Event Comment: By His Majesty's Command. Afterpiece: a New Dramatick Entertainment of Musick and Grotesque Dancing. Edition of 1740: Set to Musick by Mr John-Frederick Lampe. [For further letters concerning John Hill and Rich, see London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 11 and 12 Feb.

Event Comment: At the Desire of several Ladies of Quality. Mainpiece: Written by the late N. Rowe, Esq. Afterpiece: Written by the late Barton Booth, Esq; Set to Musick by Mr Arne

Event Comment: Paid to Sun Fire Office Insurance #15; Paid for a poker and shovel 5s. (Treasurer's Book). [This policy was doubltless similar to No 109085 dated 29 July 1747 issued to James Lacy and David Garrick Esq. Patentees of His Majesties Company of Comedians of the Theatre Royal Drury Lane, for #4,000: "On the Goods and Furniture, Wardrobe Apparel, Machines and Scenes, not valued as pictures, in the House, Dressing Rooms, Wardrobe, and Scene Rooms, of the said Theatre Royal, adjoining togethe r and situate in Drury Lane aforesaid and not elsewhere, not exceeding #4,000...Note: Except such Loss and Damage as may happen by any Fire occasioned by means of any representation in any Play or Farce or in any Rehearsal of the same." (From copy of original policy, by courtesy J. A. Miller, Esq. General Manager, Sun Insurance Office Ltd., sent me in ltr. dated 5 July 1951.)] Receipts: #110 (Cross). #104 5s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Benefit for Dodd. Afterpiece: Not acted these 9 years. [See 26 March 1763.] Married at Marylebone Church-W. Lacy, Esq one of managers of Drury Lane to Miss Orpen, daughter of an eminent hatter (Winston MS 10). Married: Willoughby Lacy, Esq to Miss Orpen of St Mary-le-bon (Gentleman's Magazine, 1744, p. 141). Receipts: #166 16s. Charges: #64 12s. Profits to Dodd: #102 4s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Benefit for Wild. 1st Piece: 1st Time at this Theatre, and with Permission of G. Colman, Esq. [owner of the copyright]; written by Joseph Atkinson, Esq. [i.e. altered from his The Mutual Deception (see hay, 29 Aug. 1786)]. 2nd piece: Not acted these 2 years. 3rd piece: Not acted these 7 years [acted 23 May 1783]. Receipts: #225 0s. 6d. (113.0.6; 5.5.0; tickets: 106.15.0)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known. The January issue of the Gentleman's Journal, wnich did not appear until some time in February, stated: Mr Congreve...hath written a Comedy, which will be acted in a little time, and is to be call'd, The Old Batchelor (p. 28). The Gentleman's Journal, February 1692@3 (issued in March 1693): The success of Mr Congreve's Old Batchelor has been so extraordinary, that I can tell you nothing new of that Comedy; you have doubtless read it before this, since it has been already printed thrice. And indeed the Wit which is diffus'd through it, makes it lose but few of those Charms in the Perusal, which yield such pleasure in the Representation. Mr Congreve will in some time give us another play; you may judge by this how acceptable it will be (p. 61). In addition, a reference in the Epilogue indicates that it was produced during Lent, ano since the third edition was advertized in the London Gazette, No. 2856, 23-27 March 1693, early March seems the most likely date for the premiere. According to The Female Wits (ca. 1696), The Old Batchelor was acted fourteen days successively. John Barnard of Yale University states that Narcissus Luttrell's copy of The Old Batchelor in the Newberry Library bears the notation: "10d Mar. 16 1692@3." BM Add. Mss. 4221 (341) Memoirs Relating to Mr Congreve Written by Mr Thomas Southern (in Macdonald, Bibliography of Dryden, p. 54n): When he began his Play the Old Batchelor haveing little Acquaintance with the traders in that way, his Cozens recommended him to a friend of theirs, who was very usefull to him in the whole course of his play, he engag'd Mr Dryden in its favour, who upon reading it sayd he never saw such a first play in his life, but the Author not being acquainted with the stage or the town, it woud be pity to have it miscarry for want of a little Assistance: the stuff was rich indeed, it wanted only the fashionable cutt of the town. To help that Mr Dryden, Mr Arthur Manwayring, and Mr Southern red it with great care, and Mr Dryden putt it in the order it was playd, Mr Southerne obtained of Mr Thos. Davenant who then governd the Playhouse, that Mr Congreve should have the privilege of the Playhouse half a year before his play was playd, wh. I never knew allowd any one before. The music for the play was composed by Henry Purcell. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XXI (1917), iii-v

Event Comment: Benefit John and Chr. Rich. At 6 p.m. Notice concerning scenes and machines essentially as 3 Dec. 1715. Receipts: money #35 10s. and tickets #45 16s

Event Comment: Benefit Allen, the Numberer [Rich's Register adds: the late Mr Wilks' Nephew.] Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. Afterpiece: Intermix'd with Songs; taken from Moliere

Event Comment: LLondon Daily Post and General Advertiser, 6 Feb., contains a letter: To Mr John Hill, on his Answer to Mr Rich's Defence

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: A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), commenting upon Betterton's success with I Henry IV (see 9 Jan. 1699@1700) pictures Betterton entering his Closet and praying to Shakespeare for further assistance (p. 25), with the result that "tho' some of those Plays that Batterton Acted were Historical, and consequently highly irregular, yet they never fail'd to please" (p. 26). Sullen adds: Well, this lucky hit of Batterton's put D. Lane in a non-plus! Shakespear's Ghost was rais'd at the New-house, and he seem'd to inhabit it for ever: What's to be done then? Oh, says Rich I'll pray as well as he-What? Shall a Heathen Player have more Religion than a Lawyer? No, it shall never be said--with that Mr R@@ goes up to the Garret (a pair of Stairs higher than his own Apartment) and taking Ben Johnson's Picture with him, he implores. This work implies that Betterton presented Henry VIII in addition to I Henry IV and that Rich revived Volpone, The Alchymist, and The Silent Woman, which had, according to the author of this work, lain unacted for twenty years (p. 26)