Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Gibbs. 1st piece: Never acted here. 2nd piece [1st time; M. INT 1. In it the playbill lists Dicky Gossip by Suett, but "Fawcett came forward with an apology, stating that Suett had been suddenly taken ill, and was unable to attend the theatre. The galleries...insisted on Fawcett's singing the song in Suett's stead. Fawcett pleaded his incapacity, and at length, by dint of a little buffoonery and grimace (talents essentially necessary on such occasions) succeeded in a appeasing the tumult" (Dramatic Censor, III, 127)]

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: 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: 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: 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