Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not certain, but it was very likely this day. Writing on 12 May 1688, Peregrine Bertie states that it had been acted nine days successively. If the ninth performance fell on Friday 12 May, the premiere probably occurred on Wednesday 3 May. The Prologue and Epilogue, printed separately, are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 261-63. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 41): This Play by its Excellent Acting, being often Honour's with the presence of Chancellor Jeffereies, and other great Persons had an Uninterrupted run of 13 Days together. Note, The Poet receided for his third Day in the House in Drury Lane at single Prizes 130 l. which was the greatest Receipt they ever had at that House at single Prizes. Dedication, Edition of 1688: This, I must confess, made me hope for success upon the Stage, which it met with, but so great, as was above my expectation (in this Age which has run mad after Farces) no Comedy, for these many years, having fill'd the Theatre so long together: And I had the great Honour to find so many Friends, that the House was never so full since it was built, as upon the third day of this Play; and vast numbers went away, that could not be admitted. For Leigh as Belfond Sr, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 147-48; and for Underhill as Lolpoop, I, 154-55. For further comment upon the play, see 12 May 1688

Event Comment: [As afterpiece Public Advertiser announces The Rival Candidates, but see Hopkins Diary, 12 Oct.] The Managers met again to-day, but nothing settled. Hamlet was given out. I saw Mr Sheridan, he told me that Mr Lacy and he had agreed that no Play should be given out, nor any Bills put up, till they had settled this Affair, which was to be done to-Morrow at Mr Wallis's (the Attorney's) where they were all to dine. I waited on Mr Lacy, who agreed to the same, and no Bills or Paragraph were sent to the Papers. All the Business of the Theatre is at a Stand, and no Rehearsal called. Wed. 16th--Mr Sheridan, Dr Ford and Mr Linley dined today by Appointment with Mr Wallis where Mr Lacy was to have met them; about four o'clock he sent a verbal Message that he could not come to Dinner, but would wait upon them in the Evening, and about nine o'clock he came, and everything was settled to the Satisfaction (of them all) and a Paragraph sent to the Papers, and the Hypocrite and Christmas Tale was advertised for Friday, but no Play was to be done on Thursday--Covent Garden did not play on Friday (Hopkins Diary). Public Advertiser, 16 Oct., summarizes the proprietors' dispute: the Drury Lane patent had been purchased [in 1747] by David Garrick and James Lacy. On his death Lacy had devised his half-share to his son, Willoughby Lacy; on his retirement from the stage Garrick had sold his half-share to Sheridan, Ford and Linley. The original agreement between Garrick and Lacy, as recited in a document retained by the attorney Albany Wallis was that, in case of the sale of either share of the patent, or any part of either share, the seller was obligated to offer the first refusal to purchase to the other partner, and that this was to be done only when the theatre was closed for the summer. In selling one half of his share to Robert Langford and to Edward Thompson, Willoughby Lacy was--so argued his three partners--acting illegally: he had not offered to them the first refusal, and he was negotiating the sale at a time when the theatre was open. Public Advertiser, 17 Oct.. prints a statement from Lacy saying that he did not feel himself bound by the original agreement between his father and Garrick, but that, in the interest of the business of the theatre, he had asked Langford and Thompson to withdraw their claim to partnership, to which request they had acceded. Receipts: #130 9s. 6d

Event Comment: [The King's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but a letter--see 2 Jan. 1670@1--indicates that the first part had been acted before that date and that Part II was to be shortly staged. The point of the Prologue spoken by Ellen Gwyn seems to have derived from an incident at Dover (see Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 20) in May 1670, when James Nokes attired himself in a ridiculous fashion, including "Broad wast Belts." The speakers of the Epilogue and the Prologue to the Second Part are mentioned in Sir William Haward's MS (Bodl. MS Don. b., pp. 248-49); see The Poems of John Dryden, ed. James Kinsley (Oxford, 1958), IV, 1848-49. In Part I a song Beneath a myrtle shade, with music by John Bannister, is in Choice Songs and Ayres, First Book, 1673. Another, Wherever I am, with music by Alphonso Marsh, is in the same collection, as is also How unhappy a lover am I, the music by Nicholas Staggins. Mrs John Evelyn to Mr Bohun, ca. Jan. 1670@1: Since my last to you I have seen The Siege of Grenada, a play so full of ideas that the most refined romance I ever read is not to compare with it; love is made so pure, and valour so nice, that one would image it designed for an Utopia rather than our stage. I do not quarrel with the poet, but admire one born in the decline of morality should be able to feign such exact virtue; and as poetic fiction has been instructive in former ages, I wish this the same event in ours. As to the strict law of comedy I dare not pretend to judge: some think the division of the story is not so well if it could all have been comprehended in the day's actions (The Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, IV, 25). According to John Evelyn--see 9 Feb. 1670@1--Robert Streeter did some of the scenes for this play. In the Preface to The Fatal Discovery, ca. February 1697@8, George Powell, in discussing revivals of Dryden's plays, stated: In relation to our reviving his Almanzor...very hard crutching up what Hart and Mohun could not prop

Event Comment: At 5 went into the Pit at Covent Garden to see Mrs Yates do Lady Townly. Yates is an excellent Sir Francis, but Powell does not shine in Lord Townly....The Entertainment was the new comedy in two acts called the Oxonian in Town, with a prologue by Woodward in the character of a student....It being suspected that a number of sharpers whose characters and practices are laid open in this piece, would attempt to damn it tonight (the 3rd of its being Performed) under pretence of its casting odium on the Irish, bills were dispersed in the House during the play vindicating it from any such intention. Woodward was allowed to speak the prologue, but as soon as the curtain drew up catcalls began. When the performers retired, Powell spoke several times, but was not heard. I was told that the author (Mr Colman) desires to know whom he has offended. The Pros were a very great majority, and at last after a contest of better than 1!2 an hour, the victory was over and the piece was performed. I think it contains many good sentiments, and excellent instruction to young men and is not unworthy of Mr Colman. If vice must not be exposed to hatred and contempt, the usefulness of our theatres is at an end. Only I think the Covent Garden pleasures are represented in too favourable a light. When all was over Powell came on the stage and thanked the audience for their generous protection (Neville MS Diary). Receipts: #212 12s. (Account Book)

Event Comment: This is a farce of Macklin's Writing, it went off very greatly-he play'd Shylock too (Cross). Receipts: #190 (Cross). [Garrick and Lacy had contracted with Macklin for this Farce two weeks before this performance, according to the following document (BM Add. MS 27925): Memorandum of an Agreement relating to Mr Macklin's Farce and his Playing & performing in the said Farce, with such plays as shall be performed on which the said Farce shall be acted as aforesaid as follows: Imprimis: The said Farce to be publicly performed before Christmas, otherwise not this season on account of the Managers other engagements. Item: Mr Macklin to have for his performing in the said plays and Farce a Fifth part of the profits of the first five nights after deducting sixty-three pounds for the charges of each night during the said five nights-and the sixth night to be for the Benefit of Mr Macklin, he paying the usual charges of sixty-three pounds. Item: The Managers to have it in their power to stop the performances of the said Farce at the end of Six nights on account of their other engagements,-and in case the Receipt of any one night of the said nights on which the said Farce shall be performed as aforesaid shall fall short of One Hundred pounds. Then the Managers to have it in their power to stop the performance of said Farce as the Receipt does not amount to One Hundred pounds. Item: The said Six nights for the said Farce & plays in which Mr Macklin shall perform as aforesaid not to be played immediately succeeding one another, but alternately with such plays as the Managers shall think Convenient. Lastly: That if the said Farce shall meet with the disapprobation of the Publick, that then it shall be in the Power of Discretion of the Managers to stop the performance thereof. Dated this 28th day of November, 1759. S@ James Lacy, D. Garrick. Witness: R. Cross, Geo. Garrick.

Event Comment: Never acted. [See Genest's comment (IV, 618) derived from Cumberland and the London Magazine-its appeal to the fashionable circles, its damnation at first performance because of the hanging of Harlequin in full view, and its modification thereafter. See 18 June and Horace Walpole to George Montagu [Arlington Street] July 28, 1761: I came to town yesterday through clouds of dust to see The Wishes, and went ac- [I, 381] tually feeling for Mr Bentley, and full of the emotions he must be suffering. What do [you] think in a house crowded was the first thing I saw! Mr and Madam Bentley perked up in the front boxes and acting audience at his own play--no, all the impudence of false patriotism never came up to it! Did one ever hear of an author that had couraee to see his own first night in public? I don't believe Fielding or Foote himself ever did--and this was the modest bashful Mr Bentley, that died at the thought of being known for an author, even by his own acquaintance! In the stage-box was Lady Bute, Lord Halifax and Lord Melcomb-I must say the two last entertained the house as much as the play-your King was prompter, and called out to the actors every minute to speak louder-the other went backwards and forwards behind the scenes, fetched the actors into the box, and was busier than Harlequin. The curious prologue was not spoken, the whole very ill-acted. It turned out just what I remembered it, the good parts extremely good, the rest very flat and vulgar-the genteel dialogue I believe might be written by Mrs Hannah. The audience was extremely fair. The first act they bore with patience, though it promised very ill-the second is admirable and was much applauded-so was the third-the fourth woeful-the beginning of the fifth it seemed expiring, but was revived by a delightful burlesque of the ancient chorus-which was followed by two dismal scenes, at which people yawned-but were awakened on a sudden by Harlequin's being drawn up to a gibbet nobody knew why or wherefore-this raised a prodigious and continued hiss, Harlequin all the while suspended in the air-at last they were suffered to finish the play, but nobody attended to the conclusion-modesty and his lady all the while sat with the utmost indifference-I suppose Lord Melcombe had fallen asleep [p. 382] before he came to this scene and had never read it. The epilogue was about the King and new Queen, and ended with a personal satire on Garrick-not very kind on his own stage-to add to the judge of this conduct, Cumberland two days ago published a pamphlet to abuse him. It was given out for tonight with more claps than hisses, but I think it will not do unless they reduce it to three acts." [p. 383]. Correspondence with George Montagu. Ed. W. S. Lewis & Ralph Brown. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941), I, 381-83] Note: (I, 381n): Bentley's play of The Wishes or Harlequin's Mouth Opened, was offered to Garrick and Rich the beginning of 1761, but wasrefused by both. His nephew Cumberland showed it to Lord Melcomb, who carried it to Lord Bute, with a compliment in verse to that Lord by Mr Cumberland. Lord Bute showed it to the King, who sent Bentley #200 and ordered the new summer company to play [it]. There was a prologue, flattering the King and Lord Bute which Foote refused to act. Two days before it was played, Cumberland wrote an anonymous pamphlet, addressed to Mr Bentley, and abusing Garrick, who had refused to act Cumberland's tragedy of Cicero's banishment, which he printed this year [1761], unacted. The Wishes were played for the first time July 27th, 1761; the 2d 3d and part of the 4th, acts were much applauded, but the conclusion extremely hissed. The Epilogue concluded with a satire on Garrick. It was acted five nights. About the same time he wrote a tragedy called Philodamus, which he was to read to Garrick, but the latter was so angry at their treatment of him, that he declared against seeing Mr Bentley" (MS account by HW of Bentley's writings, in the collection of Lord Waldegrave at Chewton Priory)