Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by Sir John Vanburgh [sic], with Alterations [by John Philip Kemble]. [Afterpiece in place of Arthur and Emmeline, advertised on playbill of 22 Oct.] Receipts: #176 1s. (140.1.0; 31.9.6; 4.10.6)

Event Comment: By Permission of the Lord Chamberlain. Benefit for the large Infant Orphan Family of a Man of Fashion [Sir Richard Perrott]. The mother of these helpless, unprotected infants, in contemplating the benevolence of a humane Public, throws herself with implicit confidence on the commiserating patronage of those who are ever ready to afford it for the relief of suffering innocence. Tickets to be had of Lady Perrott, No. 28, Spring-street, Portman-square [and see 18 Sept. 1797]

Event Comment: Mme Allegranti continuing so seriously indisposed, as in opinion of Sir George Baker, to render her immediate appearance [in Il Matrimonio Segreto, advertised in Morning Chronicle, 5 Apr.] extremely dangerous [see 9 Apr.]

Event Comment: The Lord Mayor's Show. By John Tatham. The author mentions as his assistants: Andrew Dakers and William Lightfoot, painters; Thomas Whiting, joyner; and Richard Clear, carver

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: This play was seen at the red bull by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 333, 335). Seaton speculates that the play may be: (1) Rowley's A Shoemaker a Gentleman; (2) a droll made out of the Christopher Sly prologue of The Taming of the Shrew; (3) Tourneur's lost The Nobleman or Great Man. William VanLennep ("The new-made Nobleman," Times Literary Supplement, 20 June 1936, p. 523) thinks that it may be Beaumont and Fletcher's Noble Gentleman. Nicoll (Restoration Drama, pp. 309-10) believes that this was Jolly's Company acting at the red bull

Event Comment: A facsimile of a bill announcing A Trial of Skill at this playhouse, 30 May 1664, is in Rariora, ed. John Eliot Hodgkin (London, n.d.), III, 53-54. See also William VanLennep, The Death of the Red Bull, Theatre Notebook, XVI (1962), 133-34

Event Comment: [No notice of production exists. See William VanLennep, "Thomas Killigrew Prepares His Plays for Production," Joseph Quincy Adams; Memorial Studies, p. 805

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: [Mrs Knipp] told us they begin at both houses to act on Monday [29] next. But I fear, after all this sorrow, their pains will be but little. Mrs Williams says, the Duke's house will now be much the better of the two, because of their women; which I am glad to hear

Event Comment: Killigrew contemplated a revival of Cicilia and Clarinda in 1667, a memorandum of 14 Feb. 1666@7 ordering the parts to be written out. See William VanLennep, Thomas Killigrew Prepares his Plays, p. 805

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: So she [Mrs Pepys] and I to the King's playhouse, and there sat to avoid seeing Knepp in box above where Mrs Williams happened to be, and there saw The Usurper; a pretty good play, in all but what is designed to resemble Cromwell and Hugh Peters, which is mighty silly