Event Comment: Opera, music by Sacchini &c. [not performed, according to Public Advertiser, 8 Nov., because of illness of two singers, one being Sga Sestini. A Letter by William Lee in The Public Advertiser (7 Nov.) notes that beginning in 1772 he had served refreshments in a room which served also as a passage to the boxes; alterations made to enclose the passage were made in 1773; Lee was charged #60 a year for the room (with the fire and light at his own expense). Then Elizabeth Smith, who had had charge of concessions died. In 1774 Lee was charged #160 plus #80 for coals and light. Hence Lee lost #130 and was saved only by a benefit by the graciousness of the Nobility and Gentry.

Event Comment: Mainpiece: By Particular Desire. Paid half a years rent to Duke of Bedford to Mich. Last #164 2s. 10d.; Ditto to Mr Wegg to ditto #57; Mrs Scott (laceman) #99 7s.; Mrs Chitty for coals #92 10s.; Mrs Sutton for women's cloathes #12; Tabor and Pipe 7 nights #3 13s. 6d.; Two additional flutes #3. Receipts: #272 1s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book). At the Play Mr Garrick acted and the house was so full you could not have thrust your little finger in, not withstanding the plague sweeps us away by dozens (Cumberland's Letters; Hampden, Journal)

Event Comment: Benefit for the Author of the Alterations (Hopkins Diary). [On this day Garrick wrote to Mrs Abington, relative to his practice in casting new plays: "That I may hear no more of this or that part in Mr Murphy's play, I now again tell you that every author since my management distributed his parts as he thinks will be of most service to his interest, nor have I ever interfered, or will interfere, unless I perceive that they would propose something contrary to common sense" (Harvard Theatre Collection, Autograph Letter Signed). Charges: #84 (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Afterpiece: By Desire. Paid 2 extra Flutes 15th Inst. 10s.; Paid author of the Sultan's benefit balance 21 Dec. last #60 7s. 6d.; Mr Hopkins bill for Licensing to the 26th inst. #8 8s. (Treasurer's Book). [N.B. Bickerstaff the author was living in exile presumably in St Malo, France. Garrick knew his address from a letter 24 June 1772. Whether the funds were forwarded to him, no record seems to exist. Presumably they were.] Receipts: #218 15s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: "A Gentleman who is as mad as myself about the School remark'd that the Characters upon the Stage at the falling of the Screen stand too long before they speak-I thought so too the first Night-he said it was the same on the 2d & was remark'd by others-tho they should be astonish'd & a little petrify'd, yet it may be carry'd to too great a length" (David Garrick to R. B. Sheridan, 12 May 1777, in The Letters of David Garrick, ed. D. M. Little and G. M. Kahrl, 1963, III, 1163). Receipts: #195 13s. (184.7; 10.19; 0.7)

Event Comment: Benefit for the Author [see 2 Dec.]. [A letter from Fosbrook, the box-book keeper, to Garrick gives the number of spectators in the house on this night (Garrick, Private Correspondence, II, 323), as follows: Boxes Pit 1st Gall. 2ed Gall.@1st Account 234 310 330 210@2nd Account 80 30 160 80@Total: 1,434.] Receipts: #166 14s. 6d. (140.8.0; 25.18.6; 0.8.0; tickets: none listed) (charge: #105)

Event Comment: [Miss Harper was taken ill; The Irish Widow was thereupon substituted and begun, but the audience was clamorous, and insisted on The Son-in-Law. A long delay ensued until the proper acters had been brought back to the theatre and until they were dressed. Mrs Jewell read Miss Harper's part. While trying to find out what the audience wanted, Bannister retorted sharply from the stage to one of the noisiest of the objectors. This action caused several letters to be written to various newspapers debating the right of a "servant of the public" to reprimand a member of the audience even when that member might be in the wrong (Morning Chronicle, 16 Sept., et seq.).] The last Night of the Season

Event Comment: [In mainpiece the playbill retains Aickin as Dionysius, but on the Kemble playbill his name is deleted. Of the name substituted in MS all but the 1st two letters have been cut by the binder. For Mahon as Dionysius see 12 Feb. 1778.] Receipts: #212 5s. (208/16; 3/9)

Event Comment: By Permission [of the Lord Chamberlain]. 1st piece [1st time; c 5, author unknown. Authors and speakers of Prologue and Epilogue unknown]. 2nd piece [1st time; m.int i, author unknown]. 3rd piece [1st time; f 2, by Walley Chamberlain Oulton, altered from The Letter Writers, by Henry Fielding. MSS of none of these pieces in Larpent; none of them published]. The Doors to be opened at 5:30. To begin at 6:30

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, author unknown; frequently attributed to Thomas Vaughan, but his authorship denied in a letter written by him to editor of the Oracle, 13 Feb. 1796. Author of Prologue unknown. Epilogue by Edward Topham (European Magazine, Nov. 1784, p. 393). MS: Larpent 670; not published; synopsis of plot in London Magazine, Nov. 1784, p. 389]. Receipts: #161 2s. 6d. (142/9/0; 18/0/6; 0/13/0)

Event Comment: By Permission of the Lord Chamberlain. Benefit for a Performer, thirty years a Servant of the Publick at Covent-garden and Haymarket Theatres [unidentified]. Mainpiece: Written by the ingenious Mrs Behn, with Alterations by a Gentleman well known in the Dramatick World and Republick of Letters. The Characters new dressed in the Habits of the Times. [Writers and speakers of Prologue and Epilogue unknown.] Afterpiece: Altered from Sir John Vanbrugh. The Doors to be opened at 5:00. To begin at 6:00

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, by Thomas Holcroft, based on Le Glorieux, by Philippe Nericault, dit Destouches. In 1793 reduced by the author to an afterpiece of 3 acts. Prologue and Epilogue by the author (Knapp, 101, 307). This play was originally attributed to James Marshall (Public Advertiser, 5 Feb.); on 8 Feb. he wrote a letter to the editor of the Oracle, stating that "The School for Arrogance is not mine, but Mr Holcroft's...By appearing for a time as the ostensible author I hope I have contributed to heal what was most unaccomodating between Mr Harris and Mr Holcroft." And see Genest, VII, 24, 27.] Oracle, 19 Feb. 1791: This Day is published The School for Arrogance (1s. 6d.). "If Mrs Wells could be prevailed upon to speak out, so that the audience might hear, it would be of some advantage to the new play. At present, the performer who happens to be on the stage with her has it all in confidence" (Gazetteer, 9 Feb.). Receipts: #186 11s. (181.8; 5.3)

Event Comment: Benefit for Vestris Sen. Tickets to be had of Vestris, No. 2, Hay-market. 2nd ballet: A new Historical Dance [in 3 acts]. The Music entirely new, composed by VanEsch. With new Dresses, Machinery, and Decorations. [Morning Chronicle, 15 Apr., printed a letter from Vestris complaining that the manage had not fulfilled his promises as regards the scenery. Vestris outlines what he had planned, and concludes with a description of the "3rd and last act, the Olympus descending, which shall fill the whole stage with clouds, and a Glory in which one shall see Jupiter with his whole Celestial Court; Hercules shall appear there mounting in the Olympus to receive his Apotheosis; the Ballet shall be concluded by a general acclamation of joy and admiration of all the people assembled in the place."

Event Comment: [The playbill retains Sga Calvesi, but Morning Post, 14 Apr., prints a letter from her dated 13 Apr., stating that "she returns her most grateful thanks to the Subscribers and the Public for their indulgence in dispensing with her performance yesterday evening. She was one of the many unfortunate performers who were left unpaid in the year of 1783 by Mr Taylor. Deprived of resources, she naturally contracted debts, for one of which (yesterday evening going to obey her duty to the Public) she was arrested, and so expeditiously and secretly hurried away as to deprive her of the assistance of the Manager or her Friends to liberate her 'till an hour too late for Performance." The name of the singer who took her place is not known.

Event Comment: "Notoriety and Tom Thumb were to have been performed by command of Their Majesties; but, in consequence of the news from France [the execution of Louis XVI on 21 Jan.], at five o'clock a letter was received from the Vice-Chamberlain, stating that Their Majesties could not honour the theatre with their presence, and the farce was changed from Tom Thumb to the new Pantomime" (Morning Chronicle, 24 Jan.). The Doors to be opened at 5:30. To begin at 6:30. Receipts: #352 2s. 6d

Event Comment: Under the Patronage of H. R. H. the Prince of Wales, H. R. H. the Duke of York, and H. R. H. the Duke of Clarence. Benefit for a Fund for the Relief of the Wounded Seamen, and also for the Widows and Orphans of the Brave Men who fell in the late Glorious Action, under Admiral Lord Viscount Duncan [see 16 Oct.]. The Tickets for the Boxes are issued under the Direction of a Committee consisting of the following Noblemen and Gentlemen, who have obligingly undertaken to attend to the arrangement of the Evening: The Duke of Leeds, The Duke of Bedford, The Earl of Guildford, The Earl of Thanet, The Right Honorable the Lord Mayor [Brook Watson], Mr Alderman Combe, M. P., Mr Alderman Skinner, John Julius Angerstein, Esq. Tickets and Places for the Boxes not disposed of by the Committee to be had of Fosbrook at the Box Office, Little Russell-Street, and at the Bar of Lloyds Coffee House. Ladies and Gentlemen having Privilege of the Theatre are requested by the Stewards to waive the use of it for this Evening. [Address by Richard Cumberland (European Magazine, Nov. 1797, p. 339). True Briton. 23 Nov. 1797, prints a letter from the Chairman of Committee of Subscribers to the performers of the theatre, thanking them for not "accepting the usual emolument on the night of performance."] Receipts: #631 8s. (357.17.6; 57.4.6; 1.11.0; money extra left at the doors: 2.14.6; tickets: 212.0.6) (charge: #161 0s. 6d.)

Event Comment: 2nd piece [1st time; D 3, by Henry Neuman, based on Der Opfertod, by August Friedrich Ferdinand von Kotzebue. Text (R. Phillips, 1799) assigns no parts]. Boxes 5s. Pit 3s. 1st Gallery 2s. 2nd Gallery 1s. The Doors to be opened at 6:00. To begin at 7:00 [same throughout season]. Places for the Boxes to be taken of Rice, at the Theatre. The Theatre, since the last Season, has been newly Decorated. [Beginning with 19 June the playbill: Printed by T. Woodfall, Drury Lane; on 4 Sept.: No. 104, Drury Lane.] Morning Chronicle, 27 June 1799: This Day is published Family Distress (2s.). Gentleman's Magazine, May 1800, pp. 406-8, prints a letter from "J. B." in which strong exception is taken to Kotzebue in general, and this play in particular. "Theatrical entertainments have an extensive influence upon the manners of Society. When well regulated, and the pieces for representation well selected both as to matter and manner, they may be esteemed friendly to morality, and improvers of public taste. But what shall we say when both these ends are disregarded; when moral virtue is banished from the scene, and purity of taste is destroyed by affected language and pantomimical decorations? Improvements in almost every art and science have been within a few years, rapid and important. But that is not the case with the stage; nor can it be, while Kotzebue and his friends usurp the venerable boards of Shakespeare." The writer then, in sarcastic terms, outlines the plot of Family Distress. [Pope and Miss Chapman were both from cg.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Jean Chappuzeau, Le Theatre Francois (Paris, 1675), states that he saw a revival of this play in 1668. Pepys, Diary: Sent my wife and Deb. to see Mustapha acted...and so to the Duke of York's playhouse, and there saw the last act for nothing. Where I never saw such good acting of any creature as Smith's part of Zanger; and I do also, though it was excellently acted by [...], do yet want Betterton mightily

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I to the Duke of York's house, to a play, and there saw The Mad Lover, which do not please me so well as it used to do, only Betterton's part still pleases me. But here who should we have come to us but Bab. and Betty and Talbot, the first play they were yet at; and going to see us, and hearing by my boy, whom I sent to them, that we were here, they come to us hither, and happened all of us to sit by my cozen Turner and The.

Event Comment: Lady Mary Bertie to Katherine Noel, 16 March 1670@1: I have sent you the songs that were in the ballet (HMC, 12th Report, Part V, Vol. II, page 23)

Event Comment: Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, pp. 180-81) believes that a performance occurred on this day, as well as on 16 Feb. 1674@5, Shrove Tuesday, the date often specified in advance statements. For previous notices, see 2 Feb. 1674@5, 15 and 22 Dec. 1674. Edition of 1675:....followed at innumerable Rehearsals, and all the Representations by throngs of Persons of the greatest Quality...at the 20th or 30th, for near so often it had been Rehearsed and Acted....And the Composer of all the Musick both Vocal and Instrumental Mr Staggins. Langbaine. (English Dramatick Poets, p. 92): a Masque at court, frequently presented there by Persons of great Quality, with the Prologue, and the Songs between the Acts: printed in quarto Lond. 1675....This Masque was writ at the Command of her present Majesty: and was rehearsed near Thirty times, all the Representations being follow'd by throngs of Persons of the greatest Quality, and very often grac'd with their Majesties and Royal Highnesses Presence. John Evelyn (The Life of Mrs Godolphin): [Mrs Blagge] had on her that day near twenty thousand pounds value of Jewells, which were more sett off with her native beauty and luster then any they contributed of their own to hers; in a word, she seemed to me a Saint in Glory, abstracting her from the Stage. For I must tell you, that amidst all this pomp and serious impertinence, whilst the rest were acting, and that her part was sometymes to goe off, as the scenes required, into the tireing roome, where severall Ladyes her companions were railing with the Gallants trifleingly enough till they were called to reenter, she, under pretence of conning her next part, was retired into a Corner, reading a booke of devotion, without att all concerning herself or mingling with the young Company; as if she had no farther part to act, who was the principall person of the Comedy...[With] what a surprizeing and admirable aire she trode the Stage, and performed her Part, because she could doe nothing of this sort, or any thing else she undertooke, indifferently....Thus ended the Play, butt soe did not her affliction, for a disaster happened which extreamly concern'd her, and that was the loss of a Diamond of considerable vallue, which had been lent her by the Countess of Suffolke; the Stage was immediately swept, and dilligent search made to find it, butt without success, soe as probably it had been taken from her, as she was oft inviron'd with that infinite crowd which tis impossible to avoid upon such occasion. Butt the lost was soon repair'd, for his Royall Highness understanding the trouble she was in, generousely sent her the wherewithall to make my Lady Suffolke a present of soe good a Jewell. For the rest of that days triumph I have a particular account still by me of the rich Apparell she had on her, amounting, besides the Pearles and Pretious Stones, to above three hundred pounds (ed. Samuel Lord Bishop of Oxford [London, 1847], pp. 97-100). See also 15 Dec. 1674

Event Comment: In November 1678 the Duke of Modena sent his troupe of comedians to London. They remained there until mid-February 1678@9 but apparently played only six times in three months. For an account of this troupe, see A. L. Bader, The Modena Troupe in England, Modern Language Notes, L (1935), 367-69, and I. K. Fletcher, Italian Comedians in England in the 17th Century, Theatre Notebook, VIII (1954), 86-91. See also Calendar of Treasury Books, 1676-1679, pp. 1160, 1230, and Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 124

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the fact that Medbourne, who is in the cast, was sent to Newgate Prison on 26 Nov. 1678 establishes November as the latest probable date for the first production. The play was not licensed for printing until 19 Jan. 1678@9. A Compleat List of all the English Dramatic Poets (London, 1747): This Play had no Success on the Stage (p. 168)