lor, called the Credulous Husband. Fondle wife = Foote Bellmour Lee: Lætitia Mrs. Hallam:with an Epilogue to be spoken by the B-d—d* Coffee House to begin at 7 o'clock.

Friday April 24 1747. On Saturday noon exactly at 12 o'clock, at the New Theatre in the Hay., Mr. Foote begs the favour of his friends to come and drink a dish of Chocolate with him; and 'tis hoped there will be a great deal of good company and some joyous spirits; he will endeavour to make the Morning as Diverting as possible. Tickets for this Entertainment to be had at George's Coffee-house Temple Bar, without which no person will be admitted— N.B. Sir Dilberry Diddle will be there and Lady Betty Frisk has absolutely promised.

The Advertisement was repeated on the following days.

June 1. At the request of several persons, who are desirous of spending an hour with Mr. Foote, but find the time inconvenient, instead of Chocolate in the Morning, Mr. Foote's friends are desired to to drink a dish of Tea with him at half an hour past 6 in the Evening-this day, to-morrow, and Wednesday-at which time they are obliged to give over, most of the company being engaged to set out on Thursday for country expeditions-N.B. doors to be opened at after 4.

June 6. The 35th day and positively the last.

At the desire of several persons of quality, Mr. Foote will give Tea this day at after 6, having prevailed on the performers to postpone their journey till Monday. (B.M.)

* Bedford.

Wilkinson's account is inaccurate, and not to be reconciled with the bills, but he gives a good description of what Foote really did.

THOMAS WHINCOP.

In 1747 was published a posthumous T. by Whincop-to which was added-" A compleat list of all "the English Dramatic Poets, and of all the Eng"lish Plays to 1747"-Whincop died in 1730-the Editor of the B. D. supposes Mottley to have contributed to the compilation of the List-some other person or persons probably finished it—for Mottley would hardly have said of himself" this gentleman "is, as we are told, at present almost bed-rid with "the gout."

The List is compiled from Langbaine, &c.-the additions, made to the preceding works of the same nature, consist chiefly in titlepage information-there are however some things in it worthy of notice-there are also some sad mistakes-for instance, Whincop says that Dryden was restored to the place of Poet Laureat on the death of Shadwell.

Scanderbeg, or Love and Liberty-this T. is founded on a French novel of the same name-it is on the whole a moderate play-some speeches are very well written-but the first part of the 5th act is pecu

liarly dull-Whincop's widow took great pains to get this play acted, but not being able to effect her purpose, she printed it by subscription.

D. L. 1747-1748.

Garrick was now become joint-Patentee with Lacy -they divided the business of the theatre between them-Lacy took the charge of the wardrobe, and Garrick the more important part of superintending and directing every thing relative to acting-Davies says Garrick was to have £500 per Ann. as a performer-this is the sum Davies supposes him to have had from Fleetwood-but we are sure he had £630 in 1742; and it is not very likely he should have had less in 1747-1748.

Order, decency and decorum were the first objects which Garrick as Manager kept constantly in his eye -he was so accomplished himself in all the external behaviour, as well as the more important parts of his profession, that his example was greatly conducive to the regularity which he laboured to establish-punctuality in attendance at Rehearsals was exacted and complied with, and as much due attention paid to the business of the scene, as during the time of acting the play-those players who had fallen into an unlucky habit of being imperfect in their parts, and of being obliged to supply that defect by assuming a

bold front, and forging matter of their own, Garrick steadily discouraged, till by being laid aside for some time they had learned to pay a proper respect to the audience and the author-in distributing parts he consulted the genius of the actor; and tho' he was not without those prejudices, which no man is entirely divested of, yet in general the characters were well suited to those who represented them. (Davies.)

66

66

Davies says" But in no respect did Garrick, as Manager, do himself so much credit, as in reviving many of the long neglected plays of Shakspeare— "I have it in my power to prove that 8 or 9 only "were on the acting list in the time of Wilks, Cibber "and Booth, but that Garrick annually gave the "Public 17 or 18"-the eulogium on Garrick in the Gentleman's Magazine for July 1776, in which the same assertion is repeated, was probably written by Davies himself.

Davies' statement is calculated to mislead-at the time when Wilks, Cibber and Booth were managers, Shakspeare's Comedies were only beginning to recover from the neglect into which they had fallenhis best Tragedies were always on their acting list— they frequently acted Julius Cæsar, which was never once acted by Garrick-they acted Henry the 4th, Henry the 8th and Othello much more frequently than Garrick did.

The management of Wilks, Cibber and Booth ceased in 1733-between 1733 and 1747 a great change had taken place in the public taste as to Shakspeare.

Giffard had revived Henry the 5th-the Winter's Tale-and All's well that ends well.

Rich in 1737-1738 acted most of the Historical plays he had previously revived the Merry Wives of Windsor-Measure for Measure-Much ado about Nothing-and (seemingly) Coriolanus.

Fleetwood had revived As you like it-Twelfth Night-and the Comedy of Errors.

Macklin had caused the Jew of Venice to be laid aside, and the original play to be revived.

Garrick had caused Davenant's alteration of Macbeth to be laid aside, and the original play to be revived.

Lacy had revived the Tempest as written by Shakspeare.

It is impossible to say what Garrick would have done, if he had become Manager of D. L. 20 or 30 years sooner-what he actually did we know.

He did himself great credit by the revival of Antony and Cleopatra-and of Cymbeline-and by his judicious alteration of the Taming of the Shrew.

He restored a considerable portion of King Lear, but he did not make clean work.

He brought out Victor's alteration of the Two Gentlemen of Verona.

The merit of reviving Romeo and Juliet must be divided between Theo. Cibber and Garrick.

On the other hand, Garrick altered the Winter's Tale and Hamlet considerably for the worse-he is strongly suspected of having turned the Tempest into an Opera.

Tho' Richard the 3d was his grand part, yet he persisted through the whole of his theatrical life in acting that play as mangled by Cibber.

The Merry Wives was seldom or never acted by