the fray between the Duke of Buckingham at the Duke's playhouse the last Saturday (and it is the first day I have heard that they have acted at either the King's or Duke's house this month or six weeks) and Henry Killigrew, whom the Duke of Buckingham did soundly beat and take away his sword, and make a fool of, till the fellow prayed him to spare his life; and I am glad of it; for it seems in this business the Duke of Buckingham did carry nimself very innocently and well

Event Comment: See 27 Feb. 1668@9. Pepys, Diary: I did meet Sir Jeremy Smith, who did tell me that Sir W. Coventry was just now sent to the Tower, about the business of his challenging the Duke of Buckingham, and so was also Harry Saville to the Gate-house....So, meeting with my Lord Bellassis, he told me the particulars of this matter; that it arises about a quarrel which Sir W. Coventry had with the Duke of Buckingham about a design between the Duke and Sir Robert Howard, to bring him into a play [The Rehearsal] at the King's house, which W. Coventry not enduring, did H. Saville send a letter to the Duke of Buckingham, that he had a desire to speak with him. Upon which, the Duke of Buckingham did bid Holmes, his champion ever since my Lord Shrewsbury's business, go to him to know the business; but H. Saville would not tell it to any but himself, and therefore did go presently to the Duke of Buckingham, and told him that his uncle Coventry was a person of honour, and was sensible of his Grace's liberty taken of abusing him, and that he had a desire of satisfaction, and would fight with him. But that here they were interrupted by my Lord Chamberlain's coming in, who was commanded to go to bid the Duke of Buckingham to come to the King, Holmes having discovered it

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The Prologue to the Queen of Arragon Acted before the Duke of York, Upon his Birthday, and Epilogue to the Same To the Duchess, by Samuel Butler, are in The Poetical Works of Samuel Butler, ed. R. B. Johnson (London, 1893), II, 175-77. Newsletter, 12 Oct. 1668: The Duke of York's birthday will be celebrated with the usual solemnities, a play being prepared for the entertainment of the ladies. The piece chosen is The Queen of Arragon. It will be acted in the Guard Chamber at St James's (HMC, Fleming MSS., 12th Report, Appendix, Part VII, p. 59). Pepys, Diary: But the Duke of York being gone out, and to-night being a play there, and a great festival, we would not stay

Event Comment: On this day and on Friday the 20th the Duke's players gave The Impertinents; or, The Sullen Lovers or Sir Salomon. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 29) lists these as the two plays presented by the Duke's Company, but no contemporary statement indicates for certain which play was given on each day. The Journal of Sir Richard Bulstrode: Yesterday [19] at five of ye clocke, the Court were entertained with a comedy acted by the Duke's player (The Bulstrode Papers, 1879, I, 139). Saturday 28 May 1670: The absence of the court which continues at Dover till Wensday next makes us very barren of news. There is the greatest gallantry and mirth imaginable. The Dukes players have beene there all the time past came up yesterday and the kings goe downe this day (Aston Papers, Vol. XVI, Add. Mss. 36916, folio 182)