FREEMEN.

15th February, 1572. Here was Henry Lusshe and witnessed how that his app̃ntice Rafe Soda ranne awaye ffrom hym and contract hym self to three wemen and was asked at Westmrin the church and also had delt unhonestly wthhis mayde srˀvnt.19th May, 1573. Here was John Newsam and he was appoynted to brynge in his fyne for not pˀsentynge his apprentice.Here was John Appowell and he was appoynted the lyke.9th June, 1573. Here was Olyvˀ Pecocke the covenaunte Sˀvaunt of Allen Colly beinge comytted to Warde uppon Wednesday last on MrWarden Robynsons comaundment for goynge ffrom his master ffrom the Sounday untill Wednesdaye next and he was nowe relesed so that his master paynge his wages he shall serve hym.

19th May, 1573. Here was John Newsam and he was appoynted to brynge in his fyne for not pˀsentynge his apprentice.

Here was John Appowell and he was appoynted the lyke.

9th June, 1573. Here was Olyvˀ Pecocke the covenaunte Sˀvaunt of Allen Colly beinge comytted to Warde uppon Wednesday last on MrWarden Robynsons comaundment for goynge ffrom his master ffrom the Sounday untill Wednesdaye next and he was nowe relesed so that his master paynge his wages he shall serve hym.

21st July, 1573. Pecocke complained to the Court against his master “ffor not well usinge hym in beatinge hym.”

The next is a quaint piece of dryhumour—

6th October, 1573. Here was an order taken between Danyell Botham and his appˀntice that he should well and trewly sˀve his Mrand not to make any more complainte or trouble the Mrsany more, and yf he do nott sˀve his Mraccordyngly he shall have the Almes of the howsse.

The “Alms of the house” were on some other like occasions promised to troublesome apprentices.

18th October, 1573. Here was John Staples and brought in his apprentyze for evyll behaviorby hym comytted in his masters house wthhis masters mayde and he made his submyssion on his knees and asked his master forgevenes in the courte, and he was forgeven uppon condyc͠on that he should amend well & faythfullye wthout farther complaint or elles to have the ponnyshment of the howsse.11th December, 1599. In the matter in controversie betwixt Juliance Yonge & John Bradley his apprentice it is ordered that the sayd Yonge shall take his sayd apprentice into his service agayne And that the sayd Yonge shall use him as hee oughte to doe And that the sayd apprentice shall well and honestly behave himself towardsˀ his sayd Mr.22nd January, 1600. This daye Daniell Hinkesman brought in his fine of xlsfor sufferinge his apprentice to dwell wtha gentleman.

11th December, 1599. In the matter in controversie betwixt Juliance Yonge & John Bradley his apprentice it is ordered that the sayd Yonge shall take his sayd apprentice into his service agayne And that the sayd Yonge shall use him as hee oughte to doe And that the sayd apprentice shall well and honestly behave himself towardsˀ his sayd Mr.

22nd January, 1600. This daye Daniell Hinkesman brought in his fine of xlsfor sufferinge his apprentice to dwell wtha gentleman.

This apprentice had probably been let out to hire as a valet by Hinkesman, who received his wages instead of teaching him his trade.

20th February, 1600. Noah Bayley having been complained of for striking his apprentice Andrew Mathew, he was fined 40s., and at the next Court Mathew had license to sue Bayley at the Common law for “breaking his head.”

17th June, 1600. This daye it was ordered that George Langton apprentice to Mrffrederick shalbe comitted to the compter for his unreverent behaviour towardes his Mr.7th August, 1600. John Sares is to be called in question for geveinge wages to his apprentice.2nd December, 1600. This daye uppon complaynt made to this Courte it was ordered that Henry Needham should put awaye his apprentice Willm̄ Webbe for that it was then apparantly pˀved that hee is marryed wthin his terme And it was thereuppon furthrordered that the pˀsentac͠on should be discharged by a vacat thereuppon to be entered.5th May, 1601. This daie the wiefe of Thomas Asbridge decessed did complaine of Marke Nurse her apprentice for absentinge himselfe from her service and other his misdemeanors towardes her All wchuppon his humble suite and promise of amendment was forgeeven him.16th June, 1601. This daie it is ordered that Thomas Shurwin apprentice to John Urvey shalbe for ever utterly dischardged of his terme of apprentisship for that it appeareth to the Maisters uppon hearinge of their controversie that he hath the said apprentice colorablie.30th June, 1601. This daye Robert Wallis is dischardged from his apprentiship for that it appeared to this Court that his maister did not mayntayne him wthsufficient meate drynck and apparrell.22nd September, 1601. This daye uppon complaynt made by —— Jelly apprentice to Hughe ffell that the said ffell had put him oute of his service before hee had acquainted the MrstherewthIt was ordered that the said ffell should receive his said apprentice in to his service againe & that hee should pˀsently inroll him. And that the said ffell should appeare before the Mrsat the next Courte.3rd November, 1601. This daye uppon hearinge of the Controversie betwixt John Howe & his apprentice It is ordered that hee shall take home his said apprentice and use him well hereafter And whereas the said Apprentice hath complayned for that the said Howe dothe not exercyse the said apprentice in his trade of Barbery & Surgery It is furthrordered that if the said Howe shall not take a shoppe and use his trade before Christemas next that the said apprentice shalbe turned over to anothrof the same arte.16th March, 1602. This daye it is pˀmised & undertaken before the Mrsof this Company by Robert Leadbeater that hee the said Robert shall & will at the expirac͠on of the apprentisheep of Henry Edwards his apprentice geve unto the said Henry twoe suites of decent apparrell & a cloke.20th April, 1602. I Michaell Braye doe pˀmise and undertake That at the ende & expirac͠on of the tearme of apprenticeship of George Parkins my Apprentice I will geve unto him a new suite of apparrell viz one dublett one pˀ of hose one hatt one pˀ of stockins and one Cloke of decent apparrell In witnes whereof I have hereunto put my hand.22nd February, 1603. This daye it is ordered that Thomas Mownsley shall for his disobedience to his Mrbe comitted to the Compter.16th April, 1605. This daye Peter Saunderson certiefied the Court that hee had offered to inroll his apprentice before the Chamberlin and it was denyed him because the apprentice could not at the end of his terme accomplishe the Age of xxiij yeres.4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that John Udall shall at the next Courte bringe in his fine of xlsfor puttinge a waye his Apprentice Tho. Hobbes wthout orMrsconsent (see 18th June).4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Roger Kiffin shalbe dischardged of his apprentiship wthRichard Bonner for that hee wanteth meate drinck & apparrell And hee is to finde him selfe a nother Mrof this Company. (See 25th June.)18th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that John Udall shalbe committed to the Compter for his contempt.17125th June, 1605. Richard Bonnẽr is to bringe in his apprentices Roger Kiffins Indenture at the next Courte or ells hee is to be comitted to the Compter.25th June, 1605. This daye Thomas Clemence was fined at xsfor that hee was not bound apprentice by the Clark of this Company.24th September, 1605. This day it is ordered that David Vaughan apprentice to Richard Davis shalbe pˀntlie dischardged from his said Mrfor the residue of his terme to come for that his said Mrhath given him unlawfull correction as it was affirmed and hath not trayned him up in the trade that he used being Barbinge and Surgery. And is to bring in the Apprentices indenture att the next Courte or ells to be comitted to the Compter for his contempt. And the appˀntice is in the meane tyme to continue wthhis freindꝭ And is not to sˀve any pˀson that useth the trade of silck weavinge any more wthin the liberties of London.7th January, 1606. This day it is ordered that John Browne and his apprentice be here at the next Courte. And he is to be comaunded from our Mrsto discharge his appˀntice out of Bridewell wchhe holdeth there And then to be before orsaid Mrsat their next Court both he and his apprentice.14th January, 1606. John Browne is to bringe in his fine for puttinge away his appˀntice wthout the Mrsorder.5th July, 1608. This daye in the Controversie betwixt Nicholas Braye and Humfrey Pittꝭ It is ordered for that the Mrsdoe fynde that the Apprentice is not kept as hee ought to be but is lowsie and also his Mrfor want of change of apparrell And that therefore wee doe not fynde him a fit MrIt is ordered that if the said Nicholas Braye doe not hereafter use his apprentice in Better Order that then the apprentice shalbe turned over to anothrfreeman of this Company.23rd May, 1609. This daye Richard Tyler broughte in his fine accordinge to a former order for puttinge awaye (i.e., imprisoning) his apprentice wthout the Mrsorder And it was mittigated to xxs.19th November, 1611. At this Court it is ordered that John Todd shall on the next tuesdaies Court bring in his fyne of 40sfor that he did not bynde an appˀntice wchis now wthhim according to the Custome of this howse.19th November, 1611. At this Court Robert Hawley the appˀntice of Thomas Clarke was for his stubbornes & other unsemely pranckꝭ by him used towardꝭ his Mras also for his lewd & bad service brought before the Mrswhereupon he promising of amendemthis faultꝭ was for this tyme remitted.22nd February, 1613. In the complaint made by William Richardson against his MrJohn Sabyn being heard & proved at this Court by his owne confession that Sabyn did use unlawfull correction to his appˀntice. It is ordered that the Mrshall not use hereafter any such unlawfull correction for if he doe & his appˀntice make complaint thereof to the Mrsof this Company, then the appˀntice shall be taken awaye from him And further it is ordered that the appˀntice shall doe his Mrjust & true service, And that the said Sabyn shall the next Court daie bring in his fyne for not inrowling of his said appˀntice wthin the tyme lymitted by the ordynancꝭ of this howse.22nd February, 1613. This daye Joseph Boreman made promise to pˀforme such order as the Mrsdid heretofore set downe between him and his appˀntice namely⁾ that he will give to the same appˀntice two suitꝭ of apparell fitt for such an appˀntice accordinge to the true meaning of the same wthout any fraud.27th September, 1614. At this Court Raph Dixon the appˀntice of our MrHassall for manie lewd misdemeanors& for getting a woman wthchild, being an appˀntice shold have had the correction of the howse, but upon considerac͠on had he is to be sent to bridewell.23rd January, 1615. In the complaint made by Margery Stokes in the behalf of her grand child John Taft who is thˀ apprentice of one John Hedlowe for that the said Hedlow haveing receaved wththe said appˀntice the some of Tenn poundꝭ doth now turne him away & refuseth to restore the monie wchhe had wthhim. It is therefore by this Court ordered that the said Hedlow shall either receave the same appˀntice into his service agayne or otherwise repaie the said some of Tenn poundes wherefore he promised unto this Court to take the same appˀntice agayne into his service.14th March, 1615. In the matter of complaint made by the weif of one Xp̃ofer Greene who is now gone to the East indies of & about her servaunt or appˀntice for that he kepeth her shop & doth gyve her no allowaunce towardꝭ the kepeing of her out of the gettingꝭ in the same shop wchbeing duely herd at this Court It is ordered that the said appˀntice shall from henceforth weekelie make unto his Mrisa trew & just accompt ofsuch monie as he shall gett in the same shop & that from henceforth he shall be at the appoyntment of his mistris & of the Mrsof this companie and his Mrisshall have & enjoy all such benifitt as shalbe gotten by the said shopp.14th November, 1615. In the complaynt made by the servant of William Corbett against his Mrwchbeinge examyned at this Court It is aparyant that the boy hath very stubburnlie & naughtielie behaved himself unto his MrWhereupon it is this daie ordered that the boy shall goe home agayne wthhis Mr& behave himselfe more honestlie then formerlie he hath done wchthe boy promiseth to doe.18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by MrisWootten against her appˀntice Thomas Hill for his neclect of service & for pleaing at dice & whoring It is therefore ordered that the boy be corrected.18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by David Richardson against his Mrffletcher for lack of vittualls It is ordered that ffletcher shall take the boy home & kepe him as an appˀntice ought to be kept.

17th June, 1600. This daye it was ordered that George Langton apprentice to Mrffrederick shalbe comitted to the compter for his unreverent behaviour towardes his Mr.

7th August, 1600. John Sares is to be called in question for geveinge wages to his apprentice.

2nd December, 1600. This daye uppon complaynt made to this Courte it was ordered that Henry Needham should put awaye his apprentice Willm̄ Webbe for that it was then apparantly pˀved that hee is marryed wthin his terme And it was thereuppon furthrordered that the pˀsentac͠on should be discharged by a vacat thereuppon to be entered.

5th May, 1601. This daie the wiefe of Thomas Asbridge decessed did complaine of Marke Nurse her apprentice for absentinge himselfe from her service and other his misdemeanors towardes her All wchuppon his humble suite and promise of amendment was forgeeven him.

16th June, 1601. This daie it is ordered that Thomas Shurwin apprentice to John Urvey shalbe for ever utterly dischardged of his terme of apprentisship for that it appeareth to the Maisters uppon hearinge of their controversie that he hath the said apprentice colorablie.

30th June, 1601. This daye Robert Wallis is dischardged from his apprentiship for that it appeared to this Court that his maister did not mayntayne him wthsufficient meate drynck and apparrell.

22nd September, 1601. This daye uppon complaynt made by —— Jelly apprentice to Hughe ffell that the said ffell had put him oute of his service before hee had acquainted the MrstherewthIt was ordered that the said ffell should receive his said apprentice in to his service againe & that hee should pˀsently inroll him. And that the said ffell should appeare before the Mrsat the next Courte.

3rd November, 1601. This daye uppon hearinge of the Controversie betwixt John Howe & his apprentice It is ordered that hee shall take home his said apprentice and use him well hereafter And whereas the said Apprentice hath complayned for that the said Howe dothe not exercyse the said apprentice in his trade of Barbery & Surgery It is furthrordered that if the said Howe shall not take a shoppe and use his trade before Christemas next that the said apprentice shalbe turned over to anothrof the same arte.

16th March, 1602. This daye it is pˀmised & undertaken before the Mrsof this Company by Robert Leadbeater that hee the said Robert shall & will at the expirac͠on of the apprentisheep of Henry Edwards his apprentice geve unto the said Henry twoe suites of decent apparrell & a cloke.

20th April, 1602. I Michaell Braye doe pˀmise and undertake That at the ende & expirac͠on of the tearme of apprenticeship of George Parkins my Apprentice I will geve unto him a new suite of apparrell viz one dublett one pˀ of hose one hatt one pˀ of stockins and one Cloke of decent apparrell In witnes whereof I have hereunto put my hand.

22nd February, 1603. This daye it is ordered that Thomas Mownsley shall for his disobedience to his Mrbe comitted to the Compter.

16th April, 1605. This daye Peter Saunderson certiefied the Court that hee had offered to inroll his apprentice before the Chamberlin and it was denyed him because the apprentice could not at the end of his terme accomplishe the Age of xxiij yeres.

4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that John Udall shall at the next Courte bringe in his fine of xlsfor puttinge a waye his Apprentice Tho. Hobbes wthout orMrsconsent (see 18th June).

4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Roger Kiffin shalbe dischardged of his apprentiship wthRichard Bonner for that hee wanteth meate drinck & apparrell And hee is to finde him selfe a nother Mrof this Company. (See 25th June.)

18th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that John Udall shalbe committed to the Compter for his contempt.171

25th June, 1605. Richard Bonnẽr is to bringe in his apprentices Roger Kiffins Indenture at the next Courte or ells hee is to be comitted to the Compter.

25th June, 1605. This daye Thomas Clemence was fined at xsfor that hee was not bound apprentice by the Clark of this Company.

24th September, 1605. This day it is ordered that David Vaughan apprentice to Richard Davis shalbe pˀntlie dischardged from his said Mrfor the residue of his terme to come for that his said Mrhath given him unlawfull correction as it was affirmed and hath not trayned him up in the trade that he used being Barbinge and Surgery. And is to bring in the Apprentices indenture att the next Courte or ells to be comitted to the Compter for his contempt. And the appˀntice is in the meane tyme to continue wthhis freindꝭ And is not to sˀve any pˀson that useth the trade of silck weavinge any more wthin the liberties of London.

7th January, 1606. This day it is ordered that John Browne and his apprentice be here at the next Courte. And he is to be comaunded from our Mrsto discharge his appˀntice out of Bridewell wchhe holdeth there And then to be before orsaid Mrsat their next Court both he and his apprentice.

14th January, 1606. John Browne is to bringe in his fine for puttinge away his appˀntice wthout the Mrsorder.

5th July, 1608. This daye in the Controversie betwixt Nicholas Braye and Humfrey Pittꝭ It is ordered for that the Mrsdoe fynde that the Apprentice is not kept as hee ought to be but is lowsie and also his Mrfor want of change of apparrell And that therefore wee doe not fynde him a fit MrIt is ordered that if the said Nicholas Braye doe not hereafter use his apprentice in Better Order that then the apprentice shalbe turned over to anothrfreeman of this Company.

23rd May, 1609. This daye Richard Tyler broughte in his fine accordinge to a former order for puttinge awaye (i.e., imprisoning) his apprentice wthout the Mrsorder And it was mittigated to xxs.

19th November, 1611. At this Court it is ordered that John Todd shall on the next tuesdaies Court bring in his fyne of 40sfor that he did not bynde an appˀntice wchis now wthhim according to the Custome of this howse.

19th November, 1611. At this Court Robert Hawley the appˀntice of Thomas Clarke was for his stubbornes & other unsemely pranckꝭ by him used towardꝭ his Mras also for his lewd & bad service brought before the Mrswhereupon he promising of amendemthis faultꝭ was for this tyme remitted.

22nd February, 1613. In the complaint made by William Richardson against his MrJohn Sabyn being heard & proved at this Court by his owne confession that Sabyn did use unlawfull correction to his appˀntice. It is ordered that the Mrshall not use hereafter any such unlawfull correction for if he doe & his appˀntice make complaint thereof to the Mrsof this Company, then the appˀntice shall be taken awaye from him And further it is ordered that the appˀntice shall doe his Mrjust & true service, And that the said Sabyn shall the next Court daie bring in his fyne for not inrowling of his said appˀntice wthin the tyme lymitted by the ordynancꝭ of this howse.

22nd February, 1613. This daye Joseph Boreman made promise to pˀforme such order as the Mrsdid heretofore set downe between him and his appˀntice namely⁾ that he will give to the same appˀntice two suitꝭ of apparell fitt for such an appˀntice accordinge to the true meaning of the same wthout any fraud.

27th September, 1614. At this Court Raph Dixon the appˀntice of our MrHassall for manie lewd misdemeanors& for getting a woman wthchild, being an appˀntice shold have had the correction of the howse, but upon considerac͠on had he is to be sent to bridewell.

23rd January, 1615. In the complaint made by Margery Stokes in the behalf of her grand child John Taft who is thˀ apprentice of one John Hedlowe for that the said Hedlow haveing receaved wththe said appˀntice the some of Tenn poundꝭ doth now turne him away & refuseth to restore the monie wchhe had wthhim. It is therefore by this Court ordered that the said Hedlow shall either receave the same appˀntice into his service agayne or otherwise repaie the said some of Tenn poundes wherefore he promised unto this Court to take the same appˀntice agayne into his service.

14th March, 1615. In the matter of complaint made by the weif of one Xp̃ofer Greene who is now gone to the East indies of & about her servaunt or appˀntice for that he kepeth her shop & doth gyve her no allowaunce towardꝭ the kepeing of her out of the gettingꝭ in the same shop wchbeing duely herd at this Court It is ordered that the said appˀntice shall from henceforth weekelie make unto his Mrisa trew & just accompt ofsuch monie as he shall gett in the same shop & that from henceforth he shall be at the appoyntment of his mistris & of the Mrsof this companie and his Mrisshall have & enjoy all such benifitt as shalbe gotten by the said shopp.

14th November, 1615. In the complaynt made by the servant of William Corbett against his Mrwchbeinge examyned at this Court It is aparyant that the boy hath very stubburnlie & naughtielie behaved himself unto his MrWhereupon it is this daie ordered that the boy shall goe home agayne wthhis Mr& behave himselfe more honestlie then formerlie he hath done wchthe boy promiseth to doe.

18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by MrisWootten against her appˀntice Thomas Hill for his neclect of service & for pleaing at dice & whoring It is therefore ordered that the boy be corrected.

18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by David Richardson against his Mrffletcher for lack of vittualls It is ordered that ffletcher shall take the boy home & kepe him as an appˀntice ought to be kept.

There are several records of masters being fined for keeping more than three apprentices, the usual penalty being £5, though this was sometimes mitigated on petition.

13th June, 1626. This daye John Pinder made complaint against Janson his appˀntice, this Courte caused the vizard and coate to be brought into the Parlor, and the apprentice submitted himselfe to his Maister soe that his punishment was forborne.

For some particulars as to the vizard coate and bulbegger, seep. 393. The mere sight of them had a softening effect upon Master Janson, as also upon George Tether, who seems to have caught a glimpse of them next year.

7th August, 1627. This daye the weife of Salomon Carr made complaint against her apprentice George Tether formerly bound to Jeffery Baskervile deceased and he had the bulbegger showed him, whoe upon his humble submission to his Mriswas spared in hoape of his better service to her hereafter.20th November, 1632. Martine Stamp made complaint ag̃t John Scott by petic͠on to this Court thereby intimateing that his son Scotts appˀntice is nowe kept andimployed onely for digging delveing & planting and pruneing potatoes & tobacco in the Barmoothoes Iland. (Query Bermudas.)28th January, 1635. It is ordered that Jonas Gargrave shalbe prosecuted to be disfraunchised at the charge of this house in regard he tooke a married mann apprentice knoweingly.

20th November, 1632. Martine Stamp made complaint ag̃t John Scott by petic͠on to this Court thereby intimateing that his son Scotts appˀntice is nowe kept andimployed onely for digging delveing & planting and pruneing potatoes & tobacco in the Barmoothoes Iland. (Query Bermudas.)

28th January, 1635. It is ordered that Jonas Gargrave shalbe prosecuted to be disfraunchised at the charge of this house in regard he tooke a married mann apprentice knoweingly.

Mr. Heydon’s apprentice, next referred to, was doubtless a gay and swaggering young gentleman, and the Court in meteing out its amusing sentence must have been conscious of touching him on a sore place.

9th August, 1647. Mr. Heydon complayneing to this Court of his apprentice here present in Court ffor his evill and stubborne Behavior towards him and frequent absences out of his service in Day time and in late houres at night The said apprentice being in Court to answer to the same did rudely and most irreverently behave himselfe towards his said Mrand the whole Court in sawcy language and behaviour useing severall Oathes protesting that he will not serve his Mrwhatever shall come of it This Court did therefore cause the Haire of the said apprentice (being undecently long) to be cut shorter.8th August, 1729. It is ordered that the Clarke do sue Mr.Lee Mr.Pemble and Mr.Bonzer for binding their Apprentices by Scriveners and not at the Hall.4th August, 1741. It is ordered that James Parnell Stevenson who was this day bound an apprentice to Thos.fford be brought here 12 months hence by his Marthat the Court may be satisfyed of his being better improved in his Learning.

8th August, 1729. It is ordered that the Clarke do sue Mr.Lee Mr.Pemble and Mr.Bonzer for binding their Apprentices by Scriveners and not at the Hall.

4th August, 1741. It is ordered that James Parnell Stevenson who was this day bound an apprentice to Thos.fford be brought here 12 months hence by his Marthat the Court may be satisfyed of his being better improved in his Learning.

5th November, 1791. Elizabeth Conyers was apprenticed to Elizabeth Castle and presented and bound in Court. This is but one of numerous entries of girl apprentices.

The Registers of apprentices were for a long period kept in Latin,e.g.:

28th July, 1658. Mathew Moy fil̃l̃ M.M. nuper de com̃ Staford vintener̊ defunct: põ: se ap̃p. Tho. Pace Watchmaker pro 7 annis a die dãt.

The following is an example of a boy being bound to a freewoman of the Company.

23rd June, 1658. Daniel Alderson fil̃l̃ Jacobi A. nuper Civ. et B. S. Londini defunct põ: se ap̃p. matri suo Katherine Alderson pro 8 annis a die dãt.

And here is an instance of a girl, the daughter of a “gentleman,” being bound to a Barber-Surgeon and to his wife.

18th December, 1660. Katharina Bowghy fiɫ. Georgii B. de Addley in com̃ Stafford gent. defunct põ: se ap̃p WmoBennett B.C. et Marthæ uxori ejus pro 7 annis a die dãt.

Theearliest recorded fine on admission to the freedom was £3, one Martin Partridge being sworn in on 26th July, 1551, when he paid £1 and gave security for the remainder.

10th September, 1551. John Bryckett, “toothe drawer,” was admitted “a brother into this house” and paid £1.

10th November, 1551. On this day four freemen were admitted paying respectively 6s.8d., 10s., 2s., 10d., and another man paid nil, which indicates that the fines on admission were variable and at the pleasure of the Court.

19th September, 1552. It was ordered that free journeymen should not pay quarterage until such time as they set up for themselves and kept house.

4th July, 1566. It was ordered that in future any one seeking admission to the freedom if “Inglyshe borne” should pay £4 and any “alyan or straynger” £5.

7th October, 1567. In this Courte Rich Morrys upon his fre makinge pˀmyssed to geve the Mrsa bucke.21st October, 1567. In this Courte Thomas Symons and Willm fferrat are sworne and admytted brethren of this Company and are lycenced to sett open shoppe as parteners to gether wthoute Smythefelde bars.2nd June, 1573. Here was Edward Duffeeld of London a practioner in phisick & Surgery and required to be a brother of this Company and yt was agreed that he should pay xlsin hand and other xlsat St.James daye.9th June, 1573. Here was Gabriel Petrol for not being admytted a Brother [he] occupynge Surgerye wthout admyttaunce and he promysed he would and yt was agreed that he should at a moneth ende bringe in xlsin pˀte of payment of vliwthout any farther delaye.3rd June, 1600. Henry Wheelis is appoynted to pˀcure his Mrto make him free the next Court or to geve ovˀ his shop in long lane yf not then to be comitted to the compter.22nd July, 1600. This daye Henry Wilson of Ratcliffe and Mathewe Eaton of StBartholomew in West Smythfeyld were suters to the Mrsof this Company to become brothrsof the same whereuppon they are by this Court injoyned to geve their answere the next Court what gratificac͠on they will bestoweof172the Company.6th November, 1604. This daie Vincent Lowe became humble suiter to this Companie to be admytted into the same by redempc͠on to wchrequest this Courte hath consented pˀvided hee paie to this Companie in gratificac͠on vliof lawfull money of England and doe bestowe a dinnruppon the Assistantꝭ on Thursday next.5th February, 1605. This daie it is ordered that Edward Carelill Inholder shalbe translated from his Company to this payinge to the Mrsto the use of this Company iiijliand beareinge the ordenary chardge.9th April, 1605. It is this daye ordered that Raphe Parsons a freeman of this Company and Thomas Sampson Edward Squier and Robert Hoddy late servants & apprentices to xp̃ofer Thompson shall fynde them Mrsin this Company to be turned over unto before whitson tyde next And that they shall continue no longer wththeir mistres because shee is nowe marryed to a Grocer who is not free of this Company.29th January, 1610. fforasmuch as Tobye Johnson would not give consent to this Court that JamesKent173should be made a freeman The Court have thought fytt the said James should be at this Court sworne a freeman of this Company for that ytt cannot appeere to this Court that the said Johnson can prove any materiall thinge against the said Jame to debarr him of his freedome.14th January, 1611. This daie William Tavernor the late appˀtice of Widdowe Sanderson did before the Mrsof this Company promise that he would not at any tyme hereafter set up a barbers shopp in any place wthin twopˀisshes174at the least where the said Widdowe Sanderson dwelleth or keepeth shopp uppon wchpromise soe by him made the said Widdowe Sanderson is contented to make him a freeman of this cittie not wthstanding he hath untill October next to serve.2nd July, 1612. This daie at this Court yt is ordered that Edward Squior the Dyer shall not be translated from this Company unto the Company of the Dyers for that if this howse shall give consent unto him maney others of this Company as well Dyers & grocers as other tradꝭ would sue to have the like kindenes.

7th October, 1567. In this Courte Rich Morrys upon his fre makinge pˀmyssed to geve the Mrsa bucke.

21st October, 1567. In this Courte Thomas Symons and Willm fferrat are sworne and admytted brethren of this Company and are lycenced to sett open shoppe as parteners to gether wthoute Smythefelde bars.

2nd June, 1573. Here was Edward Duffeeld of London a practioner in phisick & Surgery and required to be a brother of this Company and yt was agreed that he should pay xlsin hand and other xlsat St.James daye.

9th June, 1573. Here was Gabriel Petrol for not being admytted a Brother [he] occupynge Surgerye wthout admyttaunce and he promysed he would and yt was agreed that he should at a moneth ende bringe in xlsin pˀte of payment of vliwthout any farther delaye.

3rd June, 1600. Henry Wheelis is appoynted to pˀcure his Mrto make him free the next Court or to geve ovˀ his shop in long lane yf not then to be comitted to the compter.

22nd July, 1600. This daye Henry Wilson of Ratcliffe and Mathewe Eaton of StBartholomew in West Smythfeyld were suters to the Mrsof this Company to become brothrsof the same whereuppon they are by this Court injoyned to geve their answere the next Court what gratificac͠on they will bestoweof172the Company.

6th November, 1604. This daie Vincent Lowe became humble suiter to this Companie to be admytted into the same by redempc͠on to wchrequest this Courte hath consented pˀvided hee paie to this Companie in gratificac͠on vliof lawfull money of England and doe bestowe a dinnruppon the Assistantꝭ on Thursday next.

5th February, 1605. This daie it is ordered that Edward Carelill Inholder shalbe translated from his Company to this payinge to the Mrsto the use of this Company iiijliand beareinge the ordenary chardge.

9th April, 1605. It is this daye ordered that Raphe Parsons a freeman of this Company and Thomas Sampson Edward Squier and Robert Hoddy late servants & apprentices to xp̃ofer Thompson shall fynde them Mrsin this Company to be turned over unto before whitson tyde next And that they shall continue no longer wththeir mistres because shee is nowe marryed to a Grocer who is not free of this Company.

29th January, 1610. fforasmuch as Tobye Johnson would not give consent to this Court that JamesKent173should be made a freeman The Court have thought fytt the said James should be at this Court sworne a freeman of this Company for that ytt cannot appeere to this Court that the said Johnson can prove any materiall thinge against the said Jame to debarr him of his freedome.

14th January, 1611. This daie William Tavernor the late appˀtice of Widdowe Sanderson did before the Mrsof this Company promise that he would not at any tyme hereafter set up a barbers shopp in any place wthin twopˀisshes174at the least where the said Widdowe Sanderson dwelleth or keepeth shopp uppon wchpromise soe by him made the said Widdowe Sanderson is contented to make him a freeman of this cittie not wthstanding he hath untill October next to serve.

2nd July, 1612. This daie at this Court yt is ordered that Edward Squior the Dyer shall not be translated from this Company unto the Company of the Dyers for that if this howse shall give consent unto him maney others of this Company as well Dyers & grocers as other tradꝭ would sue to have the like kindenes.

9th January, 1615. At this Court, one John Mathews, “an oculist,” made suit for his admission byredemption—

wchthis Court did consent unto conditionallie to gyve this howse a great beare bowle sutable to the rest of the great beare bowles wchhe consented unto.

Ordered19th September, 1552, that Peter Saxton and Thomas Dixon shalbe dysmiste of the Clothinge for their yll demeanor and behavyor And also Mathew Johnson because he ys not habull.1755th November, 1555. Ordered that Henry Pemarton shall not weare his Lyvery hoode nor paye no maner of quartrage unto this house but shalbe cleane exempted out of the same.

Ordered19th September, 1552, that Peter Saxton and Thomas Dixon shalbe dysmiste of the Clothinge for their yll demeanor and behavyor And also Mathew Johnson because he ys not habull.175

5th November, 1555. Ordered that Henry Pemarton shall not weare his Lyvery hoode nor paye no maner of quartrage unto this house but shalbe cleane exempted out of the same.

26th March, 1558. Robert Foster, Robert Grove, and Thomas Barnet were expelled the Livery “because they are not able.”

4th July, 1566. It was ordered that the Livery from thenceforth should not exceed fifty persons.

3rd December, 1566. Thomas Lambkyn and John Morryt appeared before the Court and testified against Edward Parke for that the saidEdward—

saide he wolde not come to the Courte beynge warned & ytyf the Mrcomytted hym to warde he wolde brynge the Mrbefore the Lorde cheefe Justice And it is ordered ytthe saide Parke shall & is upon his humble submission remytted.17626th September, 1581. It was agreed that evˀy one in the Lyverie should go decently in gownes all a like at all metinges and assemblies.30th June, 1601. This daye Abraham Allen John Hassold Richard Eade & Henry Oseyld lately taken into the livery of this Company pˀsented themselves in their livˀy gownes and the Mraccordinge to order placed their hoods uppon their showldrs.

26th September, 1581. It was agreed that evˀy one in the Lyverie should go decently in gownes all a like at all metinges and assemblies.

30th June, 1601. This daye Abraham Allen John Hassold Richard Eade & Henry Oseyld lately taken into the livery of this Company pˀsented themselves in their livˀy gownes and the Mraccordinge to order placed their hoods uppon their showldrs.

6th May, 1602. Roger Jenkins, free of the Weavers’ Company and an “admitted brothrin the practize of Surgery,” applied to be admitted to the freedom, and upon payment of £10 was made free and taken into the Clothing.

7th June, 1602. This daye it was ordered that forasmuch as Richard Samborne one of the livery of this Company had used divers opprobrius & undecent woordes of MrNewsam That the said Richard should forbeare the wearinge of his livery & hud untill hee had ordrtherefore from the Mrsof this Company.16th August, 1602. This daye Richard Howlden and Thomas Grig were admitted into the clothinge of this mistery and were commaunded to pˀvide them necessary apparrell for the same.8th November, 1604. This daye Dominick Lumley became humble suiter to this Courte to be dischardged of the office of Steward and Mrof the Anothomie and of the Livˀy and all officers wthinne the same and in considerac͠on thereof hee is to paie tenn poundꝭ to be converted into three peecꝭ of plate as a guifte for his dischardge.5th February, 1605. This daye Richard Cade & Richard Holden were fyned for not beinge atPowles177in theire Lyveryes & theire hoodes on Candlemas daye last.22nd January, 1606. This daie Roger Buckley & Richard Wood Juniorfor that they dwell in the Cuntrey and have not for long tyme gyven their attendaunce in their lyveryes accordeing to order are absolutely dismissed owt of the lyvery of this Company.21st August, 1609. This day Andrew Wheatley was fined to xijdfor attendinge in a fallinge band wthhis livery gowne wchhe accordinglie payd.26th October, 1612. This daie it is ordered that from hensforth the lyvˀie of this Company maie at their meetingꝭ out of this howse weare theirhates178wththeir lyvˀies Any order heretofore made to the contrary notwithstanding.

16th August, 1602. This daye Richard Howlden and Thomas Grig were admitted into the clothinge of this mistery and were commaunded to pˀvide them necessary apparrell for the same.

8th November, 1604. This daye Dominick Lumley became humble suiter to this Courte to be dischardged of the office of Steward and Mrof the Anothomie and of the Livˀy and all officers wthinne the same and in considerac͠on thereof hee is to paie tenn poundꝭ to be converted into three peecꝭ of plate as a guifte for his dischardge.

5th February, 1605. This daye Richard Cade & Richard Holden were fyned for not beinge atPowles177in theire Lyveryes & theire hoodes on Candlemas daye last.

22nd January, 1606. This daie Roger Buckley & Richard Wood Juniorfor that they dwell in the Cuntrey and have not for long tyme gyven their attendaunce in their lyveryes accordeing to order are absolutely dismissed owt of the lyvery of this Company.

21st August, 1609. This day Andrew Wheatley was fined to xijdfor attendinge in a fallinge band wthhis livery gowne wchhe accordinglie payd.

26th October, 1612. This daie it is ordered that from hensforth the lyvˀie of this Company maie at their meetingꝭ out of this howse weare theirhates178wththeir lyvˀies Any order heretofore made to the contrary notwithstanding.

29th December, 1615. Four liverymen admitted this day paid £2 each as a fine, and fifteen others paid £5 each. Humphrey Downinge, who had been chosen a Liveryman, and would not accept the Clothing, was fined and paid £10.

27th January, 1617. It was ordered that from henceforth the Liverymen were not to appear at the Hall in their gowns andhoods on Christmas, Twelfth and Candlemas days “as formerlie they were accustomed to doe,” but at their seats at St. Paul’s instead.

13th September, 1621. The livery was generally composed of an equal number of Barbers and of Surgeons; on this day it wasordered—

That at the next choise of a new Lyvery there shalbe chosen a Barber more than a Surgeon for that MrKellett hath not accepted of the place as yett, if he shall not accept thereof.

1636. A great many Liverymen were chosen this year, apparently for the purpose of assisting by their fines, the fund for the building of the Anatomical Theatre; from various entries at this period it would seem that when a freeman desired to be excused taking the Livery, he was obliged to take an oath before the Masters of his inability to pay the fine.

19th May, 1637. This Court upon divers treatise with Abraham Purrott a brother of this Companie being chosen into the livery by a former Court & he being summoned to appeare this daye by agreemtyet came not and hath alsoeformerly179answered that he will not hold the place of a liveryman nor paye the fine but would onely give a peece of plate of vlito this house as his gift in full satisfaction of all his fines & places, wchthis Court doth think to be farr short And therefore this Court doth impose and fine the said Abraham Purrott at xxliaccording to the ordinances confirmed by the Lords & by the Statute.

Several others were from time to time similarly fined, both in the 17th and 18th centuries.

2nd August, 1737. At this Court Robert Young who was the apprentice of James Phillips Surgeon was admitted into the freedom of the Company by service and was sworn, and the said MrYoung at the same time took the Livery, and his master MrPhillips out of his own bounty and a just sense of the diligent and faithfull services of the said Robert Young during his Apprenticeship did not only pay the charges of the said MrYoung’s freedom but did likewise bestow upon him his fine for the Livery being ten pounds.29th October, 1751. It is ordered that upon all future days for swearing in the Lord Mayor of this City at Westminster when this Company shall have their Stand as usual No Liveryman shallbe admitted into the same without leave of the Master unless he shall walk in the Publick Procession cloathed in his proper Livery gown and hood according to his summons.

29th October, 1751. It is ordered that upon all future days for swearing in the Lord Mayor of this City at Westminster when this Company shall have their Stand as usual No Liveryman shallbe admitted into the same without leave of the Master unless he shall walk in the Publick Procession cloathed in his proper Livery gown and hood according to his summons.

3rd October, 1752. It was furtherordered—

That two men and a constable shall be hired to guard the Stand and see that the said Order be complied with.

9th November, 1765. Several liverymen notwithstanding former orders to the contrary, having appeared on the Company’s Stand on Lord Mayors’ days without their gowns and hoods, it was ordered that any liveryman transgressing in the like in future, should be fined half-a-guinea.

TheYeomanry of the Barber-Surgeons appear to have had a most chequered existence, having been “established” and “put downe” several times, until finally they appear to have died out both in constitution and in name.

The Yeomanry answered exactly to the class of Members who are now styled “Freemen,” and for a long period were the most numerous body in the Company. In early times the numbers of the Livery or Clothing were strictly limited, and under the Tudors and Stuarts rarely exceeded fifty, but as the persons who were compelled to take up their freedom, and those who came in voluntarilyor by patrimony and servitude have always been a numerous section, it appears to have been considered politic to give a constitution to these inferior members of the Mystery, and consequently a Yeomanry, or Company within the Company was set up, and to this the new freeman was admitted after he had been presented and sworn before the Masters or Governors of the Clothing.

The Court of the Company framed the Ordinances for the Yeomanry, and whilst delegating to them many of their own privileges, as, for instance, the power to levy fines, and to summarily commit offenders to prison, they always seem to have retained a very tight and jealous hand over them, and were constantly interfering with the Wardens of the Yeomanry.

The Yeomanry had their own four Wardens and Court of Assistants, their Beadle and mace, common box, standing cups and other silver plate, their annual dinner, and sometimes, when in a flourishing condition, no less than four dinners in the year, their “corrector” for apprentices, and they also possessed the choice privilege of collecting the quarterage from their members. Under such auspicious circumstances, it could hardly be otherwise than that, in process of time, they should become both presumptuous and audacious and thus provoke inevitable collision with the Ruling body of the Company.

The Wardens of the Yeomanry at one period had designated themselves, or certainly encouraged others to describe them, as “The Wardens of the Barber-Surgeons,” an assumption not to be tolerated, and, like their Masters on the Clothing, had been accustomed to go to their homes (after their gatherings and feasts) in state, accompanied by a “trayne or traynes”; these acts of presumption called forth the restraining order of the 15th September, 1588 (videpost). Later on we find that they went “in searche to see what serˀvnts some ffremen of the Companie had, wchthey ought not to do,” they gave way to too much feasting and arbitrarily exercised their powers of fine and imprisonment, all which offences brought them reprimands, and somewhere about the year 1604 their temporary extinguishment. They were, however, soon after re-erected, but in the year 1635 permanently “disestablished and disendowed.”

Although the Constitution of the “Yeomanry” was then abolished, the appellation was retained for over 200 years after, though merely as a traditional distinctive name synonymous with that of “freemen.” Thus, the whifflers for Lord Mayor’s day were always chosen out of the “Yeomanry,” and members of the “Yeomanry” are continually spoken of as being chosen into the Livery.

In the Audit Book, 1847–1848, this ancient term is used for the last time in respect of the receipts for quarterage, after this the designation becomes “freemen.”

19th September, 1552. It is condescendyd and agreed that there shalbe no more yomanry of the said Company of Barbors Surgeons.

1st October, 1555. It was agreed “that the yomanrye of the sayed Company of Barbors and Surgeons shalbe establisshed and set up agayne and be in as full strenght force and power as ever yt was before the plucking downe of the same,” and articles or ordinances for the Yeomanry were enacted. As, however, these articles are excessively verbose, the following descriptions and extracts willsuffice:—

Article 1. Out of the Yeomanry were to be chosen four Wardens annually, and named respectively, the uppermost, second, third and youngest Wardens.

Article 2. One of the Yeomanry to be appointed Beadle of the Yeomanry to execute summonses, etc.

Article 3. The Wardens of the Yeomanry to bring in once a year to the Masters and Governors of the Clothing, an account of monies remaining in their hands to be delivered to the new Wardens, and to be “kept and bestowed as they wtin themselves shall thinke yt meete and convenyent to the helpe and comforte of them wtin the yomanry of Barbors and Surgeons.” The Wardens were also to present the new Wardens to the Masters or Governors for approval within eight days after being chosen. The Masters or Governors were to “have nothinge to dooe withe the monye of the yomanry.”

Article 4. If the Masters or Governors should borrow any monies of the Yeomanry they were to repay on a day to be agreed upon “the saved som̄e so borrowed wtthanks geving.”

Article 5. The Wardens on the day of Election of Masters or Governors of the Clothingshall—

come to the dynner at the hall in their best apparrell at the daye appointed whiche is the mondaye senighte before Barthelmew daye, and when the Mrand governors of the Clothinge doo gooe and choose the new Mrand governors the cheif wardein of the yomanrye shall beare the cup before the MrThe seconde wardein shall beare the cupp before the uppermoste governor of the clothinge. The thirde wardein of the yomãry shall beare the cupp before the seconde governor of the clothinge and the yongest wardein of the yomanry shall beare the cupp before the yongest governor of the clothinge in knowledging of the setting up of the yomanrye agayne.

In the event of sickness or lawful absence, others were to be appointed to this duty.

And furthermore that noen of the wardeins of the yomanrye of barbors and surgeons doo presume to goo aboute to make searche to see in anye of the Companyes houses to knowe what prentizes they have or journeymen as the Mrand governors dooof the clothinge whoo have aucthoritie so to dooe. Yf the wardeins of the yomanry be taken or justelye proved that they doo soo, to forfaycte at every tyme so doying to the hall vjlixiijsiiijd.

Article 6. The Wardens of the Yeomanry were to collect the quarterage of freemen (3d.per quarter) and of “fforyners” (6d.per quarter), and duly pay same over to the Masters and Governors, and books of account were to be kept by the Wardens.Note.—In practice this article was varied, as the Yeomanry kept the quarterage and “compounded” with the Masters for a fixed annual sum.

Article 7. The Masters were to pay the Wardens of the Yeomanry £4 which had been “advanced by them in 1543 for provysyon of wheete for the Cytie,” and which sum had been recently refunded by the City.

Article 8. The Yeomanry were to have the use of the chamber “where the Lecture ys reade every Tewysday” whenever they please to consult therein.

Article 9. These Articles were to be written on parchment, sealed and delivered to the Wardens of the Yeomanry.

Article 10. The Masters were to give notice to the Wardens of the Yeomanry of any rules which they from time to time should make touching the craft.

Article 11. The rules and ordinances of the Company were to be read to the Yeomanry three times in every year, viz.: at Candlemas, in May and at Lammas.

Article 12. The Yeomanry were to obey all the rules and ordinances now made or to be made.

16th October, 1555. The first four Wardens of the Yeomanry were presented to the Masters, their names being Edward Hewet, John Surbut, George Corraunte (Corron) and Thomas Buston (Burston).

12th October, 1557. It wasordered:—

That the Wardens of the yeomanry allwaise for the tyme beinge and by theire Assistantꝭ shall Elect and chuse every yeare to (two) wthin themsylffs to beCoostꝭ180of the Lyberary and of the Instrmentꝭ wchby the Mrsand Governors it was thought good and most Convenyent that those too whyche are maisters of the Anathomys to be Elected and Chosen the sayde Cowstꝭ (of the) Lyberary and Instrumẽtis, and the Wardens of the yeomanry for the tyme beinge shall delyvˀ and geve the kayse of the lyberarye and of the instrument howse unto those whyche they have Chosen to be Coustose thereof. And ffurther allso That the sayde Wardens of the yeomanry for the tyme beinge shall allwayse se and looke ytthe saide instrumentꝭ be kepte Cleane and that they shall do upon theyre owne Chirgis.181

15th September, 1558. It wasordered:—

That uppon the Election daye and chusynge of the fowre wardeyns of the yeomãry of the Mystery or Companye aforesayde And also theyre Wardeyns then beynge elected and chosen and also theyre Dyner or Recreocion then at orhall beynge wthall yrLawfull busynes then don and ended That and then also at theire goynge and depˀtinge frome ourhall the sayde fowre wardeyns of the yeomanrye so named by that name and by none other shall in any maner of wyse pˀsume or take uppon them nor any of them to be wayted on or broughte home unto yrowne houses Neyther shall go unto any other place or placꝭ elꝭwhere havynge wthor after them any trayne or traynes eyther of yesayde Assystaunce or any beynge oute of theyre sayde assystaunce and Companye But every pˀsone and persones of the sayde feloshyppe of the yeomanrye then shall quyetly departe and go every man his owne waye aboute his necessarye busynesse.

A fine of five marks was ordered to be taken from the “comon boxe” of the yeomanry, if the above regulation should be transgressed.

Provided AllwayeThat the sayde Wardeyns with the Rest of theyre assystaunce feloshyppe and Companye of the Yeomanry maye and shall at all Tymeand tymes decently and orderly go unto the maryagis offeringꝭ and Buryalls of theyre sayde Brethren and Susters of the sayde Company of the yeomanry as they here to fore have don.

4th July, 1566. It was ordered that the Wardens and Assistants of the Yeomanry should be allowed to sit at the “Uppermore” table in the Hall on quarter days to receive their quarterages, and to read the rules and ordinances to the Yeomanry.

18th February, 1567.In Thys Courtehere was Edward Parkebeynge182comytted to warde at the comaundment of the wardens of the yeomanry for his disobedyencˀs, and for his oprobrius & obstynat words in the pˀsents of this Courte to the Mr& govˀnors he is comytted to warde agayne.

18th January, 1569. At this Court seven freemen were sworn in to be Assistants to the Yeomanry.

15th November, 1569. In this Courte the wardens of the yeomanry broughte in the pˀsentꝭ of this courte John Wyllet Thom̃s Warren and John Jaggard & they reported ytNycolas Whytemore sholde reporte at the thre tonnes at yeldehall gate ytMrPole of the chauncery shold saye ytwe ought to have no wardens of the yeomanry. And Nyc͠ols Whytemore said ythe was at supper at MrPole & one MrLovels & they pˀused the statutꝭ said to Whyttemore he hath ben warden of his cõpany & he said no he had been warden of the yeomanry & MrPole sholde saye we cold not have a yeomanry.18th April, 1570. Here was John Jagger sayth that he was nevˀ a councell or knoleg of any pˀmoter beyng set to trouble the Company for the state of oryeomanry And also John Wyllet denyeth the byll & wyll not confesse any thinge wthoute the pˀsentꝭ of his accuser but for knowledge of the pˀmotter he nevˀ meante yt he said befor god. And Thomas Warren saed he hathe kepte all to hymsylf & nevˀ mynded nor thoughte to trouble in any respecte and denyeth the byll also. And yt is ordered that they shall agree brotherly together and here after they nor any of them shall move or speake or make any rehersall of any matter as consernyng the state of the yeomãry upon payne of ip̃rysonment. And Thom̃s Warren John Wyllet & John Jagger shall take yrromes & placꝭ and brotherly they have eyther of them taken one a nother handes & so these matters nevˀ to be reported any more here after.

18th April, 1570. Here was John Jagger sayth that he was nevˀ a councell or knoleg of any pˀmoter beyng set to trouble the Company for the state of oryeomanry And also John Wyllet denyeth the byll & wyll not confesse any thinge wthoute the pˀsentꝭ of his accuser but for knowledge of the pˀmotter he nevˀ meante yt he said befor god. And Thomas Warren saed he hathe kepte all to hymsylf & nevˀ mynded nor thoughte to trouble in any respecte and denyeth the byll also. And yt is ordered that they shall agree brotherly together and here after they nor any of them shall move or speake or make any rehersall of any matter as consernyng the state of the yeomãry upon payne of ip̃rysonment. And Thom̃s Warren John Wyllet & John Jagger shall take yrromes & placꝭ and brotherly they have eyther of them taken one a nother handes & so these matters nevˀ to be reported any more here after.

This brotherly amity did not long continue,for:—

Back to Index Next