Event Comment: Mainpiece: Never acted here. [Mrs Armstead is identified in Morning Chronicle, 16 May. Prologue by George Colman elder (Collection...of English Prologues and Epilogues, II, 207).] Afterpiece: Not acted these 20 years. With a new Overture, the Original Prologue [by David Garrick], and a New Scene, in which will be introduced an air. With a Grand Jubilee-Pageant, in Honour of Gulliver. The Music, Dresses, Scenes, Trophies and Decorations entirely new. The Music composed by Dr Arnold. ["Lilliput was altered by Garrick (its author), and a procession of cards introduced in it, Gulliver walking as the Knave of Clubs" (Gilliland, I, 121-22). London Chronicle, 16 May, gives a synopsis of this pageant.] The Doors to be opened at 6:00. To begin at 7:00 [same throughout season]. Places for the Boxes to be taken at the Theatre. After this Evening the Entertainments of this Theatre will be discontinued till further Notice, on account of the Performers employed at Drury Lane Theatre [see 28 May]

Event Comment: Note, That Subscribers' Tickets pass this Day, and every Day during Mr Penkethman's stay at Greenwich, unless it be some particular Actor's Benefit-Day

Event Comment: Receipts: #200 7s. 6d. (Account Book). Mainpiece: With New Dresses and Decorations. [The first of a series of five performances (the last, Merchant of Venice, 18 Nov.) which got Macklin dismissed from the theatre until 1775, when his lawsuit against six persons whom he claimed formed a conspiracy to hiss him from the stage and ruin his livlihood was concluded favorably for him. His performance of Macbeth was favorably treated but with certain misgivings in the Morning Chronicle (25 Oct.), but he was mercilessly criticized in the London Evening Post and St James Chronicle: "In Act II, Sc. i, Shakespeare has made Macbeth murder Duncan; Now Mr Macklin, being determined to copy from no man, reversed this incident, and in the very first act, scene the second, murdered Macbeth." The favorable review (Morning Chronicle) thought he did well in first and last acts, but gave way to stage rant and "vehemence of energetic expression" wanting any variation in tone in between. It also pointed out a certain faulty memory of his lines. His novel stage effects came in for a paragraph of comment: The alterations in the jeux de theatre respecting the representation of this tragedy do Mr Macklin great credit. His change of the scenery is peculiarly characteristical. The Quadrangle of Macbeth's castle, and the door which is supposed to lead to Duncan's apartment (both of which are entirely new) are additions of consequence to the exhibition of the play. The door also through which Macbeth comes to the Weird Sisters, in the 4th act, is a better and more probable entrance than through the common stage portal. The dresses are new, elegant, and of a sort hitherto unknown to a London audience, but exceedingly proper. The Banquet was superbly set out, and it must be confessed that the managers seem to have spared neither cost nor assiduity to ornament and add to the effect of the representation." A favorable letter from a correspondent to the London Evening Post adds: "I must observe, Mr Printer, that from the graceful and characteristic manner in which Macbeth was introduced by the martial music and military procession, from the manner of M. Macklin's acting, from his judicious alteration of the dresses, the disposition of the scene where the King is killed, the cave of the witches in the 4th act, from the improvement of Mrs Hartley's thinking in Lady Macbeth and from her manner of speaking, which seemed plainly to be the effects of some intelligence she had received from Mr Macklin...I thought Mr Macklin deserv'd great praise." See the newspaper comments all gathered and reprinted in an Apology for the Conduct of Charles Macklin, (London, 1773). See also note to 30 Oct. See also London Chronicle, Oct. 23-26 (cf. Odell, I, 453). The Westminster Magazine suggests the performance was pitiable. "Macklin knew what he ought to do, but could not do it." The Scenemen's pay this week was about double the normal cost. (Account Book).] Verse Squibs from St James Chronicle (Oct. 1773) against Macklin: @Macbeth@"Eight Kings appear and pass over in order, and Banquo the last"@Old Quin, ere Fate suppressed his lab'ring breath@In studied accents grumbled out Macbeth:--@Next Garrick came, whose utt'rance truth impressed,@While ev'ry look the tyrant's guilt confess'd:--@Then the cold Sheridan half froze the part,@Yet what he lost by nature sav'd by art.@Tall Barry now advanc'd toward Birnam Woodv@Nor ill performed the scenes--he understood--@Grave Mossop next to Foris shaped his march@His words were minute guns, his action starch.@Rough Holland too--but pass his errors o'er@Nor blame the actor when the man's no more.@Then heavy Ross, assay'd the tragic frown,@But beef and pudding kept all meaning down:--@Next careless Smith, try'd on the Murd'rer's mask,@While o'er his tongue light tripp'd the hurried task:--@Hard Macklin, late, guilt's feelings strove to speak,@While sweats infernal drench'd his iron cheek;@Like Fielding's Kings [in Tom Thumb] his fancy'd triumphs past,@And all be boasts is, that he falls the last.@ Also from St James Chronicle:@The Witches, while living deluded Macbeth@And the Devil laid hold of his soul after death;@But to punish the Tyrant this would not content him,@So Macklin he sent on the stage to present him.

Event Comment: Afterpiece: By desire. Powel: Rec'd of Mr Wolfall [Woodfall?] for a ticket for the season to admit one into any part of the house, behind the scenes and to Benefit nights excepted--#15 15s. N.B.: These tickets us'd to be no more than ten guineas each before Mr Garrick's time, as for example Mr Ibbeston upon Ludgate hill, and Mr Tinker gave no more for theirs. Receipts: #170 (Cross); #166 6d. (Powel)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: First time in 2 years. [See 17 Jan. 1766.] Harlequin's Invasion revived with alterations, particularly a Patagonian Man and Woman, executed by Mr Johnston, are very fine Figures, and gave great satisfaction to the Audience (Hopkins MS Notes)

Event Comment: This night Dr William Kenrick gave his first lecture in his series of The School of Shakespeare, at the Devil's Tavern, in Fleet Street. Topic, I Henry IV. This lecture and those of the two succeeding Wednesday evenings are reviewed in the Monthly Miscellany, Feb. 1774. Receipts: #190 1s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: This Comedy is written by Mr Cumberland but I think inferior to his other Productions was tolerably well receiv'd but a most excellent Epilogue was Written by Mr G. & Spoken by Mrs Abington which gave a great Lift to the Play Uncommon Applause to the Epilogue (Hopkins Diary). [Macmillan's note from Kemble differs slightly in wording.] Paid Mr Lauchery per order #1 1s. (Treasurer's Book). [From the Westminster Magazine, Dec. 1774: We cannot think Mr Cumberland has courted the Comic Muse in this play so successfully as in the West Indian, and the rest of his comedies. His language is unexceptionably good; he is often as witty as Congreve, as easy as Vanbrugh, and as satirical as Wycherly. But language alone will not do. The plot is ill conducted.] Receipts: #243 6s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Boxes 5s. Pit 3s. 1st Gallery 2s. Upper Gallery 1s. Places for the Boxes to be taken of Brandon at the Theatre. The Doors to be opened at 5:30. To begin at 6:30 [see 13 Nov.]. [Macready was from the Smock Alley Theatre, Dublin. In mainpiece the playbill assigns Miss Ogle to Mrs T. Kennedy, but on the Kemble playbill her name is deleted, and a MS annotation substitutes Mrs Lewis's.] "The dress worn by Lewis, with small buttons innumerable, that gave it the air of a Hussar's jacket lengthened, was lately a coat won by the Prince of Wales" (Morning Chronicle, 20 Sept.). Receipts: #242 5s. 6d. (239.19.6; 2.6.0)

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 359. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. There is no certainty that this performance is the premiere, but as the play was licensed for printing on 9 Jan. 1676@7, this performance may well be the first one. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, pp.9-10) lists the same cast except for the ommission of Letice. It is not certain which Mrs Knight played Letice. Possibly it was Frances Maria Knight (see Wilson, All the King's Ladies, where she is tentatively listed for that role), but the presence of Mrs Ursula Knight on an undated L. C. list, 3@24, with the date of her swearing into the company given as 12 March 1676@7, it is quite likely that she played this role. (I owe this reference to Ursula Knight to Professor John Harold Wilson.) John Dennis: And when upon the first representations of the Plain Dealer, the Town, as The Authour has often told me, appeard Doubtful what Judgment to Form of it; the foremention'd gentlemen [The Duke of Buckingham, Earl of Rochester, Earl of Dorset, Earl of Mulgrave, Savil, Buckly, Sir John Denham, Waller] by their loud aprobation of it, gave it both a sudden and a lasting reputation (Defense and Defects of Dramatick Poetry, 1725, in The Works of John Dennis, ed. Hooker, II, 277)

Event Comment: Paid Younger for license for the Court of Alexander #2 2s. Gave King's Footmen #2 2s.; Chairmen #2 2s.; Queen's Footmen #2 2s. & Chairmen #2 2s. (Account Book). Receipts: #210 12s

Event Comment: Afterpiece: A New Comedy (by Hugh Kelly] of 2 Acts never perform'd. [Written, as the author states in his Advertisement to the Edition of 1774, at the instigation of and on the inspiration of Mrs Abington. The Larpent MS 379 lists a partial cast and the lengths for each part: 10 Hector Strangeways-Mrs Green; 7 1!2 Zelinda 1!2 Jenny-....(A Length was 42 lines of dialogue.)] [From the +Westminster Magazine, Dec: Though there is scarce anything new in the Plot, Characters, Dialogue of this piece; yet upon the whole we found it extremely entertaining. The Indian servant is well introduced to satirize the follies and vices of the metropolis; and Sir Hector and his son give us a good dish of sea terms, well served up by Messrs $Shuter">Shuter; 7 Brownlow-$Bensley; 5 Ormsby-$Clarke; 6 Bussora-...; 5 +Orson-...; 6 +Pillage-$Dunstall; 1!2 Servant-...; 5 +Lady Strangeways-$Mrs Green; 7 1!2 Zelinda 1!2 Jenny-....(A Length was 42 lines of dialogue.)] [From the +Westminster Magazine, Dec: Though there is scarce anything new in the Plot, Characters, Dialogue of this piece; yet upon the whole we found it extremely entertaining. The Indian servant is well introduced to satirize the follies and vices of the metropolis; and Sir Hector and his son give us a good dish of sea terms, well served up by Messrs $Shuter and Quick."

Event Comment: Afterpiece: A Pantomime Entertainment not acted these eight years. [See 20 Oct. 1768.] New Scenes, Dresses and other Decorations. Doors open at 5 o'clock. To begin exactly at 6 o'clock. Theatrical intelligence, Covent Garden: Mrs Hunter, lately returned from Ireland was very well receiv'd in Mrs Oakly, and to do her justice she played the part throughout better than it has been performed for some time at either house. The labourings of Mr Wroughton's jealousy in Oakly reminded us of the progressive workings of a fatt of small beer, when inflated with powerful yeast....Orpheus and Eurydice was reviv'd after the play-the dullest of all dull Pantomimes (Harlequin's Jacket excepted). The two additional scenes we were summoned by the bills to behold, are two of the late memorable regatta:-The first is a perspective of Ranelagh Gardensv to the water, illuminated with party-coloured lamps, which terminates with the temporary obelisk erected on that occasion:-Behind this we just catch the streamers of the barges and etc., supposed to be rowing up to the stairs, and landing their company, to martial music and under the discharge of cannon, imitated by the unnatural slamming of one of the Green Room doors. This scene, however, had a tolerable appearance, but being on too confined a scale, its intended effect must have been lost. The other represented the inside of as much of the Temple of Neptunev as was possible to give the spectators in a theatre:-we cannot extol it by any means as a perfect representation:-and to prevent it coming too near the original, Harlequin, Perot, Pantaloon, and etc. were made to lounge in the orchestra instead of its being occupied by a good band of music:-in short the whole pantomime went off rather flat. It is recommended to the managers here never to suffer the scene shifters to appear again in such garb as they did; old greasy plush waistcoats, with red-stocking sleeves!-such a habit may be in keeping with a blacksmaith's forge, but not for a theatre royal in the metropolis of a polished country (Folger News Clipping)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Not acted these 12 years. [In mainpiece the playbill assigns Beverley to Palmer, but his "indisposition on Wednesday gave Kemble an opportunity of shewing himself in comedy" {Morning Chronicle, 28 Oct.).] Receipts: #110 10s. (81/18; 28/1; 0/11)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the licensing of the play on 13 Aug. 1677 suggests a production not later than July 1677. Dedication to edition of 1678: But having...suffer'd so much through the defects of setting off, when it came on the Stage, it dares not now reject any Accomdation the Press cane give it. For (with the Theatres good leave to speak Truth,) it cannot receive greater Disadvantage in the Reading, than it met in the Presenting, The chief Parts Acted by Women; and, for their Ease, and somewhat of decorum, as was pretended, whole scenes left out, and scarcely any one Speech unmangled and entire. As for Adornments, in Habit, Musick, and Scene-Work it was Vacation-time, and the Company would not venture the Charge

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the first performance is uncertain, and the play has been sometimes assigned to December 1695. There are indications, however, that the play first appeared at a later time, but certainly not later than 14 March 1695@6, the date attached to the Dedication. The Epilogue has some allusions which suggest mid-February, for it refers to the "Fasting time" of Lent and to "Dancing at Drapers-Hall last Masquerade" (a masquerade ball was held there on 4 Feb. 1695@6). Dedication, Edition of 1696: This Play was given to my Care by a Friend: I promis'd him not to neglect it in the Difficulties it was to pass through. It has had hitherto but an unpleasant Journey; and I knew no better way to make Amends, than by taking up its Rest with you [Sir John Smith]; where I am assured its Reception will be the best a truly Noble and Generous Soul can give. I beg not your Protection, Sir, from those wide-mouth'd Curs, the Criticks: But since they have had their Ends in running it down, 'tis under the Shelter of your Name I desire a poor maim'd Thing, that did its best to shew them Sport, may lye secure from farther Danger....H. Horden. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 18: Damn'd

Event Comment: [By Thomas Moore.] With Musick Vocal and Instrumental, Dances, and other Decorations proper to the same. Victor, History of the Theatres, II, 144: Three or four Years after the Performance of this famous Tragedy, I had the following account from several of the Actors who performed in it: That Sir Thomas gave them many good Dinners and Suppers during the Rehearsals of the Play, which they all laugh'd at as ridiculous; but as the Company was, at that Time, composed chiefly of young Actors, and got but small Encouragement from the Public; it may be justly said, their Necessities compelled them to perform this strange Tragedy, which stood some chance to divert from its Absurdities

Event Comment: By Command of His Royal Highness the Duke, and their Highnesses the Princesses Caroline, Mary, and Louisa [who were present]. London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 28 Feb.: The Author perceiving from the Behaviour of some Persons, a determin'd Resolution, notwithstanding the Presence of part of the Royal Family, to breed a Disturbance, to the Prejudice of the Play, occasion'd, as 'tis supposed, from an invidious Letter inserted in Thursday's Grubstreet Journal, has chose to withdraw his Play, rather than give them an Opportunity of gratifying their Malice, by a Repetition of such Disturbances as must necessarily prevent the Audience from hearing the Performance in Peace. Receipts: #112 14s