Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Kemble. Afterpiece: The [first] and only time of performing it [this season] at this theatre. Morning Herald, 31 July: Tickets to be had of Mrs Kemble, No. 24, corner of Panton-street, Haymarket

Event Comment: ["Boyce absent from this Evening's Performance" (Powell).] Powell: Much Ado about Nothing rehearsed at 10 (Barrymore ill; Farren and Dignum one scene each; Caulfield two scenes) [but this play was not acted this season]. Receipts: #209 19s. (120/16/6; 80/2/0; 9/0/6)

Event Comment: [This was Baddeley's last appearance on the stage (see 19 Nov.).] Powell: R. Palmer Ill, Benson Trip [as in playbill]; Banks Servt to Joseph Surface for Benson. School for Lovers rehearsed at 10; Mithridates at 12 [but this play not acted at this or any other London theatre between 1738 and 1800], Receipts: #329 1s. (259.0.6; 68.9.0; 1.11.6)

Event Comment: [In mainpiece "English Herald [omitted from playbill] Trueman; Cooke Ill." In afterpiece the playbill retains Aumer as Hephestion, but "Hephestion C. Kemble, Aumer at the Opera House. Miss Redhead, Miss Leak absent, Ill" (Powell).] Powell, 13 Mar.: King John rehearsed at 10; Edwy and Elgiva at 12; Jack of Newbury read at 2; 14 Mar.: Jack of Newbury rehearsed at 11. Receipts: #255 3s. (204.14.0; 48.8.6; 2.0.6)

Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Jordan. [In mainpiece the playbill retains King as Sir Peter Teazle, but "Murray, on account of the indisposition of King, was the Sir Peter to Mrs Jordan's Lady Teazle" (Monthly Mirror, May 1797, p. 311).] Tickets delivered for the 15th [for which day the benefit was first announced] will be admitted. "On the whole, Mrs Jordan's Lady Teazle, if not excellent, was respectable; and at a time when it was thought that it would be impossible to personify her Ladyship [i.e. after the retirement of Miss Farren], Mrs Jordan is commendable in having endeavoured it...[Sir Peter] was a part well suited to Murray, who excels in the still and the pathetic...In the screen scene his mirth in revealing to Charles the story of the French milliner, and his amazement the moment after when Charles, throwing down the screen, presented that milliner in the shape of Lady Teazle, must confirm the reputation of Murray. 'Lady Teazle!' (exclaimed he, turning from her towards the door, and in an accent alarmingly impressive), 'Lady Teazle, by all that is damnable!" (Monthly Visitor, June 1797, pp. 531-32). True Briton, 6 May: Tickets to be had of Mrs Jordan, No. 14, Somerset-street, Portman-square. Receipts: #550 3s. (232.4.0; 72.2.0; 7.10.6; tickets: 238.6.6) (charge: free)

Event Comment: [Longley is identified in European Magazine, Dec. 1797, p. 410, but Monthly Visitor, Jan. 1798, p. 64, says that he was Clarke, "from the Shakesperian Theatre at Tottenham Court Road." Afterpiece in place of The Shipwreck, advertised on playbill of 24 Nov.] "[Longley] is not inferior to some Falstaffs we have seen upon the London stage, and he possesses all the traditionary shrugs, winks and bye-play usual in the representation of the part" (True Briton, 27 Nov.). Receipts: #140 18s. (101.15; 38.3; 1.0)

Event Comment: Benefit for the Four Youngest Orphans of the late Mr Palmer [see dl, 18 June]. As it is presumed that the well-known liberality of the Publick will be strongly excited on the present occasion, the Proprietor of the [Haymarket] Theatre has requested the use of the Opera-House for this Evening, that the largest number of persons who wish to patronize the undertaking may be accomodated with places. The Proprietor of the Opera-House has, with the utmost readiness, granted the request. Tickets to be had of the Miss Palmers, at Dixon's, Upholsterer, the corner of Bedford-Court, Bedford-Street, Covent-Garden; of Messrs Ransom, Morland and Co., Bankers, Pall-Mall; of Jewell, No. 26, Suffolk-Street, Charing-Cross, of whom, and of Rice, at the Box-Office, Places for the Boxes may be taken. Boxes 5s. Pit 3s. Gallery 2s. "[His brother] R. Palmer attempted to deliver an address at the end of the play, but he was so much overpowered that he...left the address unrecited, and [his] part in the farce was given up to another performer" (Monthly Mirror, Aug. 1798, p. 117, which also records that the receipts were approximately #700)

Event Comment: By Command of Their Majesties. "George? Dance, @R. A., was at Covent Garden on Wednesday evening when his musical Composition of One and All [for a band] was performed before his Majesty, with much applause" (Joseph Farington,@Diary [26 Cct.], 1922, I, 243). Receipts: #628 8s. 6d. (620.17.6; 7.11.0)

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time; MD 2, by George Colman, ynger]: With new Musick, Scenery, Machinery, Dresses and Decorations. The Musick entirely new, composed by Kelly with an overture by Dussek]. The Scenes designed and executed by Greenwood? Jun, with the assistance of Chalmers and Banks. The Machinery, Decorations and Dresses designed and under the direction of Johnston, and executed by him, Underwood and Gay. The Female Dresses designed and executed by Miss Rein. Books of the Songs to be had at the Theatre. "We have to congratulate the town on the acquisition of three admirable dramatic writers, in the persons of Johnston, Greenwood, and Miss Rein, who have here exhibited a specimen of the Sublime and Beautiful which it will be difficult, indedd, to surpass" (Monthly Mirror, Jan. 1799, p. 47). [This piece is "an exhibition of music and dialogue, pantomime and dancing, painting and machinery, antique dresses and armour, thunder and lightning, fire and water, illumination, processions, banquets, battles, sieges, explosions, and everything that can surprize, enchant or terrify the spectators" (Morning Chronicle, 21 Jan.). Morning Chronicle, 16 Feb. 1799: This Day is published Feudal Times (1s. 6d.). Receipts: #483 15s. 6d. (381.10.6; 100.6.6; 1.18.6)

Event Comment: At Drapers' Hall. (See J. Paine Collier, Monk and the Restoration,' Gentleman's Magazine, New Series, XXXVI (1851), 347-52. See also 13 April 1660.

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner I went to the new Theatre and there I saw The Merry Wives of Windsor acted, the humours of the country gentleman and the French doctor very well done, but the rest but very poorly, and Sir J. Falstaffe as bad as any

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Then my wife and I to Drury Lane to the French comedy, which was so ill done, and the scenes and company and everything else so nasty and out of order and poor, that I was sick all the while in my mind to be there. See also Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 280). W. J. Lawrence (Early French Players in England, The Elizabethan Playhouse and Other Studies (1912), pp. 139-40) argues that the play was Chapoton's Le Mariage d'Orphee et d'Eurydice. See also The Description of the Great Machines of the Descent of Orpheus into Hell. Presented by the French Comedians at the cockpit in Drury Lane. The Argument Taken out of the Tenth and Eleventh Books of Ovid's Metamorphosis (1661). Rugg's Diurnal the French players (BM Add. Mss. 10116, f243v)

Event Comment: The King's Company. This play appears on Herbert's List, following the entry for 26 Oct. 1661. (See William VanLennep, "Thomas Killigrew prepares his Plays for Production," J. Q. Adams Memorial Studies (Washington, D. C., 1948, p. 803.) Pepys, Diary: W. Pen and I to the Theatre, but it was so full that we could hardly get any room, so he went up to one of the boxes, and I into the 18d. places, and there saw Love at first sight, a play of Mr Killigrew's and the first time that it hath been acted since before the troubles, and great expectation there was, but I found the play to be a poor thing, and so I perceive every body else do. BM Add. Mss. 34217, fol. 31b, in Hotson Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 246: @First then to speake of his Majestys Theatre@Where one would imagine Playes should be better@Love att the first sight did lead the dance@But att second sight it had the mischance@To be so dash'd out of Countenance as@It never after durst shew itts face@All though its bashfullnesse as tis thought@Be far from being the Authors ffault.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company, the receipts for #20 being signed by Richard Baddeley (A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 170). W. J. Lawrence (Review of English Studies, IX (1933), 221) suggests The Adventures of Five Hours as a possibility. Pepys, Diary: I met Madam Turner...she and her daughter having been at the play to-day at the Temple, it being a revelling time with them

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: On this date a band of French comedians received a permit authorizing them to bring their scenes and stage decoration to England. See W. J. Lawrence, "Early French Players in England," The Elizabethan Playhouse and Other Studies, p. 140; Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 252; and Madame M. Horn-Monval, "French Troupes in England during the Restoration," Theatre Notebook, VII (1953), 82

Event Comment: Charles II to Madame, 10 Dec. 1663: I am just now going to see a new play (C. H. Hartmann, Charles II and Madame[1934], p. 89). The Duke's Company. W. J. Lawrence, in a review of Boswell, The Restoration Court Stage, in Modern Language Review, XXVIII (1933), 103, suggests that it was The Step-Mother which was given on this occasion. The edition of 1664 lists: The Prologue to the King at the Cockpit at White-Hall. The Epilogue to the King

Event Comment: Charles II to Madame, 14 July 1664: I am just now come from seeing a new ill play and it is almost midnight (C. H. Hartman, Charles II and Madame [1934], p. 108). W. J. Lawrence, in a review of Boswell, The Restoration Court Stage, in Modern Language Review, XXVIII (1933), 103, stated his belief that this play was acted at court this day

Event Comment: Henry Muddiman, 29 Nov. 1666: The Players have upon great proffers of disposing a large share to charitable uses prevailed to have liberty to act at Both Houses, which they begin this day (CSPD, Charles II, clxxcii, 6, in Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 250). A manuscript prologue for the opening of the theatre in Bridges Street is in J. Payne Collier's MS Restoration Stage History, Part I, p. 106, in the Houghton Library, Harvard. The Diary of John Milward, Esq., ed. Caroline Robbins (Cambridge, 1938), p. 49: This day at my coming to the House [of Commons] it moved that plays might be tolerated and acted in the common theatres, and whether any members of the House of Commons should be admitted to go to acts of the playhouses, but it was not resolved

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: I with Lord Brouncker (who was this day in an unusual manner merry, I believe with drink), J. Minnes, and W. Pen to Bartholomew-Fair; and there saw the dancing mare again, which, to-day, I find to act much worse than the other day, she forgetting many things, which her master beat her for, and was mightily vexed; and then the dancing of the ropes, and also the little stage-play, which is very ridiculous

Event Comment: See 27 Feb. and 4 March. Pepys, Diary: [Sir W. Coventry] told me the matter of the play [The Rehearsal] that was intended for his abuse, wherein they foolishly and sillily bring in two tables like that which he hath made, with a round hole in the middle, in his closet, to turn himself in; and he is to be in one of them as master, and Sir J. Duncomb in the other, as his man or imitator: and their discourse in those tables, about the disposing of their books and papers, very foolish. But that, that he is offended with, is his being made so contemptible, so that any should dare to make a gentleman a subject for the mirth of the world; and that therefore he had told Tom Killigrew that he should tell his actors, whoever they were, that did offer any thing like representing him, that he would not complain to my Lord Chamberlain, which was too weak, nor get him beaten, as Sir Charles Sidly is said to do, but that he would cause his nose to be cut