Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 359. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. There is no certainty that this performance is the premiere, but as the play was licensed for printing on 9 Jan. 1676@7, this performance may well be the first one. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, pp.9-10) lists the same cast except for the ommission of Letice. It is not certain which Mrs Knight played Letice. Possibly it was Frances Maria Knight (see Wilson, All the King's Ladies, where she is tentatively listed for that role), but the presence of Mrs Ursula Knight on an undated L. C. list, 3@24, with the date of her swearing into the company given as 12 March 1676@7, it is quite likely that she played this role. (I owe this reference to Ursula Knight to Professor John Harold Wilson.) John Dennis: And when upon the first representations of the Plain Dealer, the Town, as The Authour has often told me, appeard Doubtful what Judgment to Form of it; the foremention'd gentlemen [The Duke of Buckingham, Earl of Rochester, Earl of Dorset, Earl of Mulgrave, Savil, Buckly, Sir John Denham, Waller] by their loud aprobation of it, gave it both a sudden and a lasting reputation (Defense and Defects of Dramatick Poetry, 1725, in The Works of John Dennis, ed. Hooker, II, 277)

Event Comment: Paid Younger for license for the Court of Alexander #2 2s. Gave King's Footmen #2 2s.; Chairmen #2 2s.; Queen's Footmen #2 2s. & Chairmen #2 2s. (Account Book). Receipts: #210 12s

Event Comment: Afterpiece: A New Comedy (by Hugh Kelly] of 2 Acts never perform'd. [Written, as the author states in his Advertisement to the Edition of 1774, at the instigation of and on the inspiration of Mrs Abington. The Larpent MS 379 lists a partial cast and the lengths for each part: 10 Hector Strangeways-Mrs Green; 7 1!2 Zelinda 1!2 Jenny-....(A Length was 42 lines of dialogue.)] [From the +Westminster Magazine, Dec: Though there is scarce anything new in the Plot, Characters, Dialogue of this piece; yet upon the whole we found it extremely entertaining. The Indian servant is well introduced to satirize the follies and vices of the metropolis; and Sir Hector and his son give us a good dish of sea terms, well served up by Messrs $Shuter">Shuter; 7 Brownlow-$Bensley; 5 Ormsby-$Clarke; 6 Bussora-...; 5 +Orson-...; 6 +Pillage-$Dunstall; 1!2 Servant-...; 5 +Lady Strangeways-$Mrs Green; 7 1!2 Zelinda 1!2 Jenny-....(A Length was 42 lines of dialogue.)] [From the +Westminster Magazine, Dec: Though there is scarce anything new in the Plot, Characters, Dialogue of this piece; yet upon the whole we found it extremely entertaining. The Indian servant is well introduced to satirize the follies and vices of the metropolis; and Sir Hector and his son give us a good dish of sea terms, well served up by Messrs $Shuter and Quick."

Event Comment: Afterpiece: A Pantomime Entertainment not acted these eight years. [See 20 Oct. 1768.] New Scenes, Dresses and other Decorations. Doors open at 5 o'clock. To begin exactly at 6 o'clock. Theatrical intelligence, Covent Garden: Mrs Hunter, lately returned from Ireland was very well receiv'd in Mrs Oakly, and to do her justice she played the part throughout better than it has been performed for some time at either house. The labourings of Mr Wroughton's jealousy in Oakly reminded us of the progressive workings of a fatt of small beer, when inflated with powerful yeast....Orpheus and Eurydice was reviv'd after the play-the dullest of all dull Pantomimes (Harlequin's Jacket excepted). The two additional scenes we were summoned by the bills to behold, are two of the late memorable regatta:-The first is a perspective of Ranelagh Gardensv to the water, illuminated with party-coloured lamps, which terminates with the temporary obelisk erected on that occasion:-Behind this we just catch the streamers of the barges and etc., supposed to be rowing up to the stairs, and landing their company, to martial music and under the discharge of cannon, imitated by the unnatural slamming of one of the Green Room doors. This scene, however, had a tolerable appearance, but being on too confined a scale, its intended effect must have been lost. The other represented the inside of as much of the Temple of Neptunev as was possible to give the spectators in a theatre:-we cannot extol it by any means as a perfect representation:-and to prevent it coming too near the original, Harlequin, Perot, Pantaloon, and etc. were made to lounge in the orchestra instead of its being occupied by a good band of music:-in short the whole pantomime went off rather flat. It is recommended to the managers here never to suffer the scene shifters to appear again in such garb as they did; old greasy plush waistcoats, with red-stocking sleeves!-such a habit may be in keeping with a blacksmaith's forge, but not for a theatre royal in the metropolis of a polished country (Folger News Clipping)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Not acted these 12 years. [In mainpiece the playbill assigns Beverley to Palmer, but his "indisposition on Wednesday gave Kemble an opportunity of shewing himself in comedy" {Morning Chronicle, 28 Oct.).] Receipts: #110 10s. (81/18; 28/1; 0/11)

Event Comment: Not Acted these Seven Years. Written by Ben Johnson. Daily Advertiser, 1 Nov.: On Saturday Night a great Number of Wax Candles were lighted in the Windows of Mr Cibber's, Mr Booth's, and Mr Wilks's Houses...on account of his Majesty's Birthday

Event Comment: Whereas divers Complaints have been made, that Numbers...shift from Box to Box, to the great Annoyance of the Ladies...which Inconvenience appears on Enquiry to be caus'd by many not Paying...an Office is erected in the Lobby to the Boxes, where all Persons (the Ladies Excepted) are asked to take Tickets before they go in. Receipts: #64 19s. (Account Book); #100 (Rylands MS.). Rylands MS.: Cibber ill

Event Comment: [In her memoirs Mrs Charke states that this play was acted four times consecutively during the run of Romeo and Juliet.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the licensing of the play on 13 Aug. 1677 suggests a production not later than July 1677. Dedication to edition of 1678: But having...suffer'd so much through the defects of setting off, when it came on the Stage, it dares not now reject any Accomdation the Press cane give it. For (with the Theatres good leave to speak Truth,) it cannot receive greater Disadvantage in the Reading, than it met in the Presenting, The chief Parts Acted by Women; and, for their Ease, and somewhat of decorum, as was pretended, whole scenes left out, and scarcely any one Speech unmangled and entire. As for Adornments, in Habit, Musick, and Scene-Work it was Vacation-time, and the Company would not venture the Charge

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the first performance is uncertain, and the play has been sometimes assigned to December 1695. There are indications, however, that the play first appeared at a later time, but certainly not later than 14 March 1695@6, the date attached to the Dedication. The Epilogue has some allusions which suggest mid-February, for it refers to the "Fasting time" of Lent and to "Dancing at Drapers-Hall last Masquerade" (a masquerade ball was held there on 4 Feb. 1695@6). Dedication, Edition of 1696: This Play was given to my Care by a Friend: I promis'd him not to neglect it in the Difficulties it was to pass through. It has had hitherto but an unpleasant Journey; and I knew no better way to make Amends, than by taking up its Rest with you [Sir John Smith]; where I am assured its Reception will be the best a truly Noble and Generous Soul can give. I beg not your Protection, Sir, from those wide-mouth'd Curs, the Criticks: But since they have had their Ends in running it down, 'tis under the Shelter of your Name I desire a poor maim'd Thing, that did its best to shew them Sport, may lye secure from farther Danger....H. Horden. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 18: Damn'd

Event Comment: [By Thomas Moore.] With Musick Vocal and Instrumental, Dances, and other Decorations proper to the same. Victor, History of the Theatres, II, 144: Three or four Years after the Performance of this famous Tragedy, I had the following account from several of the Actors who performed in it: That Sir Thomas gave them many good Dinners and Suppers during the Rehearsals of the Play, which they all laugh'd at as ridiculous; but as the Company was, at that Time, composed chiefly of young Actors, and got but small Encouragement from the Public; it may be justly said, their Necessities compelled them to perform this strange Tragedy, which stood some chance to divert from its Absurdities

Event Comment: By Command of His Royal Highness the Duke, and their Highnesses the Princesses Caroline, Mary, and Louisa [who were present]. London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 28 Feb.: The Author perceiving from the Behaviour of some Persons, a determin'd Resolution, notwithstanding the Presence of part of the Royal Family, to breed a Disturbance, to the Prejudice of the Play, occasion'd, as 'tis supposed, from an invidious Letter inserted in Thursday's Grubstreet Journal, has chose to withdraw his Play, rather than give them an Opportunity of gratifying their Malice, by a Repetition of such Disturbances as must necessarily prevent the Audience from hearing the Performance in Peace. Receipts: #112 14s

Event Comment: Mainpiece: By Particular desire. Afterpiece: Never Acted Before. [The Farce by Fielding is a sequel to The Virgin Unmasked.] Forbidden soon by the Lord Chamberlain. It being supposed that a particular man of quality was pointed at in one of the characters. The prohibition short of duration (Genest, III, 652). See A Letter to a Noble Lord to whom it alone belongs, occasioned by a representation at Drury Lane of a Farce call'd Miss Lucy in Town (1742), [a 20 page pamphlet criticizing the Lord Chamberlain for allowing this farce. Author gives a scene by scene account emphasizing the bawdry and discounting the pious conclusion. He concludes with remarks on theatrical dancing]: As to Dances, I think your province of prohibition does not extend; so the Public cannot owe their gratitude to you for several. I appeal to those who have been on the coast of Malabar and the banks of the Ganges whether we have not had some that have exceeded on posture, or anything of that kind so common amongst the polite Indians of Indostan. Afterpiece: Mrs Clive mimics the Muscovita admirably, and Beard Amorevoli intolerably (H. Walpole to H. Mann, 26 May).-Horace Walpole Correspondence with Sir Horace Mann, I, 435. Receipts: #70

Event Comment: Rec'd of Squibb for an order for two into the Boxes the 4th inst. 10s. (Account Book). [Query: The same two friends for whom he gave orders on 27 Nov.? If so they must have been important persons as Squibb this night paid half its night's salary to seat them.] Receipts: #175 8s. (Account Book)

Event Comment: Benefit for Mr and Mrs T. Kennedy. Mainpiece: Not acted these 2 years. Many Tickets of Mr Kennedy's having been stolen, he gives public Notice that no Tickets sold at the Doors or Avenues of the Theatre will have Admission this Evening. Morning Chronicle, 19 May: Tickets to be had of Kennedy, No. 44, Great Queen-street. Receipts: #108 4s. 6d. (41/1/6; 5/3/0; tickets: 62/0/0) (charge: #105)