Event Comment: Tragedy never acted. By James Thomson. Characters New Dress'd. But as it is rather more fashionable to run mad about Mr Thomsons's play, I will change my theme and talk to you of Tancred. I want much to know how you like it, at this distance I would lay any wager you do not like it so well as your sister does, who certainly cannot be your sister and not have been to see it long ago. Everybody agrees that no play was ever so much improved in acting, at least since the Booths and Bettertons. That first scene expecially, where Siffredi discovers to Tancred who he is, pleased me almost beyond anything I ever saw, indeed even before I saw it, that scene was my favourite. But what do you think of the story, and what of the style?-A Series of Letters between Mrs Elizabeth Carter and Miss Catherine Talbot, I, 60 (dated strangely 2 March). [On 26 April, the Daily Post published a letter by Bellario on Tancred and Sigismunda, discussing the kind of support it received]: A very remarkable new Lord of the Treasury was proud of appearing its Foster Father, and attended at the public rehearsals; the first night of the performance this celebrated person and his friends in the Box with him (all very lately most flaming Patriots) were seen clapping their hands at the following remarkable speech: First of You All...To Quit Mistakes. [The letter also discussed political aspects of the play, then the poetry of the lines. The author heard that three hundred lines were cut out after the first performance, and was of opinion that double that amount would have been beneficial.

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 King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Being full of my desire of seeing my Lord Orrery's new play this afternoon at the King's house, The Black Prince, the first time it is acted; where though we come by two o'clock, yet there was no room in the pit, but we were forced to go into one of the upper boxes, at 4s. a piece, which is the first time I ever sat in a box in my life. And in the same box come, by and by, behind me, my Lord Barkeley and his lady; but I did not turn my face to them to be known, so that I was excused from giving them my seat; and this pleasure I had, that from this place the scenes do appear very fine indeed, and much better than in the pit. The house infinite full, and the King and Duke of York was there. By and by the play begun, and in it nothing Particular but a very fine dance for variety of figures, but a little too long. But, as to the contrivance, and all that was witty (which, indeed, was much, and very witty), was almost the same that had been in his two former plays of Henry the 5th and Mustapha, and the same points and turns of wit in both, and in this very same play often repeated, but in excellent language, and were so excellent that the whole house was mightily pleased with it all along till towards the end he comes to discover the chief of the plot of the play by the reading of a long letter, which was so long and some things (the people being set already to think too long) so unnecessary that they frequently begun to laugh, and to hiss twenty times, that, had it not been for the King's being there, they had certainly hissed it off the stage. But I must confess that, as my Lord Barkeley says behind me, the having of that long letter was a thing so absurd, that he could not imagine how a man of his parts could possibly fall into it; or, if he did, if he had but let any friend read it, the friend would have told him of it; and, I must confess, it is one of the most remarkable instances that ever I did or expect to meet with in my life of a wise man's not being wise at all times, and in all things, for nothing could be more ridiculous than this, though the letter of itself at another time would be thought an excellent letter, and indeed an excellent Romance, but at the end of the play, when every body was weary of sitting, and were already possessed with the effect of the whole letter, to trouble them with a letter a quarter of an hour long was a most absurd thing. After the play done, and nothing pleasing them from the time of the letter to the end of the play, people being put into a bad humour of disliking (which is another thing worth the noting), I home by coach, and could not forbear laughing almost all the way home, and all the evening to my going to bed, at the ridiculousness of the letter, and the more because my wife was angry with me, and the world, for laughing, because the King was there, though she cannot defend the length of the letter

Event Comment: [This is the only occasion in the 18th century when a play was acted in London on this date. "The performance at the Haymarket on the 30th of January has been noticed by his Majesty in a manner which is still a topic of conversation in the higher circles...There will be no more theatrical performances on the 30th of January" (London Chronicle, 28 Feb.). On 3 Feb. the Lord Chamberlain wrote to Sheridan as follows: "Sir--Information has been received at this Office that Theatrical Entertainments were exhibited at the Theatre, under your direction, in St. James's Haymarket on the 30th of Last Month, contrary to all precedent, and repugnant to Decency, being the Anniversary of the Martyrdom of King Charles the First. I do not know by what Authority such a Step was taken but, as Chamberlain of His Majesty's Household, think it my Duty to desire that you will be pleased to Cause the Practice to be discontinued in future. I am, Sir, Your Obedient, Humble Servant, Salisbury" (MS Letters to Sheridan from Various Correspondents,II, 64, in Harvard Theatre Collection). The Morning Chronicle on 31 Jan. offered another opinion: "It gave us infinite pleasure that last night we happily broke through one of the most absurd fasts in the calendar. The Managers of Drury Lane, with proper regard to the public, rescued them from the common dullness of a 30th of January." But the absurd fast remained in force until 1843.] Receipts: #339 18s. (291.4; 40.0; 8.11; ticket not come in: 0.3)

Event Comment: WWilliam Hint in a Letter (Daily Gazetteer, 31 Oct.): Mr Sheridan? was cast most improperly, into the part of Horatio; which naturally call'd for Mr Delane? in that house....but why was Mr Garrick? left out of the play. Would he not have look'd, spoke and acted Lothario?

Event Comment: WWilliam Hint in letter (Daily Gazetteer, 31 Oct.): Here again we find Mr Delane ill cast for the sake of casting Mr Sheridan?; Still worse, Need I say how much better this play would have been acted had Mr Delane? play'd Pierre, and Mr Garrick? Jaffier

Event Comment: Benefit Lacy. Afterpiece: A new Satyrical, Allegorical, Political, Philosophical Farce, [Apparently by Lacy.] Daily Advertiser, 30 April: Yesterday I accidentally call'd in at the Theatre in the Hay-Market, and saw the Rehearsal of a new Farce call'd Fame...Which is to be acted there on Wednesday next...for the Benefit of Mr Lacy the Author. As I am neither acquainted with him, nor the Master of the Playhouse, I cannot be accus'd of Partiality, in affirming, that I think this the best Farce this Age has produc'd. It seems to be writ in Imitation of Shakespear, and entirely calculated for the present Taste. The Characters are strong, lively, majestic, and just; the incidents natural and moving; the Conduct regular; the Distresses extremely affecting; the Stile sublime; the Sentiments grand, full of Patriotism; and the Catastrophe so masterly wrought up, that, I am persuaded, no Farce whatsoever, now acting, will draw more Tears than this. But what affected me beyond all, was, the Zeal, the exemplary Zeal of a worthy Magistrate, who so strictly adheres to the very Letter of the Law, as to send a rich and honest Merchant, and Freeholder, to the House of Correction, as a sturdy Beggar, or Loiterer. I could enlarg in its Praise, but fear I may do the Author wrong, in raising your Expectations too high. See it, and I am convinc'd you will entertain the same Sentiments of it, as does Your Humble Servant, James Lacy. Alias Fustian, alias Sour-Wit, alias--But hold:--If I should be arraign'd for the Murder of this Farce, so many Alias's will half condemn me before I am heard

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time at a public theatre; C 3, by Elizabeth Craven, Baroness Craven, afterwards Margravine of Anspach, 1st acted privately at the Town-Hall, Newbury, 6 Apr. 1780. Text (G. Riley, 1781) assigns no parts. Prologue by Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Epilogue by Joseph Jekyll (see text)]: With new Dresses, &c. "The Prologue [the first 30 lines and the concluding couplet of which were used by Sheridan as the Prologue to Pizarro (see dl, 24 May 1799)] was so much admired that at the request of the Duchess of Devonshire and several other of the nobility it was respoken after the piece; but as King was absent from the theatre, it was delivered by Palmer" (Town and Country Magazine, May 1780, p. 23 ). "The chief singularity was that [Lady Craven] went to it herself the second night, in form; sat in the middle of the front row of the stage-box, much dressed, with a profusion of white bugles and plumes, to receive the public homage due to her sex and loveliness. The Duchess of Richmond, Lady Harcourt,...Mrs Damer, Lord Craven,...and I were with her. It was amazing to see so young a woman entirely possess herself-but there is such an integrity and frankness in her consciousness of her own beauty and talents, that she speaks of them with a naivete as if she had no property in them, but only wore them as gifts of the gods. Lord Craven on the contrary was quite agitated by his fondness for her and with impatience at the bad performance of the actors, which was wretched indeed, yet the address of the plot, which is the chief merit of the piece, and some lively pencilling carried it off very well, though Parsons murdered the Scotch lord, and Mrs Robinson (who is supposed to be the favourite of the Prince of Wales) thought on nothing but her own charms, or him. There is a very good though endless prologue written by Sheridan and spoken in perfection by King, which was encored (an entire novelty) the first night: and an epilogue that I liked still better and which was full as well delivered by Mrs Abington, written by Mr. Jekyl. The audience, though very civil, missed a fair opportunity of being gallant, for in one of those ----logues, I forget which, the noble authoress was mentioned, and they did not applaud as they ought to have done, especially when she condescended to avow her pretty child and was there looking so very pretty...Yet Lady Craven's tranquillity had nothing displeasing;...and it was tempered by her infinite good nature, which made her make excuses for the actors instead of being provoked at them" (Walpole [28 May 1780], XI, 178-80). Public Advertiser, 14 July 1781: This Day at Noon will be published The Miniature Picture (price not listed). Receipts: #144 9s. (94.9; 48.3; 1.17)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; T 5, by Richard Brinsley Sheridan, adapted from Die Spanier in Peru, by August Friedrich Ferdinand von Kotzebue. Prologue by Richard Brinsley Sheridan (consisting of the 1st 30 lines and the concluding couplet of his Prologue to The Miniature Picture); Epilogue by the Hon. William Lamb (see text). For publication see 1 July]: The Scenery, Dresses, and Decorations entirely new. The Musick, Airs and Chorusses incidental to the Piece composed and selected [from Gluck, Sacchini, &c. (Morning Chronicle, 25 May)] by Kelly. The Symphony preceding the Play, and those between the Acts, composed for the occasion by Dussek. The Scenery designed and executed by Marinari, Greenwood? Jun, Demaria, Banks, Blackmore, &c. [See Theatre Notebook, XX, 30-32, for suggestion that one scene was designed by DeLoutherbourg.] The Machinery, Decorations, and Dresses under the direction of Johnston, and executed by him, Underwood, and Gay. The Female Dresses designed and executed by Miss Rein. Account-Book, 14 May: Paid Miss Anne? Plumtree [i.e. Plumptree] for Spaniards in Peru #25. [It was this translation of Kotzebue's play that Sheridan adapted for the stage as Pizarro. For an account of the relationship between the translation and its adaptation see Marcella Gosch, "'Translators' of Kotzebue in England," Monatshefte fur deutschen Unterricht, XXXI, 178-83.] Paid Johnston [on this and other days] for sundries for Pizarro #135 14s. "It requires certainly more than English patience and spirits to sustain any Play of five hours in length. It is not one of the worst features of Pizarro that it contains a great deal which may be spared, without injury to the piece [see 25, 27 May]" (Morning Chronicle, 25 May). Receipts: #540 3s. 6d. (406.0.6; 17.5.0; 0.4.0; tickets sold by Fosbrook's Office: 116.14.0)

Event Comment: [P$Peter Promptwell writes a letter (Daily Gazetteer) commenting on William Hint's two letters. (See 13, 20, 23 Oct. He discourses on the history of the English stage, emphasizing that theatres were better directed heretofore than they are at present.

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time; B 3, by Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Prologue by the Hon. Richard Fitzpatrick (Public Advertiser, 3 Aug. 1781)]: With a Procession. [This was included in all subsequent performances. For the Sea Fight see 20 Nov.] With New Scenes, Dresses and Decorations. The Scenery designed by DeLoutherbourg, and executed under his direction. The Doors to be opened at 5:15. To begin at 6:15 [same for rest of season, except on 1 May 1780]. "The House was so crowded that there were many disturbances, one so great that Smith when he had nearly finished 'To be or not to be' was obliged to leave the Stage, and when the noise subsided, to return and begin the soliloquy again... As The Critic took up two hours and a half in performance, it must of necessity be considerably shortened" (Morning Chronicle, 1 Nov.). "The scene of the battle with the Armadav [was] executed in the most masterly manner. The Motion of the sea, the engaging of the ships, and the destruction occasioned by the fire-ships were happily contrived and accurately represented" (London Chronicle, 1 Nov.). Account-Book, 9 Nov.: Paid R. B. Sheridan on Acct. of Critic #320. Receipts: #241 19s. 6d. (222.11.0; 19.3.6; 0.5.0)

Event Comment: Benefit for Havard. Fairy Tale deferr'd, Miss Wright ill. This morning Mr Obrien was married to Lady Susan Strangeways. Mr Powell made an Apology & Mr King play'd his part in the Farce. N.B. This Night Mrs Yates sent me word She could play no more this Season (Hopkins). Mr Obrien married, cou'd not come. Mr King play'd his Part Mr I. Palmer King's (Cross Diary). Mr O'Brien being married this morning to Lady Susan Strangeways [sic] after the Play Mr Powell made apology that Mr O'Brien had sent word he was not able to do his part [Lovel], and that Mr King had undertaken it at every short warning, and hoped for their indulgence.-Mr J. Palmer did Mr King's part [Sir Harry's Servant]. This Night Mrs Yates gave notice she could play no more this season (Hopkins Diary-MacMillan). Receipts: #214 2s. (MacMillan); charges: #64 4s. [Profit to Havard: #149 18s.

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of this production is determined by a letter (see below). For a discussion of the origin and development of this play, see Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, pp. 274-76. A song, Why shou'd the world mistake, the music composed by John Eccles and sung by Mrs Hudson, is in Thesaurus Musicus, 1695. An unidentified letter, 22 March 1693@4: We had another new play yesterday, called The Ambitious Slave, or a Generous Revenge. Elkanah Settle is the author of it, and the success is answerable to his reputation. I never saw a piece so wretched, nor worse contrived. He pretends 'tis a Persian story, but not one body in the whole audience could make any thing of it; 'tis a mere babel, and will sink for ever. The poor poet, seeing the house would not act it for him, and give him the benefit of the third day, made a present of it to the women in tie house, who act it, but without profit or incouragement (Edmond Malone, An Historical Account of the Stage in Plays and Poems of William Shakespeare [London, 1821], III, 163-64). Gentleman's Journal, March 1694: 'Tis not altogether strange for a Play to be less kindly receiv'd, immediately after one that has deservedly ingross'd all the Applause which the Town can well bestow in some time on new Dramatic Entertainments. Perhaps Mr Settle may partly impute to this, the want of success of a new Tragedy of his which was lately acted, 'tis called, The Ambitious Slave; or, The Generous Revenge. [This play followed Southerne's The Fatal Marriage.

Event Comment: To the writer of the letter signed Hotspur in the Morning Chronicle 13 Jan. 1774; Sir: I solemnly disavow myself the writer of any anonymous letter in this or any other Newspaper relative to the School for Wives and as to the villainous accusation respecting any personal insult offered me at Liverpool I pronounce it to be a notorious lie. I now call on you to stand forth with your name and your proofs or the world will be convinc'd you are an infamous malignant assassin. Thursday Nt. Jan. 13 1774. James Reddish (Winston MS 10, from Dr Burney News Cuttings). Receipts: #255 12s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5]: By the celebrated Henry Fielding; and never yet performed or published. With new Scenes, Dresses, &c. [and incidental music by Michael Arne. Prologue by David Garrick. Epilogue by the same (see text)]. Public Advertiser, 12 Dec. 1778: This Day is published The Fathers (1s. 6d.). "This play was written by Mr Henry Fielding, some years before his death. Mr Garrick saw it at that time. Mr Fielding gave the only fair copy he had of it to his friend Sir Charles Williams, of whose judgment he entertained a high opinion. Sir Charles soon after went abroad, and the comedy was mislaid. Mr. Fielding communicated this circumstance to his family on his death-bed; and enquiry was made for it, but without effect. At length Mr Thomas? Johnes, Member for Cardigan, looking over Sir Charles's books, found a comedy in manuscript, which he read, and, approving, had it transcribed and sent to Mr Garrick for his opinion, who, like Archimedes, cried out, 'This is the lost sheep! This is Mr Henry Fielding's play!' Mr Garrick communicating it to Mr Johnes, Mr Johnes immediately sent the original manuscript, which was in Mr Fielding's hand-writing, to the family, with his best wishes for its success, promising to assist it to the utmost of his power" (Gentleman's Magazine, Dec. 1778, p.586). See also, for corroboration of the above and for other details, Wilbur L. Cross, The History of Henry Fielding, 1918, III, 99-104. Receipts: #210 11s. 6d. (186.6.0; 23.19.6; 0.6.0)

Event Comment: London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 16 May: We hear that Mr Mechlin has sent a Letter to a principal Persons belonging to Drury-Lane Theatre, signifying his great Sorrow, and his Intention to surrender himself next Sessions at the Old Bailey

Event Comment: [W$William Hint sent another letter to the Daily Gazetteer on the excluded actors concluding that the Town is deprived by some mismanagement or other of some of the best in their walks. Discusses raised prices, the Manager's Cartel, and Macklin's exclusion from both houses.

Event Comment: Garrick put the finish hand to the sale of half the patent &c. to Dr Ford, Linley, Ewart, and Sheridan for #35,000 to be delivered over in June next. Garrick it was said rais'd #12,000 last year by subscription to pay New Ornamentation, which cost #3000, so that the remaining #4500 and #35,000 was no bad interest for the #5,000 he gave in 1747. New property valuation giving him a...(Winston MS 11, from Burney News Cuttings). Paid Mr Palmer, spermacetti candle Bill #186 13s.; Mr Machin, Chorus, 19 times #4 15s. Rec'd Mr Percy's rent 1 year to Mich Last, #10; Stopages #14 5s. Receipts: #167 2s. (Treasurer's Book). From the Morning Chronicle, 19 Jan.: "David Garrick, Esq., has signed and sealed for the sale of his share in the patent and Property of Drury Lane Theatre. The purchasers are Dr Ford, Mr Ewart, Mr Linley, and Mr Richard Sheridan. The purchase money is #35,000. The public may now therefore depend upon it that this will be the last season of Mr Garrick's performing. The new proprietors as an act of their own, have stipulated that Mr Garrick shall continue to keep that box which has of late years been set apart for the accomodation of his family. Mr Garrick intimated last night to the audience his having sold his share in Drury Lane Theatre, by answering in the part of Abel Drugger , on being asked if he had any interest at the theatre, 'I had some, I don't know what I may have.'

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Not acted these 16 years [not acted since 27 Oct. 1758]. With Alterations [by Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Prologue by David Garrick]. The Characters new dressed. This Play is revived with Alterations (by R. B. Sheridan Esq) and a new occasional Prologue written by Mr Garrick? and spoken by Dodd, both well received. Miss Essex made her first Appearance upon this stage in Silvia, a small mean Figure and shocking Actress, so bad that she is to do the Part no more. Reddish was very imperfect in Vainlove from the Beginning, but was so very much so in the last Act, that the Audience hissed very much, and cryed out, 'Off, Reddish, Off!" He went forward, and addressed them as follows, 'Ladies and Gentlemen, I have been honoured with your Favour and Protection for these ten years past, and I am very sorry to give any cause for your Displeasure now; but having undertaken the Part at a very short Warning, in order to strengthen the Bill, and having had but two Rehearsals for it, puts it out of my Power to do Justice to the Part, or myself.' The Play then went on. So great a Lye was never delivered to an Audience by any Actor or Actress before. He had the Part at least six weeks in his Possession, and repeated Notice to be ready in it, and six Rehearsals was called for it,--indeed, he attended but three. Vernon undertook to study the Part at eleven o'clock to-night, and to perform it to-morrow (Hopkins Diary). [Miss Essex was from the hay.] Receipts: #209 6s

Event Comment: Not acted in 30 years. Principal Characters new Dress'd. Written by Otway (General Advertiser). Mr Woodward did ye part of Malagene in which he took off Mr Foote & would have many of ye Actors but the Audience grew so outragious, that he was forc'd to desist ye 4th & 5th Acts were much hooted, Mr Havard in a part where he says Whir was severely treated, nor could he ever appear after in ye play, but the whole Audience echoed that Word--it was given out again, wch so enrag'd the Audience yt they call'd loudly for Garrick, but as he was not this Night at the House, they pull'd up the Benches, tore down ye King's Arms, & wou'd have done much more mischief had not Mr Lacy qone into the Pit, & talk'd to 'em, what they resented was giving out a piece again after they had damn'd it--the Gallery resented ye Guards being sent in--Mr Lacy was oblig'd to go upon the Stage after & tell 'em I had given out the play again, as ne'er a Manager was present to give other Directions--In his Argument Mr Lacy call'd a Witness in ye pit, saying that Gent: next to ye painter knows I was in ye pit when ye Guards went into the Gallery, so I cou'd not send 'em this painter after ye rout came behind the scenes & was angry for being call'd painter (his name was Hudson) but at length he as well as ye rest was pacified--and we gave out Provok'd Husband (Cross). [See Foote's retaliation in Daily Advertiser, 26 Jan.] Paid Capt. Turber 1!2 year's rent #11 3s. 4d. (Treasurer's Book). Receipts: #140 (Cross); #137 12s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: For an account of the play, see John Wilson's The Cheats, ed. Milton C. Nahm (Oxford, 1935). It was licensed on 6 March (p. 124), acted, then forbade on 22 March in an order: Letter to Mr Tho. Killigrew: Signifying the Ks Pleasure that the New Play called the Cheates be no more represented till it be reuiewed by Sir Jo. Denham & Mr Waller. 22 March. 1662-3 (p. 130). Abraham Hill to John Brooke, 28 March 1663: P.S. The new play, called The Cheats, has been attempted on the Stage; but it is so scandalous, that it is forbidden (Familiar Letters of? Abraham Hill, [London, 1717], p. 103. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16) concerning Lacy: @For his just Acting, all gave him due Praise,@His Part in the Cheats, Jony Thump, Teg and Bayes,@In these Four Excelling, The Court gave him the Bays.

Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Egerton. Afterpiece: Not acted in 3 years. [See 3 April 1769.] [Genest in Volume of News Clippings (Harvard Library) quotes Edinburg Evening Courant of 29 April: Last night between the play and the farce at Drury Lane Theatre, a disturbance arose which continued for a full hour. Mr Weston it appeared was in debt to the managers a considerable sum of money, on which account they had impounded all the cash received on his benefit night. This the comedian did not like, and therefore yesterday evening sent word that he could not play, that he was arrested and detained in a springing house, but desired that no apology should be made of his being 'suddenly ill' (the usual stage plea) as it would be an egregious falsehood. After the play Mr Vernon came forward and inform'd the audience that Mr Weston 'was suddenly taken ill' and could not perform. Weston instantly started up in the front of the upper Gallery, and inform'd the house that he was not ill, but in the custody of an officer, and if the audience would have patience he'd inform them of the whole affair. A long altercation ensued. The Managers sent on Mr Vernon repeatedly; and after much pro and con Weston came down and played his part of Sneak." The article must have referred to the 24th of April, when Weston play'd Sneak in The Mayor of Garratt. The Managers promis'd the Town a publication of the whole affair."] Paid Mr Brathwait for men's cloaths #33s. Receipts: #200 8s. Charges: #70 12s. Profit to Mrs Egerton: #129 16s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time; P 3 (except for 1st two performances, which were 2), by James Harvey D'Egville. Synopsis of action (C. Lowndes [1795])]: A Representation calculated to shew the extent and powers of the New Stage, and which has been in preparation during the whole of the Season (notice on playbill of 10 Feb.). The Musick composed by Krazinsky Miller. The Scenes, Machinery, Dresses and Decorations are entirely new. The Scenery designed and executed by Marinari, and his Assistants. The Machinery designed by Cabanel, and executed by him and Jacobs. The Dresses and Decorations by Johnston and Miss Rein. Powell: [The pantomime] was astonishingly well received, except the chorus of 'Happy Pair' at the end, which was so shamefully managed that the performers met with, what they much deserved, great disapprobation. The acting of the piece was in general well conducted, but the Processionv [The Piece will conclude with the Entry of Alexander into Babylonv, and his Marriage with Statirav (playbill)], for want of room to arrange behind, was unavoidably sent on in a very confused manner...Alexander's car could not be sent on this evening, not being yet complete. [These difficulties are somewhat surprising, in view of the fact that the pantomime had had 54 rehearsals. And see 13 Feb.] 11 Feb.: Chorusses to New Ballet rehearsed at 10; Natural Son at 11; New Ballet at 11; New Ballet (full rehearsal) at 6; 12 Feb.: New Ballet rehearsed at 12. Receipts: #504 3s. 6d. (417.2.0; 83.16.6; 3.5.0)