"I went to see this, and enjoyed what is undoubtedly a good play, addressing many important issues. I think however you might like to get some constuctive critical feedback. Some relates to the production, and some perhaps to the authorship, so maybe you might like to pass the latter on to the author.

1. The initial encounter in the prolog takes place in the context of a Quaker meeting. It needs somehow to be made clear that what the 2 people say are in fact thoughts in their heads, and are not articulated; interior monologs. I only realised this afterwards, when it became clear in the final session, which is also in a Quaker meeting; at the end Hannah actually stands up to bear witness publicly. Presumably it is the same Quaker meeting, and the whole play is in flashback?

Somehow one needs to convey that words spoken when seated are internal thought-streams, and when delivered standing are articulated for the benefit of the company. This should perhaps appear somehow as a stage direction in the printed work, and to be made clear to the audience via the programme, or via an introductory few words of commentary from a 'neutral observer' character, in the 'chorus' tradition.

2. Having the couple seated with their backs to the audience, as happened at the beginning, gave rise to audibility problems, especially for older members of the audience.

3. Quaker social work in the Liberties did take place in the 19th century, but was a collective effort, based on a location to which people came, rather than individual encounters; it would have been serviced by a committee.

4. Quaker entrepreneurhip and innovation in business was indeed a feature of the 18th and 19th centuries. The Darbys did indeed discover how to smelt iron with coal rather than wood, and their output did indeed help along the war effort against Napoleon. Similarly the Grubbs in Ireland went into optical systems for the astronomers and by WW1 were making gunsights of the British Navy. There is indeed tension between industrial innovation and Quaker ethics in a world dominated by imperialism and wars.

5. By analogy, it is reasonable to suggest that a Quaker business involved in sugar might be in trouble over sourcing, and that the anti-slavery movement might contain people with dubious motivations. The trouble is, Ireland being a small country, the people concerned with the former are immediately identifiable as the Bewleys (because of the tea and coffee connection), and one has to ask, were they into sugar, were they refining it, and where did they source it. This presumably is historically verifiable, and worth researching, if it has not been done already. An additional note on this in the printed version would be helpful. If there was tension between Quaker industrial history and the slave trade, as well as the military market, it needs to be brought out, as part of the collective learning process. Current Quaker interest in investment tries consciously to be ethical.

6. There are many historical sources referenced in the web-site http://www.quakers-in-ireland.org."