THE CLERK.

23rd May, 1570. Here was John Warren & John Wyllet is comytted to warde for dysobedyence, and Thomas Newens said that one Husto an informer his neyghborsaide that the company sholde bearẽsted183upon a statute & ytyt is one of orcompany did sett the enformer to do yt but he founde not the statute to holde wththem & yrfore he wolde not deale, but to name thepˀte184he wolde not.

Warren and Wyllet must have been sent straight off to prison, as a further minute states that on the same day “after diner,” Warren was brought up out of the Compter for examination.

On the 29th May, Wyllet made submission and was released from prison.

19th September, 1570. Warren and Wyllet seem to have been cantankerous brethren, for they were complained of by the Wardens of the Yeomanry for refusing to take upon themselves the office of Wardens to which they had been elected.

7th October, 1572. Wyllet is again complained of for going to law with another member of the Company without license from the Masters, to which he pleaded that under a statute 19 Henry VII, cap. viii, he could lawfully do so. The result of this contention is not expressly stated, though there is not the least doubt but that Wyllet revisited the Compter, and ultimately withdrew his suit.

5th March, 1573. It wasordered—

That where there hath ben an order that the whole bodye of the yeomanrye of this mysterie were compelled under a certeine fyne and penaltye to meet theire wardens at a certeine place by them appointed beinge by the beadle warned, to go to offre at the weddings of their brethren at all times when any of them weare married wchwas to their great trouble, and divers inconvenyences grewe thereoff as absence from sˀrvice and sermons one sonday mornyngs and other unmeate and inconvenient meetinges in steed therof. Wherefore, the said order was declared henceforth to be void.6th October, 1573. Here was a controvˀsy betweene the wardens of the yeomanrye that were the last yere and the Audytorsof yeomanryes accomptes for that the Audytoures would not allowe that wchwas required by the said late wardens for bread and dryncke at theyre ellecc͠on Daye, the som̃e was xxvijsand order was taken that they should be allowed xvjsand they to beare the reste on theire owne chargeis and so to be ffrendꝭ and Lovers wthquietnes.6th June, 1577. Here also the wardens of the yeomanry were comaunded for good and urgent Cawse to bring in there graunt from the maisters of there yomanry against the next Corte Daie for that they did take more Quarteridge then by the Lawe they might do and also contrary to there saide graunte and in breche of the same they went after a sort in searche to see what serˀvnts some ffremen of the Companie had wchthey ought not to do, and so yt was for that tyme let passe wthwarning to do so no more and also for that they did not yerelie shewe there accompt wchnow they did and henceforth will according to there dutie.9th October, 1579. At this Corte also the Wardens of the Yeomanry brought in their accompte before the saide masters and yt was agreed upon good considerac͠ons for that manye of the said yeomanrye did ympoverishe them selves by makinge of qr̃ter Dyners and suche unnecessary metinges that from henceforthe their shalbe no more quarter Dyners be kept in orHall by the saide yeomanrye or any of them but shall do as heretofore hathe ben accustomed to be don.

6th October, 1573. Here was a controvˀsy betweene the wardens of the yeomanrye that were the last yere and the Audytorsof yeomanryes accomptes for that the Audytoures would not allowe that wchwas required by the said late wardens for bread and dryncke at theyre ellecc͠on Daye, the som̃e was xxvijsand order was taken that they should be allowed xvjsand they to beare the reste on theire owne chargeis and so to be ffrendꝭ and Lovers wthquietnes.

6th June, 1577. Here also the wardens of the yeomanry were comaunded for good and urgent Cawse to bring in there graunt from the maisters of there yomanry against the next Corte Daie for that they did take more Quarteridge then by the Lawe they might do and also contrary to there saide graunte and in breche of the same they went after a sort in searche to see what serˀvnts some ffremen of the Companie had wchthey ought not to do, and so yt was for that tyme let passe wthwarning to do so no more and also for that they did not yerelie shewe there accompt wchnow they did and henceforth will according to there dutie.

9th October, 1579. At this Corte also the Wardens of the Yeomanry brought in their accompte before the saide masters and yt was agreed upon good considerac͠ons for that manye of the said yeomanrye did ympoverishe them selves by makinge of qr̃ter Dyners and suche unnecessary metinges that from henceforthe their shalbe no more quarter Dyners be kept in orHall by the saide yeomanrye or any of them but shall do as heretofore hathe ben accustomed to be don.

1587. The Yeomanry seem to have again incurred the displeasure of the Masters, who thereupon summoned them to appear and shew cause why their grant should not be annulled, whereupon they came on the 27th Julyand—

gave their ffree and full consentꝭ that yf they have broken any pt̃e of their graunte to them heretofore made they will surrender upp their yeomanry.

10th August, 1587. The privilege of collecting quarterage was taken away from the Yeomanry.

Also whereas there hathe ben a Rule graunted to the yeomanrie that they maie send pˀsons to ward for disobedyence and to take ffynes yt ys fullie agreed the same Rule shalbe void But yf anie varyance happen to be, the same shall be declared to themasters or governorsfor Reformac͠on And further that the said yeomanrie shall take none into their Assystance wthoute the consent of orsaide masters or governorsand their successors.7th September, 1587. MrHenry Rankin Mrof orCompanie made a motyon whether he sholde swere the yeomanry or not and yf they should be sworne what othe he should geve them. And yt was agreed by the saide Corte That the Masters or Governorsmay take the pˀsentment of them but not swere them. And further yf the yeomanry do request to be sworne they must be answered wththe wordꝭ of their pattent wchys onlie to pˀsent them. And further touching the collecc͠on of their quartridge yt must stand as yt dothe untill further consultac͠on be had therein and yf they have any request to make or ought to saie they must bring the same in writinge into this Corte.29th May, 1600. This daie the wardens of the yomanrye made requeste to the Maisters that they woulde be pleased to redeliver unto them their booke of orders which remayneth in their Custodie, whereuppon it is not thoughte fitt by the Courte that the yeomanrie have the Custodie of the said booke, but that the Clarke of this Companye keepe the same And that he shewe the same booke to the yeomanrye when they have occasion to use it.

7th September, 1587. MrHenry Rankin Mrof orCompanie made a motyon whether he sholde swere the yeomanry or not and yf they should be sworne what othe he should geve them. And yt was agreed by the saide Corte That the Masters or Governorsmay take the pˀsentment of them but not swere them. And further yf the yeomanry do request to be sworne they must be answered wththe wordꝭ of their pattent wchys onlie to pˀsent them. And further touching the collecc͠on of their quartridge yt must stand as yt dothe untill further consultac͠on be had therein and yf they have any request to make or ought to saie they must bring the same in writinge into this Corte.

29th May, 1600. This daie the wardens of the yomanrye made requeste to the Maisters that they woulde be pleased to redeliver unto them their booke of orders which remayneth in their Custodie, whereuppon it is not thoughte fitt by the Courte that the yeomanrie have the Custodie of the said booke, but that the Clarke of this Companye keepe the same And that he shewe the same booke to the yeomanrye when they have occasion to use it.

About two years previously the Court had endeavoured to put down the Yeomanry and had curtailed many of their privileges; the exact nature of the disagreement is not stated, but it doubtless arose from the Yeomanry “takeinge to much uppon themsyllfs.”

17th January, 1604. At this Courte it is ordered That the Ould Wardens of the Yomanrye doe bringe in such money as is behind by theire Audite beinge eight pounds twelve shillings and eight penceOrellsto be committed to the Compter.

28th February, 1605. It was ordered that a Yeomanry of this Company should be established, though there is no entry of its extinguishment. Rules and ordinances were to be made by the Court, and twenty-four persons were to be nominated by the “present wardens of the said Yeomanry” to serve as a Court of Assistants for the Yeomanry, with a power of veto reserved to the Masters.

16th April, 1605. A Committee sat to consider the patent to be granted to the Yeomanry.

2nd May, 1605. This daye the Mrand MrWarden Mapes and MrThorney delivˀed to the Wardens of the yomanry viz. Robert Jenninges and Richard Alderson and also to Robert Wood and Edward Goodale the yomanryes boxe and money their Corrector their twoe standinge Cuppes & Covers and their cases and all such othrthinges as they had of the yomanryes, but onely their patent wchis to be renued & twoe of their keyes were delivˀed to the sayd Robert Wood and Edward Goodale by them to be kept.24th May, 1605. This daye the ordynancꝭ of the yomanry were ratiefied & confirmed by this Court. Also the quarterages of the yomanry was this daye demised unto the wardens of the yomanry from the xvjthof September next ensuinge for the terme of . . . . . . . . at the yerely rent of 8lito be paid by quarterly payments wchdemyse was passed by wrytinge indented as by the same more at lardge may appeare.

24th May, 1605. This daye the ordynancꝭ of the yomanry were ratiefied & confirmed by this Court. Also the quarterages of the yomanry was this daye demised unto the wardens of the yomanry from the xvjthof September next ensuinge for the terme of . . . . . . . . at the yerely rent of 8lito be paid by quarterly payments wchdemyse was passed by wrytinge indented as by the same more at lardge may appeare.

At the end of the Minute Book, 1598–1607, is a copy of a part of this indenture.

26th November, 1607. It wasordered:—

That the wardens of the yomanry shall take for the use of their funerall clothe at eˀvy funerall wherein it is used ijsvjdAnd the bedell for his attendaunce xijdprovided notwthstandinge that if such deceased pˀson shall owe unto the yomanry arrerages of quarterage that the wardens of the sayd yomanry shall not lend their said funerall cloth before such arrerages be first paid.10th August, 1609. It was ordered that the Yeomandry shall hold their great generall dinner albeit they made request to the Contrary.

10th August, 1609. It was ordered that the Yeomandry shall hold their great generall dinner albeit they made request to the Contrary.

The next extracts record the last events in the chequered existence of the Yeomanry.

17th November, 1635. According to a former order of Court the Wardeins of the yeomanrye did this daye deliver up unto the Maisters their Accompt and the xvijlivsviijdin money upon the foote of that Accompt Also they delivered up to this Court theirplate bookꝭ and goodꝭ with the Inventarye and that being delivered & donn Richard Lamb and Thomas Duppa twoe of the yeomanrye Wardeins threwe downe their keyes on the table in a scornefull manner and badd yeMrstake all.3rd December, 1635. This daye upon mature deliberac͠on had as alsoe upon just groundꝭ and causes showed to this Court of the greate burthen of this Companie in the continuall charge of the keepeing of a yeomanrye And it being propounded to this Court whether the Wardeins and Assistants of the yeomanrye should continew the holding of the yeomanrye yea or noe It was by most voyces fully concluded and ordered that they shall continew noe longer their governemtAnd they the Wardeins & Assistantꝭ of the yeomanrye & their governemtare by this Court dissolved.

3rd December, 1635. This daye upon mature deliberac͠on had as alsoe upon just groundꝭ and causes showed to this Court of the greate burthen of this Companie in the continuall charge of the keepeing of a yeomanrye And it being propounded to this Court whether the Wardeins and Assistants of the yeomanrye should continew the holding of the yeomanrye yea or noe It was by most voyces fully concluded and ordered that they shall continew noe longer their governemtAnd they the Wardeins & Assistantꝭ of the yeomanrye & their governemtare by this Court dissolved.

Theoffice of Clerk of the Company is doubtless as ancient as the Company itself, although there is no mention of one prior to the year1530185; but as there were always registers to be kept, fees to receive, apprentices to bind, and the multifarious business of a Livery Guild to conduct and record, we conclude that the office has existed from the earliest period.

The Clerk in Queen Mary’s time seems to have combined the occupation of gardener with that of his office, and for this he had but a small fee in addition to his stipend. Later on the Clerks appear to have devised fees for every conceivable kind of business which could possibly be transacted at Barber-Surgeons’ Hall, and in the 17th and 18th centuries the income derived from this source alone must have been very considerable.

The Company has been served by good, bad and indifferent Clerks; we prefer to dwell only on the former and record the namesamong others, of Francis Rowdon, Charles Bernard and John Paterson as being worthy to be held in goodly remembrance. The books of the Company abound in testimony to their ability as well as to the fidelity and zeal which they displayed in the execution of their office.

1st October, 1555. The first Clerk of whom there is any record is Thomas Apulton (or Apleton), who, being Beadle, was promoted to that office.

As will be seen elsewhere, the Company had a fair garden in Monkwell Street, and the following interesting minute connects it with theClerk:—

8th October, 1555. The Clercke of our Companye shall have for waxe pennes and ynke and for trymynge of the gardeyn yerelye vjsviijd.Yf the gardeyn be not well trymmed and made clene weded and swept at all tymes when the Mrand Governors of the clothing or any of Thassistaunce of the same shall see yt and thereupon fynde faulte then the saide Clercke shall paye a ffyne to the hall because the said gardein ys not made cleane swept and wedyd as the Mrand Governors of the Clothinge and thassistaunce of the same shall think meete and convenyent.

5th March, 1556. It was ordered thatif—

The Clercke of the Company doo evile mysuse any of the Clothinge or of the yomanry wthunsemely words & dewe proofe therof had and proved he shalbe dismyssed clere from the having of the Office of clercke.

27th August, 1557. John Johnson was elected and sworn Clerk “for so longe time as he shal behave hymsyllfe well and honestlye in the saide office.” The salary was fixed at £4 per annum, with 6s.8d.extra for paper, ink and keeping the garden, and “for wasshinge of the lynen of the howse iijsiiijd.”

It would appear that one Wilson had some time previously been Clerk, for arrangements were made by which Wilson’s widow was notto be put out of her house, and it was also settled that if Johnson died before his wife, his widow should in like manner have the house after his decease. The rent of this house, which was attached to the Hall was 10s.per annum, and paid by the Clerk to the Renter Warden.

Johnson probably continued Clerk till about 1570, as the books are kept in the same handwriting until then.

Thomas Garter succeeded Johnson, but on 14th January, 1572, he was dismissed from his office for a “certain lewde facte by him committed,” and William Field was elected and sworn in in his place. Field wrote an exceedingly neat and precise hand.

20th March, 1572. It was ordered that in future the Clerk of the Company should always be chosen from among the freemen.

15th March, 1575. William Eden elected Clerk vice Field.

14th November, 1577. Eden was ordered to receive £6 per annum “benevolence” over and above his salary of £4, in consideration of the “smalenes of his lyvinge.”

10th December, 1596. Eden was indebted to the Company £10, “yet in regard of the hardnes of the tyme and his greate charge he shalbe forborne this yere.” At the same Court, gifts were made to the Beadle and Porter on account of the hardness of the times.

16th June, 1597. Eden’s troubles had not forsaken him for we read under thisdate—

There was geven unto Willm̃ Eden Clark of the Companie in regard of his greate charge and the scarsytie of the tyme the some of vliand for the xliwchhe oweth he ys to pay the same as god shall inable him.

2nd November, 1597. Francis Rowdon elected Clerk vice Eden. Rowdon appears to have been a most methodical man andkept the books with scrupulous neatness and care; his writing is a very fine specimen of the Court hand of the period, and the best in the Company’s books for many years.

1599. The Clerk’s Salary was raised to £6 per annum.

1600. To £8 per annum, and in

1603 To £10 per annum.

26th November, 1607. This daye ffrancꝭ Rowdon Clark to this Company pˀsented his petic͠on to this Court by wchhee prayed ratificac͠on of certen fees belonginge to his place and office in this Company as hereof doe insue.Ffirsthee prayed to have xls.for the drawinge registringe of the Mrsaccompt so that it be regestered wthin twoe moneths aftrthe awdit.Alsohee prayed to have xs.for evˀy alienac͠on of every lease of any of the Companyes landes or tenemtꝭ for wrytinge thereof.Alsoto have for the drawinge & ingroseinge of every lease xxs.Alsoto have xijd.for evˀy othe ministered by any of the Mrsto any of the yomanry of this Company.Alsoto have xijd.for evˀy one that is made free by service and sixe shillingꝭ & sixe pence of every man that is made free by redempc͠on or translac͠on.Alsovjs.viijd.for enteringe of every Anathomy accompt.Alsoto have iiijd.for every Acquittance that hee shall make for the wardens of the yomanry for the forme of theyre quarterage And xijd.of them for the Coppie of every order wchconcerneth the governemtof the yomanry.Alsothat hee may have of evˀy freeman for his letter of admittance or tollerac͠on under the seale of the house vjs.viiijd.And of evˀy forren for the lyke xs.And of evˀy alien xiijs.iiijd.Alsofor pennes Inck & papˀ and for the wardens bookes pˀ an. xs.Alsofor every bill of complaynt iiijd.Alsofor enteringe of evˀry order betwixt pˀtie & pˀtie for the endinge of any Controversie xijd.Alsofor makeinge cleane the hall against evˀy feaste iiijs.And such a dishe of meate as the Mrsof evˀy such feast shall think fit.Alsofor evˀy searche for the name of evˀy freman or appˀntice iiijd.Alsofor evˀy pˀson that is taken into the livˀy iijs.iiijd.Alsofor evˀy pˀson that is taken into the Assistantꝭ iiijs.iiijd.Allwchordinancꝭ and allowances were ratiefied & confirmed by this Court.6th July, 1609. Uppon the humble suite & petic͠on of ffrancꝭ Rowdon Clarke to this Company It is this daye ordered by this Courte that wthin one moneth next ensuinge hee shall noĩat to the pˀnt Mrsa sufficient Clarke to whom hee is desyreous to surrender his place and office of Clark to this Company And his suite shalbe graunted unto him if such pˀson so to be pˀnted unto this Court shalbe lyked and allowed.

Ffirsthee prayed to have xls.for the drawinge registringe of the Mrsaccompt so that it be regestered wthin twoe moneths aftrthe awdit.

Alsohee prayed to have xs.for evˀy alienac͠on of every lease of any of the Companyes landes or tenemtꝭ for wrytinge thereof.

Alsoto have for the drawinge & ingroseinge of every lease xxs.

Alsoto have xijd.for evˀy othe ministered by any of the Mrsto any of the yomanry of this Company.

Alsoto have xijd.for evˀy one that is made free by service and sixe shillingꝭ & sixe pence of every man that is made free by redempc͠on or translac͠on.

Alsovjs.viijd.for enteringe of every Anathomy accompt.

Alsoto have iiijd.for every Acquittance that hee shall make for the wardens of the yomanry for the forme of theyre quarterage And xijd.of them for the Coppie of every order wchconcerneth the governemtof the yomanry.

Alsothat hee may have of evˀy freeman for his letter of admittance or tollerac͠on under the seale of the house vjs.viiijd.And of evˀy forren for the lyke xs.And of evˀy alien xiijs.iiijd.

Alsofor pennes Inck & papˀ and for the wardens bookes pˀ an. xs.

Alsofor every bill of complaynt iiijd.

Alsofor enteringe of evˀry order betwixt pˀtie & pˀtie for the endinge of any Controversie xijd.

Alsofor makeinge cleane the hall against evˀy feaste iiijs.And such a dishe of meate as the Mrsof evˀy such feast shall think fit.

Alsofor evˀy searche for the name of evˀy freman or appˀntice iiijd.

Alsofor evˀy pˀson that is taken into the livˀy iijs.iiijd.

Alsofor evˀy pˀson that is taken into the Assistantꝭ iiijs.iiijd.

Allwchordinancꝭ and allowances were ratiefied & confirmed by this Court.

6th July, 1609. Uppon the humble suite & petic͠on of ffrancꝭ Rowdon Clarke to this Company It is this daye ordered by this Courte that wthin one moneth next ensuinge hee shall noĩat to the pˀnt Mrsa sufficient Clarke to whom hee is desyreous to surrender his place and office of Clark to this Company And his suite shalbe graunted unto him if such pˀson so to be pˀnted unto this Court shalbe lyked and allowed.

26th July, 1609. Rowdon presented Richard Ratsdale, Scrivener, for the office of Clerk, about whose sufficiency and ability enquiries were ordered to be made, but they were not satisfactory, for, on the 10th August, William Syddon was elected Clerk vice Rowdon.

The same day it was ordered that Rowdon was to continue in the Livery and to have the use of the Hall and his house until Michaelmas, also that Syddon was to be translated from the Cutlers’ Company.

Syddon’s records of the Company’s business were very meagre and a great contrast to those of the former Clerk.

7th October, 1625. Syddon surrendered his clerkship to Richard Turner (a son of Cressens Turner, Clerk in the Lord Mayor’s Court), who was admitted and sworn. Turner died in 1643, and by his will left some property to the Company to be annually distributed in charity amongst freemen of the Barber-Surgeons, and this became the source of a protracted litigation between his widow and the Company. On the 17th November, 1643, she filed a bill against the Company, which they defended, and succeeded in retaining the greater portion of the bequest. The accounts appear to have been very intricate and involved, remaining unsettled for many years. TheCourt, however, distributed the whole of the bequest in accordance with the will, as long as the estate (which was leasehold) held out.

16th June, 1628. It is ordered by this Court and our Mrgave order to the Clarke that he should henceforward have a stoole and sitt at the end of the table wthhis bookes and register as the clarkes of other Companies doe.

2nd October, 1643. Robert Rawlins elected Clerk vice Turner.

30th June, 1648. The Court granted Rawlins £30 in consideration of his great pains about the Company’s business, and ordered that his salary should be raised from £10 to £30 per annum.

23rd February, 1658. Richard Reynell elected Clerk vice Rawlins (resigned).

21st July, 1685. Joseph Masters elected Clerk.

17th September, 1685. Charles Hargrave elected “Deputy Clerk.” The business of the Company had of late years increased enormously in consequence of the examinations of and Certificates to Navy Surgeons, examinations held for superannuation of wounded or infirm soldiers and sailors, and other matters connected with the Navy office, all of which entailed vast labour on the Clerk.

28th November, 1688. Charles Hargrave elected Clerk vice Masters.

20th November, 1707. Charles Bernard elected Clerk vice Hargrave.

Hargrave had kept the books in a slovenly manner, and appears to have been both a dishonest servant as well as an improvident man.

11th December, 1707. It was reported to the Court that Hargrave’s Estate was indebted to the Company £320 8s.6d., moneys which he had received and not accounted for.

8th July, 1708. Mrs. Sarah Hargrave (his Widow) presented a petition for relief, stating that she was in poor circumstances, with six children unprovided for, whereupon the Court, notwithstanding her late husband’s delinquencies, very generously ordered her a gratuity of £12 10s.0d.

Charles Bernard was a relative of, and Executor to Charles Bernard, Serjeant-Surgeon to Queen Anne and Master in 1703. It is delightful to observe the methodical and careful manner in which Bernard began, and all through his life kept the books and accounts; he wrote a large and elegant hand, though somewhat encumbered with flourishes, and his signature is a characteristic one.

7th September, 1708. Hargrave’s son was in the Compter, and the Clerk was directed to see and talk with him about the Company’s papers in his custody, and if he would give them up the Clerk was to make him a present of three guineas.

The Court frequently relieved Mrs. Hargrave, and in December, 1709, gave her £15.

Among the official list of Clerk’s fees at this period were thefollowing:—

For the use of the Hall for ffuneralls, Country ffeasts or weddings1 0 0ffor the ffunerall of every Liveryman, the best hood or0 7 0

17th July, 1718. The Court as a particular reward to Charles Bernard their Clerk for abstracting and peruseing the Company’s title to the Estate in East Smithfield and for his care in passing the fine thereof whereby the Company saved a sume of money and for his extraordinary trouble in attending the Lords of the Admiralty and prosecuteing several persons for takeing the dead bodys from the place of Execuc͠on Did and do hereby give him the sum̄e of fourscore pounds who accepted the same as a most bountifull Instance of the kindness of this Court to him with a full resoluc͠on on his part to acquitt himself by all imaginable and constant returns of duty and gratitude.

Mr. Charles Bernard, who had been a most zealous Clerk and high in the esteem of the Court, died somewhere between the 5th and 20th February, 1740.

25th March, 1740. Joseph Wheeler, son of John Wheeler, Barber-Surgeon, elected Clerk, vice Bernard. Wheeler wrote a fine bold and flowing hand; and the books were well kept, but he was evidently not so able a man as Mr. Bernard.

4th July, 1740. Joseph Wheeler provided two sureties who entered into a bond for £3,000, to ensure his fidelity in the execution of his office.

17th January, 1743. The Commissioners of the Navy having complained that sufficient regard had not been paid to former letters of theirs respecting Surgeons’ Mates, and it appearing that the Clerk had withheld the said letters from the Court, it was ordered that he should be suspended forthwith, with which the Commissioners were acquainted and also that the Court had resolved not to take off such suspension but by the consent and desire of the Commissioners.

31st January, 1743. The Commissioners of the Navy having signified their desire that the Clerk should be restored to his office, he was called into Court, severely reprimanded, reinstated in his position, and cautioned as to his future conduct.

Mr. Wheeler continued Clerk until the separation of the Surgeons from the Barbers in 1745, when neither body retained his services, and it appearing that moneys were due from him to the Company, application was made to his sureties.

25th June, 1745. John Paterson was chosen Clerk to the Barbers’ Company at the first Court held after the separation, and entered into a Bond with two sureties in a sum of £2,000.

19th February, 1746. Mr. Paterson having brought in an account of his Costs in the matter of the separation of the Surgeons amounting to £167 13s.2d., and also an account of voluntary contributions by members of the Company towards defraying the same amounting to £168 10s.6d., he begged the Court to accept of his past services as a return for the honour done him in his election, and the Court were pleased to accept of the compliment, but having a high sense of the services rendered by Mr. Paterson, they directed the sum of £80 to be laid out in plate and presented to him “to remain in his family as a memorial of his merit and of their gratitude.”

5th March, 1765. Mr. Paterson requested permission to resign his office, which the Court accepted with great reluctance, and passed a complimentary resolution in his favour.

Richard Beale, who had been Mr. Paterson’s clerk and was highly recommended by him, was elected Clerk.

8th August, 1765. Mr. Paterson was unanimously elected an Assistant.

Mr. Beale bequeathed £500 to the Company in reversion on the death of Mrs. Ann Woodhouse.

22nd April, 1766. James Marye elected Clerk vice Beale (deceased).

22nd April, 1766. John Paterson Esquire being withdrawn a Motion was made and the question being put That a piece of plate of the value of Fifty Pounds or thereabouts be presented to the said MrPaterson as a mark of the high esteem and value this Court entertains of his merit and abilities and to shew their gratitude to him for his long and faithful services during the course of twenty years and in return for his readiness on every occasion to assist this Court with his advice and council, the same was carried in the Affirmative,Nemine Contradicente.

By the Accounts for this year it appears that a Silver Tureen, Dish and Ladle were purchased for £65 16s.0d., and this was no doubt the gift to Mr. Paterson.

20th August, 1767. The Court being informed that Mr. Paterson intended to stand for the City at the next General Election, it was ordered that he should have the use of the Company’s Hall for his meetings.

An excellent mezzotint portrait of Mr. Paterson, with some eulogistic lines below, is preserved at Barbers’ Hall.

In 1754 Mr. Paterson presented to the Company the valuable portrait of the Duchess of Richmond, painted by Sir Peter Lely, and which still adorns the Court Room.

Mr. Paterson was a member of the Common Council, and sometime Chairman of the Bridge House Estates Committee, he was also M.P. for Ludgershall, Wilts. He was ever faithful to this Company, serving it with distinguished ability, and seems to have been greatly respected and esteemed.

1st June, 1790. William Wood elected Clerk vice Marye.

Mr. Wood presented the Company with a handsome Silver Tea Urn.

13th August, 1795. Edward Grose Smith (Mr. Wood’s partner) elected Clerk vice Wood, resigned.

5th March, 1822. Henley Smith (son of E. G. Smith) elected Clerk vice Smith, resigned.

5th February, 1861. Mr. Henley Smith resigned and was elected an Assistant (Master in 1864).

7th May, 1861. Henley Grose Smith (son of Henley Smith) elected Clerk vice Smith, resigned. Mr. Henley Grose Smith was elected an Assistant 1877.

Thereis no certainty as to the first institution of this office, though it is probably not so old as that of the Clerk, who in ancient times, summoned the Livery, collected the quarterage and performed various duties which we afterwards find assigned to the Beadle, and we may conclude that in those days he was little more than a Caretaker or “Porter”; indeed, this is the more likely as the latter designation is frequently applied to the Under Beadle in the Records.

As the business and numbers of the Company increased, several minor functions of the Clerk were delegated to the Porter or Beadle, who had distinctive duties assigned to him varying with the age in which he lived; among these may be enumerated, sweeping the garden, collecting quarterage, cleaning the Hall, whipping naughty apprentices, summoning freemen, etc., bringing home dead bodies from Tyburn, keeping lists of journeymen, pressing Surgeons and Barbers for sea service, assisting the Masters on search days, hunting up and laying informations against non freemen practisingBarbery and Surgery, marshalling and heading processions, both at the Hall and in the City pageants, guarding the Parlour door, and other offices too numerous to particularise, though there were but few of them which did not yield a fee, and indeed our Beadle could hardly have lived without fees, for his official salary in Edward VI’s time was but £4 per annum, which, notwithstanding the greater value of money then, could scarcely be considered a fat living.

With one exception, the office has been (and properly so) held by freemen, and in the appointment of the Court. In 1626, however, the Lord Keeper sent a letter “recommending” (i.e., commanding) the Company to elect one Gorton, a servant of his, to the place, and Gorton was accordingly chosen. The interference of the King and his great officers in the patronage and appointments vested in the City guilds was carried to great lengths with some of the Companies, and there are amusing accounts extant of the astuteness with which this meddling was sometimes met (videHerbert’s Livery Companies). Our Company, with the solitary exception above referred to, appears to have been happily free from this species of intervention.

Early in the 17th century there were two Beadles of the Clothing, the Under Beadle being often styled the Porter, but about the middle of the 18th century, and since then, one Beadle has sufficed.

The Beadle has always had his “house” at the Hall, and used formerly to pay a small quit rent for it. On the dismission of a Beadle for misconduct, a difficulty was sometimes experienced in regaining possession of this house, andvarious shifts were resorted to; even the Beadles’ Widows now and then refused to turn out, and the “benevolences” meted out to them were possibly sometimes in the nature of bribes to induce them to go.

Besides the Beadles of the Clothing, there was a Beadle of the Yeomanry, whose duties were analogous to those of his more exalted brethren, and into whose office he frequently stepped when there was a vacancy.

The Beadles for many years had a most disagreeable duty to perform, namely, the procuring and bringing home from Tyburn the dead bodies of malefactors. By the Act 32 Hen. VIII, the Company were empowered to have yearly the bodies of four executed felons for “anatomies,” and the practice was for the Beadles to attend at the gallows and select such bodies as they pleased. Their opponents were generally the hangman, who himself trafficked in these uncanny goods, the relatives of the criminal, and the populace who were incited by the relatives to resist the Beadles. Many were the unseemly fights which took place over these bodies, and oftentimes when the Beadles had secured a “subject” and were driving off with it in a coach, they were attacked and beaten, and the body rescued from them. The hangman appears to have been entitled to the dead man’s clothes, for on more than one occasion the Company gave him compensation for them, they having been torn to pieces in the brutal struggle for possession. Moreover the Company had often to satisfy the Coachmen for personal injuries and for damages to their coaches, as well as to give special gratuities to their Beadles by way of solatium for the beatings which they underwent. Frequent prosecutions and convictions followed the interference with the Company’s Officers at these times, and even the Sheriff’s Officers were on one occasion dismissed by the City for having sided against the Beadles.

The hangman came to the Hall regularly for his Christmas Box and gave a receipt for the same, sometimes affixing the title “Executioner” after his signature. Many curious particulars relating to the above will be found elsewhere. (VideWardens’ Accounts,Surgery, etc.)

The Beadle is elected annually by the Court, and resides at the Hall. The two Silver maces pertaining to his office are as handsome and massive as any in the City and are always carried before the Master on Court days.

14th May, 1530. The earliest reference to the Beadle in our Records is to be found in the Ordinances signed by Sir Thomas More, where it is directed that the Members shall take their seniority “according to the trew entrance therof in the Bedyllꝭ Rolle.”

6th November, 1550. Richard Wilson was Beadle at this time.

6th July, 1552. Thomas Appulton, Beadle, vice Wilson deceased.

19th September, 1552. It was agreed that Appulton “shall have his messe of meate on the feaste dayes.”

4th May, 1574. Here was the Wardens of the yeomanry and brought Anthony Hall in to the Courte to be admytted Beadle of the yeomanrye and he was sworne and admytted and fathe(r) Roger(s) put to his penc͠on and to geve attendaunce but as he is able.

22nd July, 1577. Richard Rogers, the old Beadle of the Yeomanry, was ordered a gift of 20s.and a yearly pension of 20s.

23rd July, 1582. Robert Norton, Yeomanry Beadle, was authorised to take 2d.of every freeman on his admission, and his yearly salary of 8s.was raised to 26s.8d.

14th August, 1587. Robert Norton was Livery Beadle.

10th December, 1596. James Hewes (Hughes) was Livery Beadle.

16th June, 1597. John Smith, Livery Beadle.

15th August, 1603. Edward Evans, Livery Beadle.

15th August, 1603. Kellam Clifton appointed Porter or Under Beadle.

21st July, 1608. Edward Blayny, Beadle, was dismissed for behaving himself “very dishonestly.”

14th August, 1617. Kellam Clifton elected Beadle and Edward Presson, Porter.

2nd December, 1617. Clifton was suspended for misbehaviour, but subsequently reinstated.

9th July, 1618. William Chapman elected Porter.

19th February, 1621. Clifton, again misbehaving himself, was dismissed.

14th June, 1621. Humphry Mumford elected Beadle.

3rd July, 1621. Chapman, the Porter, dismissed for using “lewd speeches,” but on his humble submission and craving pardon on his knees, he was reinstated, 10th July, 1621.

20th August, 1621. The Company could not get Clifton out of his house, so they gave him 20s.and a pension of 40s.per annum during good behaviour and the pleasure of the Court. Possibly the “pleasure of the Court” did not extend beyond one year.

15th February, 1626. Edward Gorton (recommended by the Lord Keeper) elected Beadle in place of Mumford.

10th July, 1628. This daye this Court takeing notice of an order made the 3 of Julye, 1621, by wchorder Chapman our Porter for his dissolute and deboist carriage was ip̃o facto then by that order dismissed of his said place and likewise of an order made in the beginning of oure Mrstyme for the dismissing of the said Chapman for his misbehavior and upon the generall complaint made unto this Court against the said Chapman for the most parte being drunck misbehaveing himselfe towardꝭ the Mrsand carrieing himselfe soe basely & quarrelsome to the brethren of this Companie and neglecting his duety to this house. It is thereupon ordered that he shall stand dismissed from his said place unlesse at the next Court of Assistantꝭ it doe appeare that he hath left his former carriage of being often drunck & deboistnes.

3rd February, 1634. Gorton requested to be discharged of his office of Beadle in respect of his age and feebleness, and Nathaniel Foster was elected in his place.

25th January, 1637. Chapman, “Under Beadle,” resigned, and was assigned a pension of £4 per annum during pleasure.

25th January, 1637. Edmond Johnson “who writeth very well” was elected Under Beadle.

6th March, 1639. Foster, for his “sawcey carriage unto this Companie” and general neglect of duty, was dismissed.

1659. Francis Johnson was Beadle with a salary of £10, and Peter Smith, Porter, with a salary of £8.

1662. Peter Smith was Beadle, and Thomas Veere, Porter.

23rd June, 1692. Ordered that William Cave be admitted to assist Peter Smith and Jonas Wills the Beadles.

19th July, 1694. Peter Smith was dead; he had been a very zealous servant of the Company. On the first floor landing at the Hall is a pretty piece of heraldic glass in the window with his name and the date 1671. Jonas Wills elected Beadle.

16th August, 1694. William Cave elected Beadle vice Wills deceased.

8th July, 1708. William Cave and Thomas Repton were Beadles.

6th July, 1710. Repton’s widow had £3 given her to bury her late husband.

20th February, 1711. Mr. Gratian Bale (son of Nathan Bale, Citizen and Grocer) who was apprenticed 22nd June, 1669 to Robert Andrewes (Surgeon), and afterwards became an Examiner in Surgery, and Master in 1709, petitioned the Court to be relieved of the office of an Assistant on the ground that he had fallen into decayed circumstances and could not possibly support that dignity, and onhis resignation being accepted, the Court proceeded to the election of a Beadle in the room of Thomas Repton deceased, whereupon Mr. Bale waselected—

And in regard that the sdMrBale had been Marof This Company This Court doth hereby give him leave (asking the consent of the Governorsfor the time being) to depute some other person to walke before the Company in his stead with the Beadles staffe & gowne upon the Lord Mayors & Elecc͠on days.

18th May, 1714. Mr. Bale having become too infirm to execute his office, the Court, in consideration of his past services, appointed William Hardy, Barber, his assistant, at a salary of £10 per annum.

31st July, 1716. William Cave died of a “high fever.”

16th August, 1716. William Watkins and William Hardy elected Beadles, on condition of paying Mr. Bale £10 per annum, which the Court supplemented with another £10.

10th July, 1717. Richard Collins elected Beadle vice Hardy, deceased.

18th August, 1720. It was ordered that in future no man could be qualified to be put in nomination for the office of Beadle if above 40 years ofage—

in order that the business may from thenceforward be discharged and dispatched with propˀ vigour and dexterity and to the honour and profitt of the Company.

13th April, 1721. Watkins being so indisposed as not to be able to perform his duties, Charles Window (who looked after the dead bodies at Tyburn) was ordered to officiate for him. Watkins shortly after lost his speech and got into Ludgate prison, where he had a weekly allowance from the Company—he seems to have remained in prison till his death, 3rd August, 1724.

7th October, 1722. Henry Gretton elected Beadle vice Watkins.

6th November, 1724. Matthew Morris elected Beadle vice Collins, resigned.

30th October, 1732. William Littlebury elected Beadle vice Morris, deceased.

5th June, 1764. John Wells elected Beadle vice Littlebury, resigned on pension.

3rd April, 1787. William Smith elected Beadle vice Wells, deceased.

4th March, 1788. Joseph Wells (son of John Wells) elected Beadle vice Smith, deceased.

6th February, 1798. Jacob Bonwick elected Beadle vice Wells, deceased.

1st March, 1814. William Barnes elected Beadle vice Bonwick.

11th August, 1831. Samuel Borrett elected Beadle vice Barnes (who retired on a pension of £50 per annum).

11th August, 1864. John Heaps (Master in 1855) elected Beadle vice Borrett (who retired on a pension of £50 per annum).

1st July, 1879. Edward Lawless elected Beadle vice Heaps (who retired on a pension of £52 per annum).

Back to Index Next