Event Comment: Benefit for Whitfield and Mrs Morton. Morning Chronicle, 2 May: Tickets to be had of Whitfield at his house, Crown-Court, Bow-street; of Mrs Morton, No. 15, Crown-Court, Covent Garden. Tickets sold at the Doors will not be admitted. Receipts: #186 7s. 6d. (87.3.6; tickets: 99.4.0) (charge: #105)

Event Comment: Never Acted before. [By William Duncombe.] 5s., 3s., 2s., 1s. Prompter, 18 Feb.: Accordingly, the Reception it met with, answer'd what the Author might have expected, if parental Fondness had not over-rated it in his Esteem.... The ill Success then this Play met with, gave me as much Satisfaction, as I had already conceived Indignation against the Poet, for having been so servile, as to stoop to translate a Frenchman's Plagiarism

Event Comment: [Librettist unknown. Premiere. For the identification of this opera, see Loewenberg, pp. 58-59. Downes (p. 48) says that the opera lasted five days; Cibber (I, 325) states that it was given only three days, and those not crowded. This day marked the opening of the Queen's Theater in the Haymarket, the first new theatrical construction of the century. For a discussion of it, see Cibber, I, 319-22.

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not certain, but it was very likely this day. Writing on 12 May 1688, Peregrine Bertie states that it had been acted nine days successively. If the ninth performance fell on Friday 12 May, the premiere probably occurred on Wednesday 3 May. The Prologue and Epilogue, printed separately, are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 261-63. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 41): This Play by its Excellent Acting, being often Honour's with the presence of Chancellor Jeffereies, and other great Persons had an Uninterrupted run of 13 Days together. Note, The Poet receided for his third Day in the House in Drury Lane at single Prizes 130 l. which was the greatest Receipt they ever had at that House at single Prizes. Dedication, Edition of 1688: This, I must confess, made me hope for success upon the Stage, which it met with, but so great, as was above my expectation (in this Age which has run mad after Farces) no Comedy, for these many years, having fill'd the Theatre so long together: And I had the great Honour to find so many Friends, that the House was never so full since it was built, as upon the third day of this Play; and vast numbers went away, that could not be admitted. For Leigh as Belfond Sr, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 147-48; and for Underhill as Lolpoop, I, 154-55. For further comment upon the play, see 12 May 1688

Event Comment: Gentleman's Journal, November 16@2: In my first Journal I gave you a large account of the Musick Feast on St Cecilia's day; So, to avoid repetitions, I shall onely tell you that the last was no ways inferiour to the former....The following Ode was admirably set to Music by Mr Henry Purcell and perform'd twice with universal applause, particularly the second Stanza, which was sung with incredible Graces by Mr Purcell himself. [See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, VIII, and Orpheus Britannicus, 1702, 1706, 1711. The Ode appears to have been written by Nicholas Brady.

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the first performance is not certain, but the evidence points to this day as a strong Possibility. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus (p. 44) states that it was given thirteen days consecutively, and John Coke (see 16 March 1696@7) states that it was acted "till Saturday" (16 March 1696@7). If the tragedy was acted on Wednesdays but not Fridays, as was often the practice in Lent, and if the farce alluded to for Saturday, 16 March 1696@7, comprised the entire program, this day was probably the premiere. The following sequence of performances is based on these premises. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 44: The Mourning Bride...had such Success, that it continu'd Acting Uninterrupted 13 Days together. Gildon, English Dramatick Poets, p. 23: This Play had the greatest Success, not only of all Mr Congreve's, but indeed of all the Plays that ever I can remember on the English Stage, excepting some of the incomparable Otway's. Aston, A Brief Supplement (in Cibber, Apology, II, 302): His [Betterton's] Favourite, Mrs Barry, claims the next in Estimation. They were both never better pleas'd, than in Playing together.--Mrs Barry outshin'd Mrs Bracegirdle in the Character of Zara in the Mourning Bride, altho' Mr Congreve design'd Almeria for that Favour

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time; c 3, altered from the same, probably by the author, Richard Bentley]: Written in the manner of the Italian Comedy. With new Scenes and Dresses. [Author of Prologue unknown.] "It was originally produced at Drury Lane in the summer of 1761 [27 July] . . . and has now been new dished up, and seasoned to the day" (European Magazine, ibid). J. P. Collier states that "it is not a revival of the former piece" (MacMillan, Larpent Catalogue, p. 98). It was not, strictly speaking, a "revival", but, rather, a revision, as a collation of Larpent MS 586 (the present version, which is unpublished) with MS 199 (Bentley's 1761 version) makes clear. In 1761 Bentley introduced "the speaking Harlequin after the manner of the Italians . . . Mr Harris some years after gave it a second chance on the stage" (Cumberland, Memoirs, I, 212-14). Receipts: #215 19s. (213/5/6; 2/13/6)

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: Mainpiece: A Tragedy never performed there. Mrs Yates first appearance this stage in 8 years. This Play is from the Orestes of Voltaire Mrs Yates who has been at Covent Garden these 8 years is now return'd & chose to make her first appearance in the part of Electra. Mr Garrick wrote an Excellent Prologue & Epilogue for the Occasion both of which were greatly receiv'd With great Applause. The Play is very dull & heavy & Mrs Yates wanted Spirit greatly in the part of Electra had but little Applause (Hopkins Diary). Paid salary list 5 days at #91 8s. 10d. #457 4s. 2d.; Mr French on acct #5 5s. (Treasurer's Book). [From Westminster Magazine, Oct. (of the mainpiece): From its want of business, it is a very heavy, tedious performance. Most of the scenes are mere declamations; and a certain air of coldness and apathy, which is the peculiar characteristic of French drama, runs thro the whole, which must ever render it unpleasing as well as uninteresting to an English Audience." Gave a severe comment on the Prologue with its theme "home is home be it ever so homely." Preferred the Epilogue. The perspective scenery of Argosv, the Palace of Aegisthusv, and the Tomb of Agamemnonv, designed by Loutherbourg, and painted by Messrs French and Roy, were warm and spirited, and the dresses elegant and characteristic."] Receipts: #243 17s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5]: By the celebrated Henry Fielding; and never yet performed or published. With new Scenes, Dresses, &c. [and incidental music by Michael Arne. Prologue by David Garrick. Epilogue by the same (see text)]. Public Advertiser, 12 Dec. 1778: This Day is published The Fathers (1s. 6d.). "This play was written by Mr Henry Fielding, some years before his death. Mr Garrick saw it at that time. Mr Fielding gave the only fair copy he had of it to his friend Sir Charles Williams, of whose judgment he entertained a high opinion. Sir Charles soon after went abroad, and the comedy was mislaid. Mr. Fielding communicated this circumstance to his family on his death-bed; and enquiry was made for it, but without effect. At length Mr Thomas? Johnes, Member for Cardigan, looking over Sir Charles's books, found a comedy in manuscript, which he read, and, approving, had it transcribed and sent to Mr Garrick for his opinion, who, like Archimedes, cried out, 'This is the lost sheep! This is Mr Henry Fielding's play!' Mr Garrick communicating it to Mr Johnes, Mr Johnes immediately sent the original manuscript, which was in Mr Fielding's hand-writing, to the family, with his best wishes for its success, promising to assist it to the utmost of his power" (Gentleman's Magazine, Dec. 1778, p.586). See also, for corroboration of the above and for other details, Wilbur L. Cross, The History of Henry Fielding, 1918, III, 99-104. Receipts: #210 11s. 6d. (186.6.0; 23.19.6; 0.6.0)

Event Comment: [In mainpiece the playbill retains Miss Farren, "but on account of the sudden indisposition of Miss Farren her part in the play was read by Mrs Ward, who gave it with great effect, and having studied Miss Farren's manner, was a very tolerable substitute" (Diary, 2 May).] Afterpiece [1st time; C 3, by John Philip Kemble]: Taken from [The Country Lasses; or] The Custom of the Manor [by Charles Johnson]. Diary, 6 May 1789: This Day is published The Farm House (1s.). And see 6 May. Receipts: #165 3s. (125.12.0; 34.18.6; 4.12.6)

Event Comment: The United Company. As 9 Nov. 1692 is known to be the second day, it is assumed that 8 Nov. 1692 represents the first performance. (See entry for 9 Nov. 1692.) The authorship is uncertain; William Mountfort signed tne Dedication, but its authorship is linked with that of Edward III (November 1690), which may have been by Bancroft. Gentleman's Journal, October 1692 (not issued until November): Henry the Second, King of England, A new Play, by the Author of that call'd Edward the Third, which gave such universal satisfaction, hath been acted several times with applause. It is a Tragedy with a mixture of Comedy....Had you seen it acted, you would own that an Evening is pass'd very agreeably, when at a Representation of that pleasing Piece. [Alfred Harbage, Elizabethan-Restoration Palimpsest, Modern Language Review, XXXV (1940), 312-18, argues that this play is the Elizabethan Henry II once in the possession of Moseley. A song, In vain 'gainst Love I strove, composed by Henry Purcell and sung by Mrs Dyer, not in the printed play, is in Comes Amoris, 1693, and Joyful Cuckoldom 1695. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), vii

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 3140, 12-16 Dec. 1695, to be published 17 Dec. 1695, suggests that its first appearance was not later than November 1695. According to the Edition of 1695, the music was set by the late Henry Purcell, Courteville, Samuel? Aykerod, and other composers. For Purcell's music, see Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XVI (1906), xxix-xxxi. The songs were sung by Miss Cross and Mrs Verbruggen. Preface, Edition of 1696: I must inform the Reader, that this Third Part before it came upon the Stage was acknowledg'd and believ'd by all that saw it, and were concern'd (as well those that heard it read, as those that were Actors, who certainly, every one must own, are in their Affairs skilful enough to know the value of things of this Nature) to be much the best of all the Three Parts;...tho prepar'd by my indefatigable Diligence, Care, Pains, nay, the variety which I thought could not possibly miss the expected Success, yet by some Accidents happening in the Presentment, was disliked and explored; The Songish part which I used to succeed so well in, by the indifferent performance the first day, and the hurrying it on so soon, being streightned in time through ill management--(tho extreamly well set to Musick, and I'm sure the just Critick will say not ill Writ) yet being imperfectly performed, was consequently not pleasing; and the Dances too, for want of some good Performers, also disliked; all which, tho impossible for me to avoid, and not reasonably to be attributed any way to a fault in me, yet the noisy Party endeavour'd to use me as ill as if it were, till the generous Opposition of my Friends gave me as much reason to thank them for their Justice, as to despise the others Malice.... As to the Poppet Shew in the Fourth Act, the Accident of its being plac'd so far from the Audience, which hindred them from hearing what either they or the Prolocutor said, was the main and only reason of its diverting no better. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702) p. 17: Sullen: The third Part of Don Quixote. Ramble: Oh the ever-running Streams of Helicon! by all that's Poetical, my Friend Durfey; good lack! I thought I shou'd meet with him before we got half way: Well, in the name of Impudence, what luck? Sullen: Damn'd, Damn'd to all intents and purposes. Ramble: His first and second Part did well

Event Comment: Benefit for Waldron and Mrs Greville. Farce (in 2 Acts) Never performed before, and for that night only. This Farce was written by Mr Waldron-Some Applause (Hopkins Diary). [MacMillan's note from Kemble differs slightly in wording.] Paid Mr Wegg's rent half year to Lady Day last #57; Duke of Bedford ditto #164 2s. 10d.; One yrs Paving, Cleansing & Lighting to ditto #39 7s. 6d.; Mr Moody for Mr Philips #13 13s.; St Martin's Charity School, 1 year, 1774 #2 2s. (Treasurer's Book). [The Westminster Magazine for May gives the following cast for the farce: Reuben-$Waldron; Blunt-$Moody; Sharp-$Dodd; Flimsy-$LeMash; Joseph-$Burton; Mrs Reuben-$Mrs Davies; Betty-$Miss Platt. It then bluntly tells the plot and concludes: "The whole is beneath criticism."

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, by Elizabeth Inchbald. Author of Prologue unknown]: With new Dresses, Scenery, &c. Morning Herald, 4 Apr. 1797: This Day is published Wives as they Were, and Maids as they Are (2s). "The Manager of Covent Garden Theatre gives Mrs Inchbald #500 for her new Comedy" (True Briton, 13 Mar.). Receipts: #302 13s. 6d. (295.9.0; 7.4.6)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys does not indicate that this performance is the premiere, and Summers, The Playhouse of Pepys, p. 137, states, without offering his evidence, that the play first appeared on 11 Aug. 1664. The play also appears in Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138. If Pepys saw the premiere, the play was possibly given on 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 Aug. Pepys, Diary: Mr Creed dining with me I got him to give my wife and me a play this afternoon, lending him money to do it, which is a fallacy that I have found now once, to avoyde my vowe with, but never to be more practised I swear, and to the new play, at the Duke's house, of Henry the Fifth; a most noule play, writ by my Lord Orrery; wherein Betterton, Harris, and Ianthe's parts are most incomparably wrote and done, and the whole play the most full of height and raptures of wit and sense, that ever I heard; having but one incongruity, or what did not please me in it, that is, that King Harry promises to plead for Tudor to their Mistresse, Princesse Katherine of France, more than when it comes to it he seems to do; and Tudor refused by her with some kind of indignity, not with a difficulty and honour that it ought to have been done in to him. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 27-28: This Play was Splendidly Cloath'd: The King, in the Duke of York's Coronation Suit; Owen Tudor, in King Charle's: Duke of Burgundy, in the Lord of Oxford's, and the rest all New. It was Excellently Perform'd, and Acted 10 Days Successively