Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Sir W. Pen and my wife and Mercer and I to Polichinelly, but were there horribly frighted to see Young Killigrew come in with a great many more young sparks; but we hid ourselves, so as we think they did not see us. By and by they went away, and then we were at rest again; and so, the play being done

Event Comment: The King's Company. See 3 March 1668@9 for another play acted(on a Wednesday in Lent by the young players. Langbaine, (English Dramatick Poets, p. 208): Coxcomb, a Comedy, which was reviv'd at the Theatre-Royal, the Prologue being spoken by Jo. Haines. Pepys, Diary: To the King's playhouse, and there saw The Coxcomb, the first time acted, but an old play, and a silly one, being acted only by the young people

Event Comment: Christopher Rich's Company. The date of the resumption of playing is not certain, for Cibber (see below) beclouds the issue by referring to Easter-Monday in April, whereas the first Monday following Easter fell on 25 March 1694@5. Nevertheless, Monday 1 April 1695 seems the likely date of the resumption of playing, with Rich's Company ready to perform before the seceding company under Thomas Betterton was fully organized. A new song for Abdelazar, Lucinda is bewitching fair, the music by Henry Purcell and sung by "the Boy" (Jemmy? Bowen), is in Thesaurus Musicus, The Fourth Book, 1695. Cibber, Apology, I, 195: [The Patentees] were not able to take the Field till the Easter-Monday in April following. Their first Attempt was a reviv'd Play call'd Abdelazar, or the Moor's Revenge, poorly written, by Mrs Behn. The House was very full, but whether it was the Play or the Actors that were not approved, the next Day's Audience sunk to nothing. However, we assured that let the Audiences be never so low, our Masters would make good all Deficiencies, and so indeed they did, till towards the End of the Season, when Dues to Ballance came too think upon 'em. [See I, 195-96, for Cibber's account of his Prologue.] A Comparison Between the Two Stages, 1702, p. 7: But in my Opinion, 'twas strange that the general defection of the old Actors which left Drury-lane, and the fondness which the better sort shew'd for 'em at the opening of their Newhouse, and indeed the Novelty it self, had not quite destroy'd those few young ones that remain'd behind. The disproportion was so great at parting, that 'twas almost impossible, in Drury-lane, to muster up a sufficient number to take in all the Parts of any Play; and of them so few were tolerable, that a Play must of necessity be damn'd that had not extraordinary favour from the Audience: No fewer than Sixteen (most of the old standing) went away; and with them the very beauty and vigour of the Stage; they who were left behind being for the most part Learners, Boys and Girls, a very unequal match for them who revolted. According to a statement made in litigation, the company in Drury Lane acted 84 times between 25 March 1694@5 and 7 July 1695; and the Young Actors played 68 times from 6 July 1695 to 10 Oct. 1695 to 10 Oct. 1695. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 308

Event Comment: As a result of litigation in 1704, we know that the regular company at Drury Lane and Dorset Garden resumed acting (after the younger performers had had possession of the theatres) on 9 Oct. 1695, and acted 214 days to 13 July 1696, after which the young actors played until 12 Oct. 1696, acting 57 times in the long vacation. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 308