10. Both these incidents are the common property of Italian novelle and our own stage. Although not entirely impossible, they would appear highly suspicious in any connection. 11. He was at Margate 25 July, and at Bruges 7 August. 12. There do not appear to be any grounds for the oft-repeated assertions that Mrs. Behn communicated the intelligence when the Dutch were planning an attack (afterwards carried out) on the Thames and Medway squadrons, and that her warning was scoffed at. 13. Had he been imprisoned for political reasons it is impossible that there should have been so speedy a prospect of release. 14. Baptist May, Esq. (1629-98), Keeper of the Privy Purse. 15. William Chiffinch, confidential attendant and pimp to Charles II. 16. Amintas repeatedly stands for John Hoyle. In _Our Cabal_, however (_vide_ Vol. VI, p. 160), Hoyle is dubbed Lycidas. 17. _The Retrospective Review_, however (Vol. I, November, 1852), has an article, ‘Mrs. Behn’s Dramatic Writings,’ which warmly praises her comedies. The writer very justly observes that ‘they exhibit a brilliance of conversation in the dialogue, and a skill in arranging the plot and producing striking situations, in which she has few equals.’ He frequently insists upon her ‘great skill in conducting the intrigue of her pieces’, and with no little acumen declares that ‘her comedies may be cited as the most perfect models of the drama of the latter half of the seventeenth century.’ 18. Which it certainly was not secundum mid-Victorian morals. 19. Mr. Gosse in the Dictionary of National Biography basing upon the preface to _The Young King_, says that after knocking in vain for some time at the doors of the theatres with this tragi-comedy that could find neither manager nor publisher, she put it away and wrote _The Forc’d Marriage_, which proved more successful. Dr. Baker follows this, but I confess I cannot see due grounds for any such hypothesis. 20. The Duke’s Company opened at their new theatre, Dorset Garden, 9 November, 1671. 21. 4to, 1673. Mrs. Behn’s accurate knowledge of the theatre and technicalties theatrical as shown in the preface to this early play is certainly remarkable. It is perhaps worth noting that her allusion to the popularity of 1 _Henry IV_ was not included in _Shakspere Allusion-Book_ (ed. Furnivall and Munro, 1909), where it should have found a place. 22. In view of the extremely harsh treatment Ravenscroft has met with at the hands of the critics it may be worth while emphasizing Genest’s opinion that his ‘merit as a dramatic writer has been vastly underrated’. Ravenscroft has a facility in writing, an ease of dialogue, a knack of evoking laughter and picturing the ludicrous, above all a vitality which many a greater name entirely lacks. As a writer of farce, and farce very nearly akin to comedy, he is capital.