Preface
That the foundation of the Commerce, and consequently of the Greatness, of London was laid by the old Livery Guilds--few will question. Much is already known, through the Histories of such of them as have been written--and an apology from me is not needed for a further contribution to so interesting a study. But whilst I make no apology for the contribution, I crave the indulgence of my readers for any shortcomings which, from a literary point of view, may appear in this work; I invite their attention to the matter, rather than to the style in which it is expressed.
About eight years ago I applied to our Court for permission to search the Records, and my request being complied with, I devoted such spare time as I could secure from an engrossing occupation to the compilation of these Annals. The work has necessarily led to the burning of much midnight oil, because every extract and every line has been made by my own pen. The researches have extended to the examination of all, and the transcript of a considerable portion of thirteen lengthy Charters and sets of By-laws, as also to the entire perusal of about a hundred books of Records. In addition to this, there has been much labour expended at the British Museum, the Public Record Office, the Guildhall, and Somerset House.
The material thus collected became so voluminous, that I experienced considerable difficulty in separating it into Subject Chapters, and also in deciding what to retain and what to reject; my endeavour in this respect having been to preserve all that is really interesting and curious, discarding dry legal passages, doubtful points, and wearisome repetitions.
None but those who have had experience of the crabbed eccentric writing and contractions of former times (see some of the fac-similes given) and of the abbreviated “Court hand” Latin in which Charters and other Records were penned, can have the least idea of the trouble and care required in their deciphering; but in this respect I have not spared pains in giving literal and accurate transcripts.
In no case have I modernized the old spelling, or interfered with the quaintness of the original expressions; though all dates occurring between the 1st January and 24th March prior to the year 1752 (when “old style” was extinguished) have been rectified, and the “historical year,” according to our present computation, given; thus rendering the chronology systematic, and avoiding confusion and inaccuracy.
It is a matter of the greatest regret, that whilst we possess some earlier records, our Court Minutes previous to 1551 are lost. It is conjectured that they must have been at the Hall in 1793 (as a partial list of Masters was then compiled), but all trace of them has now disappeared. Again, the Minutes from 1651-1689 are now missing, although they were at the Hall about forty years ago.
I may here take the opportunity to remark that the Barbers and Barber-Surgeons held a somewhat distinctive position apart from other Companies, inasmuch as they were a Professional rather than a Trade Guild, and their History, consequently, becomes invested with an especial interest. Another point to which I, as a Barber, am proud to refer is that our Company stood out, alone, as the pioneer of Technical Education, hundreds of years before it became as popular as it now is. From the middle of the fifteenth century the Company was careful to provide for Surgical Lectures, and the regular and systematic instruction of its members. The means originally employed may have been primitive, but they were dictated by high motives, and gradually extended and developed; a Museum (a poor one, it is true) and a valuable Library were founded, an Anatomical Theatre was built, and every opportunity taken to encourage the Scientific study of Surgery--all with results fraught with the greatest benefit, not only to London, but to the Kingdom at large.
In conclusion, I desire to express my thanks to those who have aided me in my work, and especially to my dear and valued friend, Past Master Charles John Shoppee, whose practical assistance, advice and encouragement all through, have been to me of the greatest service. Mr. D’Arcy Power, M.A., has laid me under much obligation, and particularly for revising and perfecting my translation of the Norman-French Ordinances, 12th Rich. II. My son, Austin Travers Young, has rendered valuable assistance in delineating the several Illustrations throughout the work, and lastly, I must record, with gratitude, my obligation to Mr. Edward Lawless for the attention and care bestowed upon me on the numerous occasions of my visits to the Hall.
The preparation of this work, a somewhat arduous task for an Amateur, has been to me purely a labour of love, and, in laying down my pen I may be permitted to add, that my best wishes for the Ancient Mystery of Barbers are summed up in the words of our time-honoured toast, “The Worshipful Company of Barbers, Root and Branch, and may it flourish for ever.”
SIDNEY YOUNG.
ALWYNE ROAD, CANONBURY. March, 1890.
1889-1890.
THE COURT OF THE WORSHIPFUL COMPANY OF BARBERS OF LONDON.
~Master~:
WILLIAM AARON ECCLESTONE, Esq.
~Wardens~:
WILLIAM LUMLEY, Esq. JAMES COPE CORNISH, Esq. JOSEPH WILSON, Esq.
~Assistants~:
HENRY EVANS, Esq. CHARLES JOHN SHOPPEE, Esq. JAMES HARVEY, Esq., Deputy. HENLEY GROSE SMITH, Esq. GEORGE AUSTIN, Esq. RICHARD JAMES ATKINSON, Esq. CHARLES HOWARD ATKINSON, Esq. WALTER HENRY WILKIN, Esq., Alderman. JONATHAN DENNY, Esq. THOMAS GEORGE DRIVER, Esq. NATHAN SALAMAN, Esq. JOHN CARY LOVELL, Esq. EDWARD CHARLES CORNISH, Esq. GEORGE AUSTIN, Jun., Esq. WALTER LUMLEY, Esq. THOMAS ARTHUR GREENE, Esq. SIDNEY YOUNG, Esq. ALFRED LOW, Esq.
The Names of the Masters and Wardens from the year 1308 1
A list of such members of the Company as have served the Office of Serjeant Surgeon 18
A list of King’s Barbers 19
A list of members of the Company who have served the offices of Sheriff, Alderman or Lord Mayor of the City of London 19
Historical Account, The Barbers Unincorporate 21
Historical Account, The Barbers Incorporate 51
Extracts from Court Minutes, etc., more particularly relating to the Internal History of the Company 169
Precedence 239
Court of Assistants 242
The Commonalty 252
Apprentices 261
Freemen 270
Liverymen 273
The Yeomanry 276
The Clerk 288
The Beadle 299
Surgery 308
Surgical Lectures and Demonstrations 361
Wardens’ and other Accounts 379
Disputes 423
Heraldry 431
Feasts 443
The Irish Estate 468
Charities 481
Inventories 486
Plate 492
Pictures 508
Biographical Notices of Eminent Members 514 Lord Burgavenny 514 Martin Browne 546 Lord Windsor 515 Edward Arris 547 The Duke of Monmouth 515 Sir John Frederick 550 The Earl of Leven 516 Sir Nathaniel Herne 554 Sir John Aylef 516 Sir John Lethieullier 556 Thomas Vicary 522 Ephraim Skinner 558 Richard Ferris 524 Sir Humphrey Edwin 560 John Pen 525 Sir William Stewart 562 Nicholas Alcocke 527 Charles Bernard 563 Robert Balthrop 528 Sir John Bull 565 Sir Peter Proby 532 Claudius Amyand 565 William Clowes 535 Sir Thomas Challoner 567 William Clowes, jun. 537 William Cheselden 568 Thomas Thorney 538 Ambrose Dickins 570 Peter Thorney 539 Sir Cæsar Hawkins, Bart. 571 John Gerard 540 Walter Henry Wilkin 572 Sir Thomas Bludder 545
Sundry Monumental Inscriptions 573
Appendices 575
ERRATA.
p. 28 l. 20, for “religions” read “religious.”
p. 126 l. 7, for “Sugeons” read “Surgeons.”
p. 135 l. 3, for “1869” read “1864.”
p. 144 l. 20, for “1869” read “1864.”
p. 169 foot note 1, for “1526” read “1525.”
p. 258 l. 3, for “freemen” read “freeman.”
p. 473 l. 7, for “Peek” read “Peck.”
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS, &c.
PAGE
FRONTISPIECE--Henry VIII, from a portrait by Holbein at the Hall.
Old Cabinet of Masters’ Names at the Hall 1
Historical Account 21
Henry VIII and Edward IV 51
Great Seal of Edward IV 55
Fac-simile, Grant to Robert Ferbras and others, of property in Walbrook, 1462 61
Fac-simile, Saints Cosmo and Damian, and the Surgeons’ Arms 69
Fac-simile of a Diploma granted to a Surgeon in 1497 69
Portrait of Sir Thomas More 77
Holbein’s Picture at Barbers’ Hall 83
Fac-simile Page of Court Minute Book 99
Initial of Charter, Philip and Mary 101
Heading of By-Laws, 1606 116
Interior of Court Room 132
Plan of Estate 135
Old Entrance to Barber-Surgeons’ Hall 144
The Committee Room, Barbers’ Hall 168
A Master and Wardens, etc. 169
Fac-simile Title-page to Charter Book 197
Fac-simile Corn Note 212
The Compter in Wood Street 213
Portion of the Master’s Silver Garland 239
A Grotesque, over the Court Room Door 242
A Procession of Liverymen 252
An Initial Letter from the Audit Book 252
Seals of some of the Charters 288
Autograph of Charles Bernard (Clerk) 294
John Paterson 298
E. L. 299
One of the Beadle’s Mace Heads 302
Surgical Instruments, &c. 308
Alderman Arris 360
Sir Charles Scarborough and Alderman Arris at a Demonstration, on either side S. Cosmo and S. Damian 361
An Initial Letter from the Audit Book 361
Fac-simile Page of Court Minute Book 363
Upper and Middle Wardens’ Garlands 379
An Initial Letter from the Audit Book 380
An Initial Letter from the Audit Book 396
Barber-Surgeons’ Hall, 1674-1864 415
Renter Warden’s Garland 422
Disputants at the Bar of the Court 423
Inigo Jones 430
Arms of the City of London, the Barbers, the Surgeons, and England 431
The Barbers’ Arms 432
Engraving in Bowl of Henry VIII’s Cup 435
The Barber-Surgeons’ Arms, 1561 436
The Barber-Surgeons’ Arms, 1569 438
Serving a Feast 443
The Irish Estate 468
The Old Poors’ Box, and names of Benefactors 481
Taking an Inventory 486
Some of the Plate 492
Henry VIII’s Grace Cup 498
King Charles’ Cup, Queen Anne’s Punch Bowl, and Atkinson’s Punch Ladles 500
Martin Browne’s and Sir John Frederick’s Loving Cups 502
Collins’ Flagon, Monforde’s Hammer, and Arris’ Cups 503
Tea Spoons 505
The North Side of the Court Room 508
S. Y. 514
Portraits of Sir John Aylef and Thomas Vicary, after Holbein 522
Arms of Sir John Aylef 516
---- John Pen 525
---- Robert Balthrop 528
---- Sir Peter Proby 532
---- William Clowes 535
---- John Gerard 540
---- Martin Browne 546
---- Edward Arris 547
---- Sir John Frederick 550
---- Sir Nathaniel Herne 554
---- Sir John Lethieullier 556
---- Ephraim Skinner 558
---- Sir Humphry Edwin 560
---- Sir William Stewart 562
---- Charles Bernard 563
---- Sir John Bull 565
---- Claudius Amyand 565
---- Sir Thomas Challoner 567
---- William Cheselden 568
---- Ambrose Dickins 570
---- Sir Cæsar Hawkins, Bart. 571
---- Walter H. Wilkin 572
Seals of the Barber-Surgeons 575
TABLE OF LEADING DATES.
1308. Richard le Barber, the first Master of the Barbers’ Company, is sworn at Guildhall.
1388. The Masters of the Company make a return to the King’s Writ, and set forth their then ancient ordinances.
1451. Grant of Arms to the Masters of Barbery and Surgery within the Craft of Barbers.
1462. Edward IV incorporates the Barbers by Royal Charter.
1493. Informal alliance between the Barbers (Barber-Surgeons) and the Fellowship of Surgeons.
1530. The Barbers’ Ordinances are settled and allowed by Sir Thomas More.
1540. The Fellowship of Surgeons are united (by Act of Parliament 32 H. VIII) to the Company of Barbers.
1569. Grant of Arms to the Barber-Surgeons.
1605. James I grants a new Charter.
1629. Charles I grants a new Charter.
1684. All of the Company’s Charters are surrendered to the King.
1685. James II grants a new Charter.
1745. The Surgeons are separated (by Act of Parliament 18 G. II) from the Barbers.
THE NAMES OF THE
MASTERS AND WARDENS
From the Year 1308.
K.B. signifies King’s Barber; K.S. King’s Surgeon, and S.S. Serjeant-Surgeon.
------+-----------------------------------------+-------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS OF THE BARBERS. | SWORN AT GUILDHALL. ------+---------------------+-------------------+-------------------- 1308 | Richard le Barber. | ---- | December, 1308. 1375 | John Queldrick. | ---- | ---- 1376 | Lawrence de Weston. | John de Grantone. | ---- 1377 | Thomas Boyvel. | Will{m.} Osneye. | 26 August, 1377. 1378 | John Pacon. | Rich{d.} Morys. | 15 October, 1378. 1382 | Rich{d.} Capoll. | John Haydon. | 19 September, 1382. 1383 | Reginald Godard. | Walter Gisebourn. | 15 September, 1383. 1384 | William May. | Simon Conyngesby. | 6 October, 1384. 1386 | John Pacon. | John Levelyf. | 13 April, 1386. 1388 | John Shepey. | Rich{d.} Caupoll. | 16 April, 1388. 1388 | John Haydon. | Henry Cook. | 10 September, 1388. 1389 | Rich{d.} Geddyngs. | John Cheyr. | 22 September, 1389. 1390 | John Pacon. | John Bestchirche. | 31 August, 1390. 1391 | John Childe. | Will{m.} Chapman. | 27 November, 1391. ------+---------------------+-------------------+--------------------
------+---------------+------------------------------+---------------- | | |Masters of the | | |Barbers prac- AN{O.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. |tising the art | | | of Surgery. ------+---------------+------------------------------+---------------- 1415 | ---- | ---- | ---- |Simon Rolf. | | | |Richard Wellys. 1416 |John Brampton. |John Morysch. |Richard Clerc. |John Parker. | | | |Simon Rolf. 1417 |Richard Wellys.|John Queldryk.|Will{m.} |John Child. | | | Chapeley. |John Parker. 1419 |Roger Rooke. |John Dalton. |John Blakye. |Rich{d.} Wellys. | | | |Simon Roolf. 1421 |John Branton. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Bacon.| ---- | | Shiplake. | | 1423 |Will{m.} Hunne.|Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Simon Rolf. | | Chapelyn. | Ryggewyk. |John Dalton. 1424 |Rich{d.} |John Queldryk.|Rich{d.} |Rich{d.} Welles. | Snadenham. | | Merlawe. |Simon Rolf. 1428 |Simon Poule. |John Purchas. | ---- |Simon Rolf. | | | |Rich{d.} Welles. 1441 |Pierce Pope. |John Warwick. |John Roote. | ---- 1442 |Pierce Pope. |John Warwick. |John Roote. | ---- 1443 |John Roote. |John Urse. |John Waystbe. | ---- 1444 |Henry Grave. |John Grafton. |John Mereston. | ---- 1445 |Henry Grave. |John Grafton. |John Mereston. | ---- 1446 |John Blakey. |Roger Scripe. |Will{m.} Legge.| ---- 1447 |John Daulton. |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Willot.| ---- | | Woodhouse. | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1448 |John Struge. |John Hobbis. |John Grafton. |John Porter. 1449 |Tho{s.} |John Warwick. |Will{m.} Hill. |Roger Webb. | Geffery. | | | 1450 |John Grafton. |John Wale. |John Wakeley. |Edmund Callowe. 1451 |John Struge. |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} Wallis.|Hugh Harte. | | Willot. | | 1452 |John Wakeley. |John Porter. |Will{m.} Legge.|Rob{t.} Dasons. 1453 |John Daulton. |Edmund |Roger Scripe. |John Caster. | | Callowe. | | 1454 |John Urle. |Will{m.} Hill.|Tho{s.} Wallis.|Will{m.} Hayles. 1455 |John Grafton. |John Pinchon. |Rob{t.} Dasons.|John Wilkinson. 1456 |Roger Scripe. |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Henry Brooke. | | Browne. | Whitebred. | 1457 |Tho{s.} Willot.|John Pinchon. |John Caster. |John Lunne. 1458 |John Porter. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Reg{ld.} Young. | | Hobbis. | Pollet. | 1459 |John Caster. |Rich{d.} |Tho{s.} |John Morden. | | Eastey. | Castard. | 1460 |Will{m.} Legge.|Hugh Harte. |John Saunders. |Tho{s.} Folliot. 1461 |Roger Scripe. |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} Kent. | | Hobbes,S.S.| Goddard. | 1462 |Rob{t.} |John Pinchon. |Rowland |John Springet. | Dallahouse. | | Frankish. | 1463 |Will{m.} Hill. |Rich{d.} |Regin{ld.} |Rich{d.} | | Gastey. | Young. | Cappell. 1464 |John Grafton. |Rich{d.} |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} | | Eastey. | Goddard. | Whitebred. 1465 |Tho{s.} Willot.|Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |John Bone. | | Wallis. | Collard. | 1466 |Regin{ld.} |Rowland |Rich{d.} Kent. |Rob{t.} | Young. | Frankish. | | Holliday. 1467 |John Caster. |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} |John Daunt. | | Goddard. | Brightmore. | 1468 |Rowland |Rob{t.} |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Green. | Frankish. | Holliday. | Atwood. | 1469 |Roger Scripe. |Rob{t.} |John Morden. | ---- | | Palmer. | | 1470 |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} |Barth{w.} | Goddard. | Brightmore. | Pallet. | Crosby. 1471 |Will{m.} |Lawrence |Will{m.} |Rob{t.} Scott. | Whitebred. | Austin. | Pewall. | 1472 |John Pinchon. |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} |Edmund Walsh. | | Scarlett. | Lucas. | 1473 |Will{m.} Hill. |Rob{t.} |John Drumacks. |John Hingham. | | Palmer. | | 1474 |Rob{t.} |Rob{t.} Scott.|John Johnson. |William Gatard. | Dallahouse. | | | 1475 |Rob{t.} |Lawrence |Will{m.} |Rich{d.} | Holliday. | Austin. | Horton. | Southnam. 1476 |Rich{d.} Kent. |Barth{w.} |Will{m.} |John Wilson. | | Crosby. | Pewall. | 1477 |Reginald Young.|Rob{t.} |George |Rich{d.} | | Scarlett. | Robinson. | Chambers. 1478 |John Morden. |Alex{r.} |Philip Potter. |Simon Cole. | | Slight. | | 1479 |Rob{t.} |Will{m.} |Lawrence |Tho{s.} Parkins. | Studdis. | Horton. | Rogers. | 1480 |Will{m.} |Rob{t.} |John Johnson. |Rich{d.} | Pewall. | Palmer. | | Moneycock. 1481 |Tho{s.} |Lawrence |Rich{d.} |John Denmark. | Goddard. | Austin. | Lucas. | 1482 |Will{m.} |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} |Rich{d.} | Horton. | Scarlett. | Chambers. | Southnam. 1483 |Rob{t.} |James Scott. |John Stanton. |Rich{d.} | Holliday. | | | Hayward. 1484 |John Pinchon. |John Johnson. |Edward Walch. |Rob{t.} Lilley. 1485 |Rob{t.} |Philip Potter.|John Tounnyage.|Rich{d.} | Holliday. | | | Hayward. 1486 |Reginald Young.|Rich{d.} |John Wilson. |John Papworth. | | Chambers. | | 1487 |Rich{d.} Lucas.|Simon Cole. |John Johnson. |Rich{d.} Nevell. 1488 |Rob{t.} |Philip Potter.|Ralph Dowell. |Will{m.} Oakley. | Scarlett. | | | 1489 |Rob{t.} Palmer.|Rich{d.} |James Ingolsby.|Owyn Mayne. | | Hammond. | | 1490 |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} |John Johnson. |Tho{s.} Walton. | Holliday. | Suddenham. | | 1491 |John Johnson, |James Scott. |Ralph Dowell. |Nicholas Lyving. | Sen{r.} | | | 1492 |John Johnson. |Rich{d.} |Rich{d.} |Henry Tyley. | | Haward. | Nevell. | 1493 |James Scott. |James |James Holland. |Roger Sheene. | | Ingolsby. | | 1494 |Robert |Owyn Mayne. |Nich{s.} |John Browne. | Scarlett. | | Lyving. | 1495 |Rich{d.} |James |James Holland. |Will{m.} Newton. | Nevell. | Ingolsby. | | 1496 |Rob{t.} |Will{m.} |John Knott. |Tho{s.} Dawes. | Holliday. | Oakley. | | 1497 |John Johnson. |Roger Sheene. |Andrew Oliver. |Henry | | | | Haselhurst. 1498 |James Scott. |James |John Sommers. |Henry Geery. | | Ingolsby. | | 1499 |Rich{d.} |James Holland.|John Robertson.|John Botelier. | Heyward. | | | 1500 |James Scott. |Tho{s.} |John Knott. |Will{m.} | | Daniell. | | Maresfield. 1501 |James Ingolsby.|Nich{s.} |Henry Geery. |Will{m.} | | Lyving. | | Ashwell. 1502 |Roger Sheene. |John Knott. |Tho{s.} |John Peerson. | | | Atkinson. | 1503 |Nich{s.} |Henry |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Apleton. | Lyving. | Haselhurst. | Lythego. | 1504 |Tho{s.} Dawes. |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |John Oakley. | | Atkinson. | Withers. | 1505 |Henry |John Peerson. |Will{m.} |Edm{d.} | Haselhurst. | | Kerkby. | Milliners. 1506 |James Ingolsby.|Henry Geery. |John Woodward. |Tho{s.} Gibson. 1507 |John Johnson. |John Knott. |Will{m.} |John Mullyns. | | | Ashwell. | 1508 |Nich{s.} |John Peerson. |Will{m.} |John Tayler. | Lyving. | | Kerkby. | 1509 |Henry Geery. |Will{m.} |John Woodward. |Rob{t.} | | Lythego. | | Misleden. 1510 |John Knott. |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Edw{d.} Potter. | | Apleton. | Hopkinson. | 1511 |John Peerson. |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Gibson.|Tho{s.} Martin. | | Kerkby. | | 1512 |John Johnson. |Will{m.} |John Oakley. |Rob{t.} Maynard. | | Lythego. | | 1513 |James Holland. |Will{m.} |John Tayler. |Nich{s.} Morton. | | Ashwell. | | 1514 |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} |Walter Kellet. |Henry Baldwin. | Kerkby. | Gibson. | | 1515 |Will{m.} |John Woodward.|Edw{d.} Potter.|Edw{d.} | Lythego. | | | Arundell. 1516 |Tho{s.} |John Tayler. |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} Went. | Apleton. | | Handsom. | 1517 |John Johnson. |John Oakley. |Roger Foster. |Will{m.} | | | | Morreyson. 1518 |Tho{s.} Gibson.|Henry Baldwin.|Rob{t.} |Tho{s.} Twynne. | | | Myneyard. | 1519 |John Peerson. |Walter Kellet.|Rich{d.} Ude. |John Banks. 1520 |John Peerson. |Edw{d.} |John Banks. |Henry Cazor. | | Potter. | | 1521 |Tho{s.} Gibson.|Edw{d.} |Edw{d.} |George Brian. | | Potter. | Arundell. | 1522 |Tho{s.} Gibson.|Nich{s.} |Rich{d.} Went. |Rich{d.} | | Morton. | | Sermont. 1523 |John Tayler. |Nich{s.} |Rich{d.} Went. |Rich{d.} | | Morton. | | Sermont. 1524 |John Tayler. |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} |John Enderby. | | Twynne. | Tayler. | 1525 |Will{m.} |Henry Baldwin.|Henry Cazor. |Tho{s.} Viccary. | Kerkby. | | | 1526 |Edward Potter. |John Banks. |Rob{t.} Simson.|Will{m.} Kidd. 1527 |Henry Baldwin. |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} |John Younge. | | Twynne. | Tayler. | 1528 |Walter Kellet. |Tho{s.} |John Potter. |Tho{s.} Sutton. | | Viccary. | | 1529 |Tho{s.} Gibson.|Edward |John Enderby. |Rich{d.} Gower. | | Arundell. | | 1530 |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} |Ralph Garland. |John Ayliffe. | Viccary,S.S.| Tayler. | | 1531 |Henry Baldwin. |Henry Cazor. |Tho{s.} Wench. |Nich{s.} | | | | Simpson. 1532 |John Banks. |John Potter. |John Ayliffe. |George Holland. 1533 |Will{m.} |Ralph Garland.|Peter Daiseman.|James Tompson. | Kerkby. | | | 1534 |John Potter. |John Goodby. |Rob{t.} Postle.|John Bird. 1535 |John Potter. |John Ayliffe. |John Bird. |Charles Wyght. 1536 |Tho{s.} Twynne.|Ralph Garland.|James Tompson. |John Newman. 1537 |Nich{s.} |John Johnson. |George Holland.|Will{m.} Rewe. | Simpson, | | | | K.B. | | | 1538 |Sir John |John Bird. |Tho{s.} Surbut.|George Geene. | Ayliffe,K.S.| | | 1539 |John Penn, |K. Barber. |John Hutton. |Henry Pemberton. | K.B. | | | 1540 |Edmund Harman, |James Monford,|William Tilley.|Rob{t.} | K.B. | K.S. | | Sprignall. 1541 |Tho{s.} |James Tompson.|Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} Bowle. | Viccary,S.S.| | Johnson. | 1542 |John Bird. |Charles Wyght.|Will{m.} |John Gyle. | | | Sherborn. | 1543 |John Johnson. |James Monford,|James Banks. |Robert | | | | Waterford. |George Holland.| K.S. |James Tompson. |Christ{r.} | | | | Salmon. 1544 |John Younge. |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} Bowle.|John Atkinson. | | Postle. | | 1545 |John Bird. |George Geene. |Henry |Rob{t.} | | | Pemberton. | Brownhill. 1546 |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Dan{l.} |Tho{s.} Gale. | Viccary,S.S.| Tilley. | Sambrook. | 1547 |John Enderby. |Peter |Rob{t.} |John Smith. | | Daiseman. | Sprignall. | 1548 |Tho{s.} |John Skinner. |John Newman. |John Gyle. | Viccary,S.S.| | |Will{m.} | | | | Otherborn. 1549 |Geo{e.} |Rob{t.} |Rob{t.} |Augustine | Holland. | Waterford. | Brownhill. | Clarke. 1550 |Geo{e.} Geene. |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} Bowle.|Tho{s.} | | Johnson. | | Stockdale. | | | |Matth{w.} | | | | Johnson. 1551 |Rich{d.} |Rob{t.} |John Barker. |James Wood. | Ferris. | Sprignell. | | 1552 |Christ{r.} |Tho{s.} Knott.|Aug{ne.} |Rich{d.} Elliot. | Salmon. | | Clarke. | 1553 |Rich{d.} Bowle.|John Atkinson.|Tho{s.} |Hugh Lymcocke. | | | Whittingham. | 1554 |Rob{t.} |Aug{ne.} |Will{m.} Green.|John Bonnar. | Sprignell. | Clarke. | | 1555 |Tho{s.} Knott. |Tho{s.} Gale. |John Smythe. |Tho{s.} Fysshe. 1556 |Geo. Holland, |Rob{t.} Brown.|Alex{r.} Mason.|Rich{d.} | K.S. | | | Tholmwood. 1557 |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |James Wood. |John Warren. | Viccary,S.S.| Whittingham.| | 1558 |John Atkinson. |Hugh Lymcocke.|William Walton.|Geo. Vaughan. 1559 |George Geene. |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Baylie.|John | | Greene. | | Smarthwaite. 1560 |Tho{s.} |James Wood. |John Bonnar. |Rob{t.} | Whittingham. | | | Balthrop. 1561 |Tho{s.} Gale. |Alex{r.} |John Standon. |Rob{t.} Mudesly. | | Mason. | | 1562 |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} Hughes. | Ferris, S.S.| Walton. | Mudesly. | 1563 |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} |Geo. Vaughan. |John Weste. | Brownhill. | Tholmwood. | | 1564 |Will{m.} |Rob{t.} |Tho{s.} |Nich{s.} | Greene. | Balthrop. | Robinson. | Archenbold. 1565 |Rob{t.} |Geo. Vaughan. |Rich{d.} |Geo. Corron. |Balthrop,S.S.| | Hughes. | 1566 |James Wood. |Tho{s.} |Nich{s.} |Tho{s.} Burston. | | Barber. | Archenbold. | 1567 |Alex{r.} Mason.|Rob{t.} |Geo. Corron. |John Robinson. | | Mudesly. | | 1568 |Rich{d.} |Nich{s.} |Tho{s.} |Rich{d.} Wisto | Tholmwood. | Archenbold. | Burston. | (died.) | | | |John Field. 1569 |George Vaughan |John Standon. |John Field. |Humphry Paris. | (died.) | | | |Alex{r.} Mason.| | | 1570 |Tho{s.} Barber.|Rich{d.} |John Robinson. |John Yates. | | Hughes. | | 1571 |Tho{s.} Barber.|George Corron.|Rob{t.} Clarke.|Will{m.} Bovey. 1572 |Rob{t.} |John Robinson.|Tho{s.} Banks. |Edw{d.} Ireland. | Mudesly. | | | |Alex{r.} Mason | | | | (died.) | | | 1573 |Rob{t.} |Tho{s.} |John Hitchen. |Will{m.} Bull. |Balthrop,S.S.| Burston. | | 1574 |Rich{d.} |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} Bovey.|Rich{d.} Upton. | Hughes. | Robinson. | | |George Corron | | | | (died.) | | | 1575 |Tho{s.} |John Feild. |Will{m.} |John Mason. | Whittingham. | | Swaine. | 1576 |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |John Yates. |Will{m.} Crowe. | Burston. | Banckes. | | 1577 |John Feild. |John Hitchen. |Christ{r.} |Henry Rankyn. | | | Swaldell. | 1578 |Tho{s.} |John Yates. |Rich{d.} Wisto.|Leonard Coxe. | Banckes. | | | 1579 |John Hitchen. |William Bovey.|William Crowe. |Tho{s.} Bird. 1580 |Rob{t.} |Christ{r.} |Edward Ireland.|John Haysie. | Mudesly. | Swaldell. | | 1581 |Will{m.} Bovey.|Will{m.} |Henry Rankyn. |Edw{d.} Griffin. | | Swaine. | | 1582 |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Leonard Coxe. |Rich{d.} Wood. | Banckes. | Crowe. | | 1583 |Christ{r.} |Rich{d.} |Tho{s.} Bird. |Will{m.} Gale. | Swaldell. | Wisto. | | 1584 |John Hitchen. |Henry Ranken. |John Haysie. |Rich{d.} | | | | Sprignall. 1585 |Will{m.} Crowe.|Leonard Coxe. |Rich{d.} Wood. |Henry Bradley. 1586 |Rich{d.} Wisto.|John Haysie. |Edward Griffin.|John Leycock. 1587 |Henry Rankyn. |Tho{s.} Bird. |Rich{d.} |John Johnson. | | | Sprignall. | 1585 |Leonard Coxe. |Rich{d.} Wood.|Will{m.} Borne.|George Denham. 1589 |John Haysie. |Edward |Will{m.} |John Martin. | | Griffin. | Gooderus. | 1590 |Tho{s.} Bird. |Will{m.} Gale.|Tho{s.} Wayte. |John Izard. 1591 |Rich{d.} Wood. |Rich{d.} |Geo. Baker, |James Bates. | | Sprignall. | S.S. | 1592 |Edward Griffin.|Will{m.} |Geo. Denham. |John Dards. | | Gooderus, | | | | S.S. | | 1593 |Christ{r.} |John Leycock. |John Izard. |John Burgess. | Swaldell. | | | 1594 |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |John Newsom. |Gooderus,S.S.| Borne. | Clowes. | 1595 |Will{m.} Gale. |John Martyn. |James Bates. |John Peck. 1596 |Tho{s.} |John Izard. |Tho{s.} Warren.|Lewis Atmer. | Banckes. | | | 1597 |George Baker, |James Bates. |John Dards. |John Gerrard. | S.S. | | | 1598 |John Leycock. |John Burgess. |Tho{s.} |Robert Johnson. | | | Thorney. | 1599 |Rich{d.} Wood. |John Dards. |John Newsom. |Will{m.} Martyn. |Will{m.} Borne |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Edw{d.} Rodes. 1600 | (died.) | Thorney. | Martyn. | |John Leycock. | | | 1601 |John Martyn. |Lewis Atmer. |Christ{r.} |Rob{t.} Fuller. | | | Frederick. | 1602 |Tho{s.} |William |Edw{d.} Rodes. |Tho{s.} Martyn. | Thorney. | Martyn. | | 1603 |Will{m.} |John Peck. |Rob{t.} Fuller.|John Richmond. |Gooderus,S.S.| | | 1604 |John Leycock. |Christ{r.} |Tho{s.} Martyn.|Rich{d.} Mapes. | | Frederick. | | 1605 |John Peck. |Edw{d.} Rodes.|Will{m.} |John Fenton. | | | Fyninge. | 1606 |William Martyn.|Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} Mapes.|Randall Foster. |Thomas Thorney.| Fuller. | | 1607 |John Gerrard. |Tho{s.} |John Fenton. |Tho{s.} Veare. | | Martyn. | | 1608 |Edward Rodes. |Rich{d.} |Robert Johnson.|Roger Jenkins. | | Mapes. | | 1609 |Christ{r.} |Will{m.} |Randall Foster.|Edw{d.} | Frederick, | Fyninge. | | Ingolsby. | S.S. | | | |William Gale | | | 1610 | (died.) |John Fenton. |Tho{s.} Veare. |John Hassall. |John Pecke. | | | 1611 |Robert Fuller. |Rob{t.} |Roger Jenkins. |Abraham Allen. | | Johnson. | | 1612 |Richard Mapes. |Randall |Abraham Allen. |John Kerrell. | | Foster. | | 1613 |John Fenton. |Thomas Veare |Edw{d.} |John Coghill. | | (died.)[1] | Ingolsby. | 1614 |John Hassall. |Roger Jenkins.|John Kerrell. |Lewis Rogers. 1615 |Sir Peter |Edward |John Coghill. |Rich{d.} Cooper. | Proby, Ald.| Ingolsby. | | 1616 |Christ{r.} |John Kerrell. |Lewis Rogers. |Jasper Arris. | Frederick, | | | | S.S. | | | 1617 |Ralph Bovey. |Lewis |Jasper Arris. |Peter Porter. | (died.) | Rogers[2] | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[1] John Hassall chosen Warden. [2] Rich{d.} Cooper chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1618 |Edward |Henry Ofeild. |Peter Porter. |Tho{s.} Borne. | Ingolsby. | | | 1619 |John Coghill. |Peter Porter. |Tho{s.} Borne. |Tho{s.} Allen. 1620 |Richard Cooper.|Tho{s.} Borne.|Tho{s.} Allen. |John Newman. 1621 |Randall Foster.|Tho{s.} Allen.|Dominic |John Dards. | | | Lomleine. | 1622 |Alexander |Jasper Arris |John Newman. |Rich{d.} | Baker, J.P.| (died.)[3] | | Wateson. 1623 |John Kerrell. |Dominic |Rich{d.} |Rich{d.} | | Lomleine. | Wateson. | Thornebury. 1624 |Joseph Fenton. |Rich{d.} |Rich{d.} |Andrew Wheatley. | | Wateson. | Thornebury. | 1625 |Henry Ofeild. |Rich{d.} |James Molines. |John Woodall. | | Thornebury. | | 1626 |William Clowes,|James Molines.|Andrew |Rich{d.} | S.S. | | Wheatley. | Morrice. 1627 |Tho{s.} |Andrew |John Woodall. |Dan{l.} Hinxman. | Caldwell, | Wheatley. | | | Esquire, | | | | K.B. | | | |Thomas Borne | | | | (died.) | | | 1628 |Tho{s.} |John Borne. |Will{m.} |Arthur Dowton. | Caldwell, | | Walker. | | Esquire, | | | | K.B. | | | 1629 |Dominic |Rich{d.} |Arthur Dowton. |George Roades. | Lomeline. | Morrice. | | 1630 |Richard |John Newman. |Dan{l.} |Edw{d.} | Wateson, | | Hinxman. | Waterhouse. | _Surgeon in | | | | Ordinary to | | | | the King._ | | | 1631 |Rich{d.} |Dan{l.} |Tobias |Henry Blackley. | Thornbury. | Hinxman. | Johnson. | 1632 |James Molines. |Arthur Dowton.|Rich{d.} |John Ward. | | | Powell. | 1633 |John Woodall. |Rich{d.} |Henry Blackley.|George Predey. | | Powell. | | 1634 |Richard |Henry |John Heydon. |John Davyes. | Morrice. | Blackley. | | 1635 |Michael |John Warde. |Nicholas Heath.|Will{m.} Huckle. | Andrews, | | | | _Surgeon in | | | | Ordinary to | | | | the King._ | | | 1636 |Richard Powell.|John Heydon. |Will{m.} |Lawrence Cotton. | | | Huckle. | 1637 |Henry Blackley.|Will{m.} |Lawrence |Tho{s.} | | Burgin. | Cotton. | Trevellion.[4] | | | | (Dismissed.) 1638 |William Clowes,|William |George Dunn. |Henry Wateson. | S.S. | Lingham. | | 1639 |Thomas Davyes, |Nicholas |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} | K.B. | Heath. | Collins. | Bignell. 1640 |John Heydon. |Henry Wateson.|Martin Browne. |Tho{s.} Browne. 1641 |John Ward. |Lawrence |Tho{s.} Browne.|John Pinder. | | Cotton. | | 1642 |William Burgin.|George Dunne. |Edward Arris. |John Lufkin. 1643 |Nicholas Heath.|Will{m.} |John Lufkin. |Henry Boone. | | Bignell. | | 1644 |William Huckle.|Tho{s.} |Henry Boone. |Robert Clarke. | | Collins. | | 1645 |Lawrence |Martin Browne.|Robert Clarke. |Will{m.} Gurney. | Cotton. | | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[3] John Dards chosen Warden. [4] Will{m.} Lingham chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1646 |George Dunne. |William Kings.|Will{m.} |Ralph Foster. | | | Gurney. | 1647 |William |Henry Boone. |Ralph Foster. |Will{m.} | Bignell. | | | Bennett. 1648 |Thomas Collins.|Rob{t.} |Will{m.} |John Madocks. | | Clarke. | Bennett. | 1649 |Robert Clarke. |Will{m.} |John Madocks. |Tho{s.} Allen. | | Bennett[5] | | | | (died.) | | 1650 |William Kings. |Will{m.} |John Frederick.|Cha{s.} | | Gurney. | | Stamford. 1651 |Edward Arris, |Ralph Foster. |Thomas Allen. |Tho{s.} Turner. | Ald. | | | 1652 |William Gurney.|Rob{t.} |Cha{s.} |Rob{t.} | | Bullock. | Stamford. | Westbrooke. 1653 |Martin Browne. |John Madocks. |Tho{s.} Turner.|Lawrence Loe. 1654 |Sir John |Tho{s.} Allen.|Abraham Clarke.|Tho{s.} Bowden. | Frederick, | | | | Ald. | | | 1655 |Henry Boone. |Tho{s.} |Lawrence Loe. |Tho{s.} Kingman. | | Turner. | | 1656 |Ralph Foster. |Cha{s.} |Nicholas |John Perkins. | | Stamford. | Brothers. | 1657 |Robert Bullock.|Robert |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} | | Westbrook. | Watson. | Calveley. 1658 |John Madocks. |Lawrence Loe. |Will{m.} |Ralph Thickness. |Sir John | | Rymmer. | | Frederick, | | | | Ald. | | | 1659 |Thomas Allen. |John Perkins. |Ralph |John Sotherton. |Charles | | Thickness. | | Stamford. | | | 1660 |Thomas Turner. |Thomas Bowden.|John Sotherton.|Thomas Burton. 1661 |Humphry |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} Burton.|Tho{s.} Canham. | Painter,S.S.| Calveley. | | 1662 |Thomas Lisle, |Nicholas |James Farre. |Joseph Bynns. | K.B. | Brothers. | | 1663 |John Knight, |John |Joseph Bynns. |Tho{s.} Hall. | S.S. | Sotherton. | | 1664 |Ralph Foliard, |Ralph |Tho{s.} Hall. |Tho{s.} Hollier. | K.B. | Thickness. | | 1665 |Richard |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |John Harvie. | Wiseman,S.S.| Canham. | Hollier. | 1666 |Thomas |Tho{s.} |John Harvie. |James Pearse, | Calveley. | Hollier. | | _Duke of York’s | | | | Surgeon_. 1667 |Lawrence Loe. |James Farre. |James Pearse. |Will{m.} Fryer. 1668 |Thomas Canham. |James Pearse. |Will{m.} Fryer.|Will{m.} | | | | Markham. 1669 |John Knight, |John Harvie. |Will{m.} |Tobias Sedgwick. | S.S. | | Markham. | 1670 |James Farre. |Tobias |Will{m.} |Henry Barker. | | Sedgwick. | Markham. | 1671 |Ralph |Will{m.} |Henry Barker. |James Brooks. | Thickness. | Fryer. | | 1672 |John Harvie. |Henry Barker. |James Brooks. |Henry Johnson. 1673 |Tho{s.} |James Brooks. |Henry Johnson. |Rich{d.} Powell. | Hollier. | | | 1674 |Sir Nathaniel |Henry Johnson.|Rich{d.} |Will{m.} Perse. | Herne, | | Powell. | | Alderman. | | | 1675 |James Pearse, |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} Perse.|Will{m.} | _The King’s | Powell. | | Bellamy. | and Duke’s | | | | Surgeon_. | | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[5] Martin Browne chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1676 |Sir John |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Symonds. | Letheuillier,| Perse. | Bellamy. | | Sheriff. | | | 1677 |Henry Johnson. |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |John Knight, | Bellamy. | Symonds. | Middleton. | S.S. | | | 1678 |William Fryer. |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |Edmund Thorold. | | Symonds. | Middleton. | 1679 |William Perse. |Philip Foster.|Tho{s.} Page. |Rich{d.} | | | | Cheshire. 1680 |James Brooks. |Edmund |Rich{d.} |George Horsnell. | | Thorold. | Cheshire. | 1681 |Edmund Thorold.|Tho{s.} |Geo. Horsnell. |Tho{s.} Baylie. | | Middleton. | | 1682 |Richard Powell.|Tho{s.} Page. |Tho{s.} Baylie.|Edw{d.} | | | | Cockaigne. 1683 |Thomas Page. |Rich{d.} |Edw{d.} |Rob{t.} Leeson. | | Cheshire. | Cockaigne. | 1684 |Richard |Geo. Horsnell.|Rob{t.} Leeson.|Rob{t.} | Cheshire. | | | Sanderson. 1685 |George |Robert Leeson.|Rob{t.} |John King. | Horsnell. | | Sanderson. | 1686 |Robert Leeson. |Robert |John King. |Will{m.} | | Sanderson[6]| | Layfield. | | (died.) | | 1687 |Thomas Hobbs, |John King. |Will{m.} |John Darling. | S.S. | | Layfield. | 1688 |Sir Humphry |Will{m.} |Roger Knowles. |John Stambrooke. | Edwin, | Layfield. | | | Alderman. | | | 1689 |John Conny, |John |Roger Knowles. |John Darling. | Esquire. | Stambrooke. | | 1690 |William |Roger Knowles.|John Jackson. |Henry | Bellamy. | | | Rossington. 1691 |William |John Jackson. |Henry |Rich{d.} Hewett. | Layfield. | | Rossington. | 1692 |John King. |Henry |Rich{d.} |John Deane. | | Rossington. | Hewett. | 1693 |Roger Knowles. |Rich{d.} |John Deane. |Will{m.} Clarke. | | Hewett. | | 1694 |Richard Hewett.|Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Caister. | | Gardiner. | Clarke. | 1695 |Henry |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} |George Minikin. | Rossington. | Clarke. | Caister. | 1696 |William Clarke.|Tho{s.} |George Minikin.|Tho{s.} | | Caister. | | Litchfeild. 1697 |Thomas |George |Tho{s.} |John Pinke. |Gardiner,S.S.| Minikin. | Litchfeild. | 1698 |George Minikin.|Tho{s.} |John Pinke. |James Wall. | | Litchfeild. | | 1699 |Thomas |John Pinke. |James Wall. |Barth{w.} King. | Litchfeild. | | | 1700 |John Pinke. |James Wall. |Rich{d.} Marks.|Will{m.} Oades. 1701 |James Wall. |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} Oades.|Ralph Hatley. | | Marks. | | 1702 |Richard Marks. |Will{m.} |Ralph Hatley. |Will{m.} | | Oades. | | Pleahill. 1703 |Charles |Ralph Hatley. |Will{m.} |John Worts. | Bernard,S.S.| | Pleahill. | 1704 |Ralph Hatley. |William |John Worts. |Zachariah | | Pleahill. | | Gibson. 1705 |William Oades. |John Worts. |Zach{h.} |Will{m.} Bond. | | | Gibson. | 1706 |John Worts. |Zach{h.} |Will{m.} Bond. |Gratian Bale. | | Gibson. | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[6] John Conny chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1707 |Zachariah |Will{m.} Bond.|Gratian Bale. |Will{m.} Moss. | Gibson. | | | 1708 |William Bond. |Gratian Bale. |Will{m.} Moss. |Anth{y.} | | | | Herenden. 1709 |Gratian Bale. |William Moss |Edw{d.} Green. |Simon Lynch. | | (died).[7]| | 1710 |Simon Lynch. |Edw{d.} Green.|Will{m.} |Rich{d.} Harvey. | | | Watkins. | 1711 |Edward Green. |Will{m.} |Anth{y.} |Joseph Cousins. | | Watkins. | Herenden. | 1712 |William |Anth{y.} |Joseph Cousins |Joseph Greene. | Watkins. | Herenden. | (died).[8] | 1713 |Anthony |Will{m.} |Rich{d.} |Christopher | Herenden. | Smith. | Harvey. | Toms. 1714 |William Smith. |Richard |Christ{r.} |Alex{r.} Geekie. | | Harvey. | Toms. | 1715 |Richard Harvey.|Christ{r.} |Joseph Greene. |Robert Hayes. | | Toms[9] | | | | (died). | | 1716 |Robert Hayes. |Joseph Greene.|John Shott. |Will{m.} Loup. 1717 |Joseph Greene. |John Shott. |Alex{r.} |James Northall. | | | Geekie. | 1718 |John Shott. |Alex{r.} |James |Will{m.} | | Geekie. | Northall. | Cotesworth, | | | | Esquire. 1719 |Alexander |James |Will{m.} Loup. |Sam{l.} Rayson. | Geekie. | Northall. | | 1720 |James Northall.|Will{m.} Loup.|Sam{l.} Rayson.|Henry Myddelton. 1721 |William Loup. |Sam{l.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} | | Rayson. | Cotesworth, | Blanford. | | | Esquire. | 1722 |Samuel Rayson. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Cole, | | Cotesworth, | Blanford. | Esquire. | | Esquire. | | 1723 |William |Will{m.} |Henry |John Randall. | Cotesworth, | Blanford. | Myddelton. | | Esquire. | | | |William | | | 1724 | Blanford |Henry |John Randall. |James Ferne. | (died). | Myddelton. | | |John Shott. | | | 1725 |Henry |John Randall. |Will{m.} Cole, |January Farmer. | Myddelton. | | Esquire. | 1726 |John Shott. |Will{m.} Cole,|January Farmer.|Henry Bull. | | Esquire. | | 1727 |William Cole, |January |James Ferne. |John Nicholls. | Esquire. | Farmer. | | 1728 |January Farmer.|James Ferne. |John Nicholls |Ambrose Dickins, | | | (died).[10]| Esquire,S.S. 1729 |Ambrose |Will{m.} |Claudius Amyand,|Luke Maurice. | Dickins, Esq.,| Parker. | | | S.S. to | |Esquire, S.S.| | Queen Anne, | | | |King Geo. I.,| | | |King Geo. II.| | | 1730 |William Parker.|Claudius |Luke Maurice. |Edw{d.} | | Amyand, | | Woodward. | |Esquire,S.S.| | 1731 |Claudius |Luke Maurice. |Edw{d.} |John Barnwell. | Amyand, | | Woodward. | | Esquire,S.S.| | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[7] Will{m.} Watkins chosen Warden. [8] Will{m.} Smith chosen Warden. [9] John Shott chosen Warden. [10] W{m.} Parker chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1732 |Luke Maurice. |Edw{d.} |John Barnwell. |Tho{s.}Bridges. | | Woodward. | | 1733 |James Ferne. |John Barnwell.|Tho{s.} |John Watts. | | | Bridges. | 1734 |John Barnwell. |Tho{s.} |John Watts. |William Petty. | | Bridges. | | 1735 |Edward |John Watts. |Will{m.} |Dan{l.} Fradin. | Woodward. | | Petty. | 1736 |John Watts. |Will{m.} |Dan{l.} Fradin.|John Wheeler. | | Petty. | | 1737 |Thomas Bridges.|Dan{l.} |John Wheeler. |John Truelove. | | Fradin. | | 1738 |Daniel Fradin. |John Wheeler. |John Truelove. |James Dansie. 1739 |William Petty. |John Truelove.|James Dansie. |Tho{s.} | | | | Essington. 1740 |John Truelove. |James Dansie. |Will{m.} |Joseph Wood. |John Wheeler | | Haddon. | | (died.) | | | 1741 |James Dansie. |Will{m.} |John Hayward. |Jonathan Medley. | | Haddon. | | 1742 |William Haddon.|John Hayward. |Jonathan |Joseph Sandford. | | | Medley. | 1743 |John Hayward. |Jonathan |Joseph |Humphry Negus. | | Medley. | Sandford. | 1744 |Jonathan |Joseph |Humphry Negus. |Will{m.} | Medley. | Sandford. | | Cheselden, | | | | Esquire. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
MEMORANDUM.--That on the 24th June, 1745, The Surgeons were by Act of Parliament separated from The Barbers.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1745 |Jonathan |Humphry Negus.|Edw{d.} Boxley.|Sam{l.} Rutter. [11]| Medley. | | | 1745 |Humphry Negus. |Edw{d.} |Sam{l.} Rutter.|Rob{t.} Scrooby. | | Boxley. | | 1746 |Edward Boxley. |Sam{l.} |Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} | | Rutter. | Scrooby. | Swithin. 1747 |Sam{l.} Rutter.|Rob{t.} |Rich{d.} |John Bearblock. | | Scrooby. | Swithin. | 1748 |Robert Scrooby.|Rich{d.} |John Bearblock.|Will{m.} | | Swithin. | | Roberts. 1749 |Richard |John |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Cotton. | Swithin. | Bearblock. | Roberts. | 1750 |James Theobald,|John |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Cotton. | Esq. | Bearblock. | Roberts. | 1751 |John Bearblock.|Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Cotton.|John Whiting. | | Roberts. | | 1752 |William |Tho{s.} |John Whiting. |Rich{d.} Lookes. | Roberts. | Cotton. | | 1753 |Thomas Cotton. |John Whiting. |Rich{d.} |Peter Theobald, | | | Lookes. | Esq. 1754 |John Whiting. |Peter |John Pepys. |Will{m.} | |Theobald, Esq.| | Glenister. 1755 |John Pepys. |Will{m.} |Thomas Potter. |Michael I’Ans. | | Glenister. | | 1756 |Michael I’Ans. |John Blundell.|Will{m.} |Charles Moore. | | | Tillett. | 1757 |John Blundell. |Will{m.} |Charles Moore. |Thomas Griffin. | | Tillett. | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[11] Mr. Medley had been Master of the Barber-Surgeons from Election day, 1744, until the 24th June, 1745, and was Master of the Barbers from that date until Election day, 1745, when Mr. Negus was chosen.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1758 |William |Charles Moore.|Thomas Griffin.|Alexander Glen. | Tillett. | | | 1759 |Charles Moore. |Thomas |Alex{r.} Glen. |Achilles | | Griffin. | | Preston. 1760 |Thomas Griffin.|Alex{r.} Glen.|Achilles |John Lowther. | | | Preston. | 1761 |Sir Tho{s.} |Alex{r.} Glen.|Achilles |John Lowther. | Challenor, | | Preston. | | Ald. | | | 1762 |Alex{r.} Glen |John Lowther. |John Marshall. |Isaac Burton | (died.) | | | (died).[12] |Achilles | | | | Preston. | | | 1763 |John Lowther. |John Marshall |Samuel Norton. |Will{m.} | | (died).[13]| | Hurford. 1764 |Samuel Norton. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Evans.|Will{m.} Peirse. | | Hurford. | | 1765 |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Edw{d.} Parker. | Hurford. | Evans. | Peirse. | 1766 |Will{m.} Evans.|Will{m.} |Edw{d.} Parker.|Tho{s.} | | Peirse. | | Holehouse. 1767 |Will{m.} |Edw{d.} |Tho{s.} |George Russell. | Peirse. | Parker. | Holehouse. | 1768 |Edward Parker. |Tho{s.} |George Russell.|Sam{l.} | | Holehouse. | | Plackett. 1769 |Thomas |George |Sam{l.} |John Wilding. | Holehouse. | Russell. | Plackett. | 1770 |George Russell.|Sam{l.} |John Wilding. |Tho{s.} Barnett. | | Plackett. | | 1771 |Sam{l.} |John Wilding. |Tho{s.} |Joseph Hill. | Plackett. | | Barnett. | 1772 |John Wilding. |Thomas |Joseph Hill[14]|John Rogers. | | Barnett. | (resigned).| 1773 |Thomas Barnett.|John Rogers. |Timothy Baylie.|Geo. Veriar, | | | | Esq{re.} 1774 |John Rogers |Timothy |Geo. Veriar, |John Paterson, | (died.) | Baylie.[15] | Esq{re.} | Esq. |Timothy Baylie.| | | 1775 |George Veriar, |John Paterson,|James Scott. |Rich{d.} | Esq{re.} | Esq. | | Wainwright. 1776 |John Paterson, |James Scott. |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} Stock. | Esq{re.} | | Wainwright. | 1777 |James Scott. |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} Stock.|Will{m.} Stagg. | | Wainwright. | | 1778 |Rich{d.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Stagg.|James Potter. | Wainwright. | Stock. | | 1779 |William Stock. |Will{m.} |James Potter. |Will{m.} Kippax. | | Stagg. | | 1780 |William Stagg. |James Potter. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} | | | Kippax. | Roberts. 1781 |James Potter. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Slade. | | Kippax. | Roberts. | 1782 |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Slade.|Tho{s.} Harris. | Kippax. | Roberts. | | 1783 |Will{m.} |Will{m.} |Henry Wichells.|John Berrow, | Roberts. | Slade. | | Esq{re.} 1784 |William Slade. |Henry |John Berrow, |Will{m.} Dodds. | | Wichells. | Esq{re.} | 1785 |Henry Wichells.|John Berrow, |Will{m.} Dodds.|Tho{s.} Garrood. | | Esq. | | 1786 |John Berrow, |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} Golding. | Esq{re.} | Dodds. | Garrood. | 1787 |William Dodds. |Tho{s.} |Tho{s.} |Rob{t.} Emerton. | | Garrood. | Golding. | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[12] Sam{l.} Norton chosen Warden. [13] Will{m.} Evans chosen Warden. [14] Timothy Baylie chosen Warden. [15] James Scott chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1788 |Thomas Garrood.|Tho{s.} |Rob{t.} |John Davison. | | Golding. | Emerton. | 1789 |Thomas Golding.|Rob{t.} |John Davison. |Rob{t.} Downes. | | Emerton. | | 1790 |Robert Emerton.|John Davison. |Robert Downes. |Ralph Eden[16] | | | | (resigned). 1791 |John Davison. |Robert Downes.|Daniel Adams. |David Lamb. 1792 |Robert Downes. |Daniel Adams. |David Lamb. |John Adams. 1793 |Daniel Adams. |David Lamb. |John Adams[17] |George Grange. | | | (died). | 1794 |David Lamb. |George Grange.|Thomas |John Slee. | | | Thompson. | 1795 |George Grange. |Tho{s.} |John Slee. |John Knox. | | Thompson. | | 1796 |Thomas |John Slee. |John Knox. |Edm{d.} Humphris | Thompson. | | | [18] | | | | (resigned). 1797 |John Slee. |John Knox. |Rob{t.} |James Lyon. | | | Douglas. | 1798 |John Knox. |Rob{t.} |James Lyon. |Francis Pearson. | | Douglas. | | 1799 |Robert Douglas.|James Lyon. |Francis |Jeremiah James. | | | Pearson. | 1800 |James Lyon. |Francis |Jeremiah James.|Joseph Atkinson. | | Pearson. | | 1801 |Francis |Jeremiah |Joseph |James Speight. | Pearson. | James. | Atkinson. | 1802 |Jeremiah James.|Joseph |James Speight |Tho{s.} Herbert. | | Atkinson. | (died). [19]| 1803 |Joseph |Thomas |Will{m.} Long. |James Clay. | Atkinson. | Herbert. | | 1804 |Thomas Herbert.|Will{m.} Long.|James Clay. |Joseph Wells. 1805 |Will{m.} Long. |James Clay. |Joseph Wells. |Rob{t.} Garwood. 1806 |James Clay. |Joseph Wells. |Rob{t.} |Will{m.} Baylie. | | | Garwood. | 1807 |Joseph Wells. |Robert |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} | | Garwood. | Baylie. | Hampshire. 1808 |Robert Garwood.|Will{m.} |Tho{s.} |John Wilt. | | Baylie. | Hampshire. | 1809 |William Baylie.|Thomas |John Wilt. |John Hart. | | Hampshire. | | 1810 |Thomas |John Wilt. |John Hart. |John Driver. | Hampshire. | | | 1811 |John Wilt. |John Hart. |John Driver[20]|Charles Swan. | | | (died). | 1812 |Charles Swan. |Thomas Rowney.|Thomas Law. |Rich{d.} Jones. 1813 |Thomas Rowney. |Thomas Law. |Rich{d} Jones. |John Benj{n.} | | | | Cole. 1814 |Thomas Law. |Rich{d.} |John Benj{n.} |Thomas Stimson. | | Jones. | Cole. | 1815 |Richard Jones. |John Benj{n.} |Tho{s.} |John Papps. | | Cole. | Stimson. | 1816 |John Benj{n.} |Tho{s.} |Malcolm |Peter Skipper. | Cole. | Stimson. | Dunnett. | 1817 |Malcolm |Peter Skipper.|Rich{d.} |Tho{s.} Adam. | Dunnett. | | Morgan. | 1818 |Peter Skipper. |Richard |Tho{s.} Adam. |Anthony Lyon. | | Morgan. | | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[16] Dan{l.} Adams chosen Warden. [17] Tho{s.} Thompson chosen Warden. [18] Tho{s.} Herbert chosen Warden. [19] John Field chosen Warden. [20] Thomas Law chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1819 |Richard Morgan |Tho{s.} |Anthony Lyon. |Will{m.} Vale. | (died). | Adam.[21] | | |Thomas Adam. | | | 1820 |Anthony Lyon. |Will{m.} Vale.|James Clapp. |James Carpenter. 1821 |William Vale. |James Clapp. |James |Daniel Stewart. | | | Carpenter. | 1822 |James Clapp. |James |Daniel Stewart.|James Hemp. | | Carpenter. | | 1823 |James |Daniel |James Hemp. |James King. | Carpenter. | Stewart. | | 1824 |Daniel Stewart.|James Hemp. |James King. |James Lyon. 1825 |James Hemp. |James King. |James Lyon. |Tho{s.} Kidder. 1826 |James King. |James Lyon[22]|Tho{s.} Kidder.|Warman Thorn. | | (died). | | 1827 |Thomas Kidder. |Warman Thorn. |Edw{d.} Grose |Geo. Whitehead. | | | Smith. | 1828 |Warman Thorn. |Edw{d.} Grose |Geo. Whitehead.|Tho{s.} Wharton. | | Smith. | | 1829 |Edw{d.} Grose |Geo. |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} Twinch. | Smith. | Whitehead. | Wharton. | 1830 |George |Tho{s.} |Will{m.} |Will{m.} | Whitehead | Wharton.[23]| Twinch. | Robinson. | (died). | | | |Thomas Wharton.| | | 1831 |William |Samuel Closs. |Geo. Hadden. |Philip Lawton. | Robinson. | | | 1832 |Samuel Closs. |George Hadden.|Philip Lawton. |Henry Waite. 1833 |George Hadden. |Philip Lawton.|Henry Waite. |Joseph Carter. 1834 |Philip Lawton. |Henry Waite. |Joseph Carter. |John Benj{n.} | | | | Lings. 1835 |Henry Waite. |Joseph Carter.|John Benj{n.} |William Sallis. | | | Lings. | 1836 |Joseph Carter. |John Benj{n.} |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Skegg | | Lings. | Sallis. | Driver. 1837 |John Benj{n.} |Will{m.} |Tho{s.} Skegg |Sam{l.} | Lings. | Sallis. | Driver. | Edenborough | | | | (died). [24] 1838 |William Sallis.|Tho{s.} Skegg |Joel Edwards. |George Browne. | | Driver. | | 1839 |Tho{s.} Skegg |Joel Edwards. |George Browne. |Henry Patten. | Driver. | | | 1840 |Joel Edwards. |George Browne.|Henry Patten. |Robert Low. 1841 |Joel Edwards. |Henry Patten. |Robert Low. |John Atkinson. 1842 |Henry Patten. |Robert Low. |John Atkinson. |George Sadler. 1843 |Robert Low. |John Atkinson.|George Sadler. |Tho{s.} Burn | | | | Hopgood. 1844 |John Atkinson. |George Sadler.|Tho{s.} Burn |John Colley. | | | Hopgood. | 1845 |George Sadler. |Tho{s.} Burn |John Colley. |John Annis. | | Hopgood. | | 1846 |Tho{s.} Burn |John Colley. |John Annis. |Will{m.} Vale. | Hopgood. | | | 1847 |John Colley. |John Annis. |Will{m.} Vale. |Will{m.} Hemp. 1848 |John Annis. |Will{m.} Vale.|Will{m.} Hemp. |Alex{r.} | | | | Rowland. 1849 |William Vale. |Will{m.} Hemp.|Alex{r.} |Will{m.} Hare. | | | Rowland. | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[21] James Clapp chosen Warden. [22] Edward Grose Smith chosen Warden. [23] Sam{l.} Closs chosen Warden. [24] Joel Edwards chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1850 |William Hemp. |Alex{r.} |Will{m.} Hare. |Rich{d.} Haines. | | Rowland. | | 1851 |Alexander |Will{m.} Hare.|Rich{d.} |Sam{l.} | Rowland. | | Haines. | Holehouse. 1852 |William Hare. |Rich{d.} |Donald Gray. |Ralph Smith | | Haines. | | Kirby. 1853 |Richard Haines.|Donald Gray. |Ralph Smith |Tho{s.} Will{m.} | | | Kirby | Wood. | | | (died).[25]| 1854 |Tho{s.} |James Fred{k.}|John Heaps. |Tho{s.}Brock. | Will{m.} Wood.| Burn. | | 1855 |John Heaps. |Tho{s.}Brock. |Robert Low. |James Carpenter. 1856 |Thomas Brock. |Robert Low. |James |Tho{s.} Worton. | | | Carpenter. | 1857 |Robert Low. |James |Tho{s.} Worton.|James Reeve. | | Carpenter. | | 1858 |James |Tho{s.} |James Reeve. |Martin Love. | Carpenter. | Worton. | | 1859 |Thomas Worton. |James Reeve. |Martin Love. |Will{m.} | | | | Dunsf{d.} | | | | White. 1860 |Martin Love. |Will{m.} |Will{m.} Riley.|John Swainston. | | Dunsf{d.} | | | | White. | | 1861 |Will{m.} D. |Will{m.} |John Swainston.|George Whiting. | White. | Riley. | | 1862 |William Riley. |John |George Whiting.|Henley Smith. | | Swainston. | | 1863 |John Swainston.|George |Henley Smith. |Abraham Western. | | Whiting. | | 1864 |Henley Smith. |Abraham |John Swainston.|Francis | | Western[26] | | Cuthbertson | | (died). | | (died). [27] 1865 |Francis |John Mason. |Thomas |John Waite. | Snelling. | | Carpenter. | 1866 |Thomas |John Waite. |Henry Sallis. |George Driver. | Carpenter. | | | 1867 |John Waite. |Henry Sallis. |George Driver. |Will{m.} | | | | Dunnett. 1868 |Henry Sallis. |George Driver.|Will{m.} |James Cornish. | | | Dunnett. | 1869 |George Driver. |William |James Cornish. |John Carter. | | Dunnett. | | 1870 |John Carter. |James Douglas |Henry Evans. |Richard Atkinson | | Bennett[28] | |Cordell Loader. | | (died). | | 1871 |Henry Evans. |R. A. C. |Edward Stone. |Frederick Baker. | | Loader. | | 1872 |R. A. C. |Edw{.d} Stone.|Fred{k.} Baker.|H{y.} Edw{d.} | Loader. | | | Murrell. 1873 |Edward Stone. |Fred{k.} |H. Edward |Tho{s.} | | Baker. | Murrell. | Emberson. 1874 |Frederick |H. Edward |Tho{s.} |Edward Ruff. | Baker. | Murrell. | Emberson. | 1875 |H. Edward |Tho{s.} |Edward Ruff. |Fred{k.} Wilson. | Murrell. | Emberson. | | 1876 |Thomas |Edward Ruff. |Fred{k.} |Cha{s.} John | Emberson. | | Wilson. | Shoppee. 1877 |Edward Ruff. |Fred{k.} |Cha{s.} John |James Harvey, | | Wilson. | Shoppee. | C.C. 1878 |Cha{s.} John |James Harvey, |Ja{s.} Henry |Benj{n.} | Shoppee. | C.C. | Pitcher. | Woolley. 1879 |James Harvey, |Ja{s.} Henry |Benj{n.} |George Austin, | C.C. | Pitcher. | Woolley. | sen{r.} ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
[25] Will{m.} Hare chosen Warden. [26] Will{m.} Dunsford White chosen Warden. [27] Francis Snelling chosen Warden. [28] Edw{d.} Stone chosen Warden.
------+---------------+----------------------------------------------- AN{o.}| MASTERS. | WARDENS. ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+---------------- 1880 |Ja{s.} Henry |Benj{n.} |Geo. Austin, |Will{m.} Ruston. | Pitcher. | Woolley. | sen{r.} | 1881 |Benj{n.} |Geo. Austin, |Will{m.} |Rich{d.} Ja{s.} | Woolley. | sen{r.} | Ruston. | Atkinson. 1882 |Geo. Austin, |Will{m.} |Rich{d.} Ja{s.}|Walter H{y.} | sen{r.} | Ruston. | Atkinson. |Wilkin, Ald. 1883 |William Ruston.|Rich{d.} |Walter H{y.} |Jonathan Denny. | | Ja{s.} | Wilkin, Ald.| | | Atkinson. | | 1884 |Rich{d.} Ja{s.}|Walter H{y.} |Jonathan Denny.|Cha{s.} Howard | Atkinson. | Wilkin, | | Atkinson. | | Ald. | | 1885 |Walter Hy. |Jonathan |Tho{s.} George |Nathan Salaman. | Wilkin, Ald.| Denny. | Driver. | 1886 |Jonathan Denny.|Tho{s.} George|Edw{d.} Cha{s.}|George Austin, | | Driver. | Cornish. | jun{r.} 1887 |Edward Cha{s.} |George Austin,|W{m.} Aaron |Will{m.} Lumley. | Cornish. | jun{r.} | Ecclestone. | 1888 |George Austin, |W{m.} Aaron |Will{m.} |Ja{s.} Cope | jun{r.} | Ecclestone. | Lumley. | Cornish. 1889 |W{m.} Aaron |Will{m.} |Ja{s.} Cope |Joseph Wilson. | Ecclestone. | Lumley. | Cornish. | ------+---------------+--------------+---------------+----------------
A LIST OF SUCH MEMBERS OF THE COMPANY AS HAVE SERVED THE OFFICE OF SERJEANT SURGEON.
This List, as well as the list of King’s Barbers, is undoubtedly incomplete, but contains the names of all those of whom any record exists at Barbers’ Hall. A short account of the Office of Serjeant Surgeon etc., may be seen in The Medical Times for 1867, vol. 2, p. 438.
William Hobbes, W. 1461. Thomas Vicary, M. 1530, &c. Richard Ferris, M. 1562. Robert Balthrop, M. 1565. William Gooderus, M. 1594. George Baker, M. 1597. Christopher Frederick, M. 1609. William Clowes, M. 1626. Humphrey Painter, M. 1661. John Knight, M. 1663. Richard Wiseman, M. 1665. Thomas Hobbs, M. 1687. Thomas Gardiner, M. 1697. Charles Bernard, M. 1703. Ambrose Dickins, M. 1729. Claudius Amyand, M. 1731. John Ranby, S.S. to George II, sworn a foreign brother of the Company 5 October, 1722. Sir Cæsar Hawkins, Bart., S.S. to George III, admitted to the Livery 1736. Thomas Gataker, S.S. to George III, was free of the Company.
M. signifies Master. W. Warden.
A LIST OF THE KING’S BARBERS.
Nicholas Simpson, M. 1537. John Penn, M. 1539. Edmund Harman, M. 1540. Thomas Caldwell, M. 1628. Thomas Davyes, M. 1639. Thomas Lisle, M. 1662. Ralph Foliard, M. 1664.
M. signifies Master.
A LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE COMPANY WHO HAVE SERVED THE OFFICES OF SHERIFF, ALDERMAN OR LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.
-------------------------+-------+--------+--------------------+------ NAME. |MASTER.|SHERIFF.| ALDERMAN. |MAYOR. -------------------------+-------+--------+--------------------+------ Sir John Ayliffe | 1538 | 1548 |Bridge Without, 1551| -- (Grocer) | | |Dowgate | Sir Peter Proby | 1615 | 1614 |Queenhithe | 1622 (Grocer) | | | | Sir John Frederick | } | |{Vintry, 1653 | 1661 (Grocer) | 1654} | 1655 |{ | M.P. for Dartmouth,| 1658} | |{Coleman Street | M.P. for the City. | } | | | Edward Arris | 1651 | -- |Bridge Without, 1663| -- Sir Nathaniel Herne | 1674 | 1674 |Billingsgate, 1676 | -- M.P. for Dartmouth.| | | | Sir John Lethieullier | 1676 | 1674 | ---- | -- Sir Humphry Edwin | 1688 | 1688 |Tower | 1697 (Skinner) | | | | Sir William Stewart | -- | 1711 |Cripplegate, 1711 | 1721 (Goldsmith) | | | | Sir John Bull | -- | 1718 | ---- | -- (Clothworker) | | | | Sir Thomas Challoner | 1761 | 1762 |Aldgate, 1760 | -- Walter Henry Wilkin | 1885 | -- |Lime Street, 1888 | -- -------------------------+-------+--------+--------------------+------
HISTORICAL ACCOUNT
THE BARBERS UNINCORPORATE.
The origin of the Barbers’ Guild partook of a religious character; and the meeting together of men of the craft for religious observances, for attending the funerals and obits of deceased members and their wives, and for feasting once a year, gradually transformed a semi-social and religious guild into what ultimately became a purely secular or “trade guild.” This religious origin is borne out by the very important Return made by the Barbers of London, to the Writ of 12th Rich. II, and is strengthened by reference to the Returns made by the Barbers of Lincoln and of Norwich (both which latter are preserved at the Record Office), and which clearly point to those guilds being of a religious character; indeed the Barbers of Norwich do not seem to have had a single secular or trade ordinance in their constitution.
1388. In the Return of the Barbers of London to the Writ of Richard II, the Masters recite that they “have found a document amongst the articles of their records made of the time to which memory runneth not,” concerning the points upon which the fraternity was founded;
PRIMEREMENT al honourance de Dieu et touz ses Seyntes et pur excitac͠on les c͠oens des gentz a bien faire et perseverance avoir et bien faitz. . . . .
FIRSTLY to the honour of God and all his Saints, and to stir up the commons of the people to do well, and to have perseverance in well doing. . . . .
Regulations were made enjoining charity, attendance at funerals and obits, against the enticing away of the servants of others, providing for the amicable settlement of disputes, and the like.
The articles above briefly referred to, contain nothing in particular as to trade regulation or inspection, leaving a pretty certain inference that they were made for the governance of a social and religious guild or fraternity. We shall presently see that in 1308, the Company partook of the nature of a trade guild, and we may therefore reasonably presume that the articles made in the time to which memory in 1388 did not run, were drawn up previous to 1308, and therefore without much hesitation we may assign the origin of the Barbers’ Company to at least the xiij{th.} century.
In the early part of the reign of Edward II, and indeed for a long while previously, the Barbers were practitioners in the art of Surgery; at all events they performed the minor operations of that craft, such as bleeding, tooth-drawing, cauterization, and the like.
The Barbers having been accustomed to assist the monks in the surgical operations performed by them in early times, acquired a degree of proficiency which enabled them to practise as Surgeons themselves. Up till about the xij{th.} century the practice of Surgery and Medicine was however almost wholly confined to the Clergy, who seem to have enjoyed the double privilege of curing men’s bodies as well as their souls. In 1163 the Council of Tours, under Pope Alexander III, considering that a practice which involved in its operations the shedding of blood, was incompatible with the holy office of the clergy, forbad them to interfere in any matter of Surgery; the consequence of this edict was that they gave over the operations of Surgery but continued to practise the healing art of Medicine.
As already said, the Clergy very frequently employed the Barbers as their assistants, and committed to them the preparation of the medicated baths and the performance of sundry minor surgical operations. No doubt the Edict of Tours was hailed with joy by the Barbers, who thus found a lucrative practice thrown in their way, and seized the opportunity of practising as Surgeons “on their own account,” calling themselves Barber-Surgeons, and practising both Barbery and Surgery.
c. 1307. The archives preserved at the Guildhall have many entries concerning the Barbers’ Company, and in Letter-Book D. 157{B.} there is an ordinance concerning the Barbers of London, which shows that at this time they were occupied in Surgery, and advertised their profession in an objectionable manner, which was very properly forbidden by the City authorities.
DE BARBOURS. Et que nul barbier ne soit se ose ne si hardy qil mette sank en leur fenestres en apiert ou en view des gentz, mais pryvement le facent porter a Thamise sur peine des doux souldz rendre al oeps des Viscountz.
CONCERNING BARBERS. And that no barbers shall be so bold or so hardy as to put blood in their windows, openly or in view of folks, but let them have it privily carried unto the Thames, under pain of paying two shillings to the use of the Sheriffs.
1308. The first express entry which we have concerning our Company is the presentation and admission of Richard le Barber, as Supervisor or Master of the Barbers, before the Court of Aldermen in 1308 (Letter-Book C. 96).
RIC’S LE BARBOUR ex oppõito ecc̃lie omñi scoꝜ parue elect’ est et p’sentatˀ pˀ Barbitonsores london die Martˀ p’xˀ p’t fm̃ Sc̃e Lucie virgĩs Anno R. E. fiɫ R. E. sc̃do coram dñis Nichõ de ffarndon tũc maiore london Johñe de Wengũue cetˀisqʒ Aldermĩs ad custodiendˀ officiũ BarbitonsoꝜ &c. Et admissus est et jurˀ q’d quolibet mense faciet scrutiniũ pˀ totñ officiũ suũ et si quos invenˀit lupanarˀ id alio mõ inhonestos et in scandalũ officii &c. eos distringat & distriaõem in cam’am apportari faciet &c.
RICHARD LE BARBOUR dwelling opposite to the Church of Allhallows the Less, was chosen and presented by the Barbers of London, on Tuesday next after the feast of Saint Lucy the Virgin (13th December) in the second year of the reign of King Edward, son of King Edward, before Sir Nicholas de Farndon, then Mayor of London, John de Wengrave and other Aldermen, to have supervision over the trade of the Barbers &c. And he was admitted and made oath that every month he would make scrutiny throughout the whole of his trade, and if he should find any among them keeping brothels, or acting unseemly in any other way, and to the scandal of the trade, he was to distrain upon them, and cause the distress to be taken into the Chamber (of London) &c.
The foregoing record does not appear very creditable to the reputation of the Barbers of Edward the Second’s time, but it should be remembered that in those days, and for a long period before and afterwards, the Barbers superintended the Baths (Bagnios) and that these places were not infrequently the resort of improper characters; a few of our predecessors had perhaps, under the circumstances, been somewhat lax in their morality, and let us hope that Richard le Barber administered to those whom he found offending, due correction according to his oath and their deserts.
It would not seem from the terms of the admission, that the Master was at that period elected annually, and the Office was probably held by one man for a considerable number of years. There is no entry in the City books (which have been carefully examined for the purpose) of another admission to the Office until the year 1376, when two Masters were appointed, and then for some years subsequently two new Masters were sworn in annually.
1309. In this year we find the first record of an admission of a Barber to the freedom of the City, and several others occur about this period (see Freemen).
1310. On Wednesday next after the feast of the Nativity, 4th Edward II, Gerard the Barber was sworn keeper of the Gate of Newgate (Letter-Book D. 113), and there are other entries of Barbers being appointed keepers or porters at the City gates; from one of these, in 1375, it would seem that they were to keep a strict watch that no lepers should enter the city, and it was doubtless on account of their surgical knowledge enabling them to distinguish those afflicted with leprosy, that these offices were conferred upon them.
1310. On Monday before the feast of St. Gregory the will of Richard le Barber, our first Master, was proved in the Court of Husting. To Katherine his wife and Johanna his daughter, he left tenements and rents in Bread Street, Cordwainer Street, Queenhithe, Candlewike Street, and Whitecrouche Street. To Thomas de Mangrave his apprentice, a shop in Bread Street; to the fabric of London Bridge 20{s.,} and the residue to pious uses.
1312. The earliest admission of a Surgeon (not a Barber Surgeon) to the freedom is that of “Magister Johẽs de Suthwerk cirurgicus,” who was sworn on Friday before the feast of St. Barnabas, 5th Edward II, and who paid nothing for his freedom, being admitted at the instance of Hugh de Waltham, Town Clerk.
Among the Archives at Guildhall are various entries relating to early Barbers, which, although not touching upon the history of our Company, may properly be preserved in these pages, and I shall therefore give translations of a few of them.
1315. On Monday next after the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the 8th Edward II, by common assent of the Mayor and Aldermen in the Hustings of pleas of Land, there was granted and demised to William de Dounesheued, Barber to Sir John de Sandale, Chancellor of our Lord the King, a certain house belonging to the Bridge of London, to have and to hold to the said William for his whole life, he paying yearly on the usual days two and a half marks to the keepers for the time being of the said Bridge, which said house is situate between a house belonging to the said Bridge in which John Mew now dwells towards the West, and a house belonging to Thomas le Maderman towards the East, in the Parish of Saint Dionis Backchurch London. And the said William, the said house and its appurtenances in all needful manner shall sustain, and against wind and rain cause the same to be defended during the whole term of his life.
And there was a proviso that if the rent should remain unpaid for a whole year that the Bridge Keepers should re-enter. (Letter-Book E. 28{B.})
1319. On Thursday after the feast of St. Valentine, 13th Edward II, there was enrolled an obligation by which Roger the Barber (servant to John de Dallinge, Sheriff of London) and Margaret his wife, were bound to pay £100 to Sir John de Laugecombe, Rector of the Church of Laumaz Heys (sic) before the feast of Easter. (Letter-Book E. 85.)
1320. On Wednesday next after the feast of Saints Fabian and Sebastian, 13th Edward II, Lawrence the Barber, one of the men sworn to keep the Poultry Market on Cornhill, laid an information against John Bakon that he the said John was a forestaller of the Market. (Letter-Book E. 96{B.})
1320. In the same year among the names of the Citizens assessed to contribute to a fine of £1,000 to the King, occurs that of Thomas the Barber. (Letter-Book E. 106{B.})
1320. On Monday next before the feast of St. Margaret the Virgin, 14th Edward II, the Wardship of Alice, Joane and Agnes, children of John de Wynton, Barber, deceased, was given to Joane his widow; several shops and houses in the City belonging to the deceased are scheduled as for the benefit of the Wards, and Robert de Lamyngton, John de Bristolle, Barber, and Roger de Croidon were bound as sureties. (Letter-Book E. 114.)
Instances also occur of City Wards (sons of Barbers deceased) being apprenticed by the Chamberlain to various trades.
1340. In 14th Edward III, Hamo the Barber was assessed by the City at £10 as his contribution towards a forced loan of £5,000 to the King (Letter-Book F. 33) and six years later (1346) Hamo was again assessed at 20_s._ towards a “present” of 3,000 marks to the King.
1370. On 14th March, 44th Edward III, the wardship of Alice (aged 3 years), daughter of Nicholas the Barber, was given to Gilbert Prince, who was to use her legacy of 40 marks for her benefit.
1374. On the 28th July, 1374, Lawrence de Weston, Barber (Master of the Company in 1376), and Margaret his wife, mother of the said Alice, came before the Mayor, &c., and proved that the said Alice was dead, whereupon Gilbert Prince, the Executor of Nicholas the Barber’s will, was discharged, and the money paid to Lawrence and Margaret de Weston. (Letter-Book G. 244 and 317{B.})
Reverting now from individuals to the Company, we find that the Barbers existed as a Trade Guild, but unincorporated certainly from the year 1308, and that they were at first ruled by one Master, and later on (in 1376) by two Masters, appointed annually. This Company of Barbers was composed of two classes of Members--viz., those who practised Barbery proper (perhaps including phlebotomy and tooth drawing), and those who practised Surgery, and who were, for distinction sake, called Barber-Surgeons (in the City books they are spoken of as “Barbers exercising the faculty of Surgery”). For aught we know to the contrary, a perfect harmony and good understanding existed between these two sections of the Company, and it is probable that the ranks of the latter were continually recruited from the former.
1381. The earliest evidence of the existence of our Hall is to be found in Harl. MS. 541, which contains a list of Companies’ Halls in the City, temp. 5 Richard II, by which it appears that the Barbers’ Hall was then, as now, in the Parish of Saint Olave, Silver Street, and doubtless on the same site; the entry is, “Barbar hall y{e} p’yssh of Seynt Oluf in Sylverstrete.” In 1490 the Hall is known to have been on the same site.
1388. In this year Richard II sent his writs all over the Kingdom to enquire into the nature and constitution of the several guilds and fraternities, religions, social or craft, and the returns to these writs, which must have been an immense number, were formerly kept among the Records at the Tower of London. Herbert, in his History of the Livery Companies, refers to his fruitless endeavours to discover these returns, and I have made diligent enquiry at the Record Office for them also, with the undoubted result that all of those which relate to the London Trading Guilds are lost. There are, however, a great number relating to London religious guilds and to trade guilds all over the country. Two of these concerning the Barbers of Norwich and of Lincoln are so highly interesting that I have preserved them in Appendix A.
Amongst our Archives at Barbers’ Hall, is a vellum book of Ordinances written out fair in 1658, and therein is to be found a copy of the return made by the Barbers of London to the writ of Richard II, and which the Company caused to be extracted from the Tower Records in 1634. It is certified by William Colet as agreeing with the original, but unfortunately Mr. Colet (although he was Deputy-Keeper of the Records) or his copyist has made one or two mistakes, which necessitate a little hiatus in the translation, and he has put the year as the 11th instead of the 12th of Richard II. That the latter year is the correct one is abundantly proved by the dates on the original writs and on the numerous returns still in existence at the Record Office, as also by the names of the Masters certifying, who are recorded at Guildhall as having been admitted 10th September, 12th Richard II.
Richard II was more solicitous as to the funds and property of the Guilds, than he was about their observances, and our predecessors seem to have quickly acquainted him with their pecuniary position, “the which Company have neither tenements nor rents to their common use.”
The Masters recite an old document which they found in their strong box, and which will well repay perusal; it opens with a devout dedication to the Trinity, the Virgin Mary, and the glorious company of heaven, and the first Ordinance being expressly made in honour of God and all saints, and with the intention of stirring up the people to do well and to persevere therein, we must all approve of it. It provides firstly, that decayed brethren shall have an allowance of 10-1/2_d._ per week, if their poverty have not come about by their own folly. The second and third Ordinances relate to attendance at funerals and obits of deceased members. Then follow certain rules, that no man shall entice away another’s servant; the Masters to settle disputes, payment of quarterage, refusal of office, absence from Mass and the yearly feast, the livery clothing, &c., &c. It is well to observe here the evidence of the antiquity of our livery, of the quarterage, and of the feast, all of which have come down to these days.
Some later Ordinances are added, which were apparently made in 1387. This return is probably the only one extant of the whole of those made by the London trade guilds, and is therefore of the highest interest. A copy of the original (which is in Norman French), together with a translation, follows.
COPIA extracta ex Bundell’ Fraternitatum et Gildar’ Civitatis London remaneñ de Recordo prout patet in Rotulis dñi Regis infra Turrim London.
Anno xj{o}.[29] Ricardi Secundi.
[29] A mistake for Anno xij{o.}
JOHAN HEYDON et Hen Cook Mestres[30] William Chapman et William Gomine Surveyours de la Compaignie appelle ffraternite des Barbers de la Citee de Londres dauncien temps ordeigne certifiant au Counsail ñre S{r.} le Roy en sa Chancellarie la forme manere et condicion de touz articles obseruancez et lour circumstances contenuz en la paper de dite Compaignie en la forme quesuyt la quel compaignie nont nul teñt ne rent a lour c͠oe oeps les queles articles la dite Compaignie nont usez en lour temps forsqz soulement pur auer lour vesture un foitz per añ et paier lour quarterage pur sustiner pouerez geñtz de mesme la Compaignie et un foitz per añ assembler pur manger et eslire neuells Mestres et Surveiours sanz ascun autre article de sontz escript mettre en use forsqz ceux qˀ tan soulement sont faitz al honour de dieu mes purtant qils ont trouez un paper one les articles de sontz escriptz fait del temps donc memorie ne court ils les ont p’sentez a vrẽ tressages discrecions.
[30] Sworn Masters of the Barbers, 10 Sept., 1388. 12th Ric. II. (Letter-Book H. 235{B.})
CESTE ENDENTURE fait en nom̃ de Dieu omnipotent pier et fitz et seynt Esperitz et de nr̃e Dame Seynt Marie et de tout la gloriouse Compaignie de Ciel de la foundacion et de Lordinance de la fraternite des Barbers de la Cite de Londres tesmoigñ coment et sur queux pointz la dite Fraternite est funduz et ordeigne.
PRIMEREMENT al honourance de Dieu et touz ses Seyntes et pur excitac͠on les coẽns des geñtz a bien faire et perseuerance auoir en bien faitz est ordeigne qˀ si ascun frere de cel fraternite qi ad este de cell fraternite per vij anz sil cheit en mischief ou en pouerte pˀ auenture issint qil neit de quoy il purra viure de son propre et ces ne luy aucigne de sa propre folye qu donqz il auera chescun semaigne de lour c͠oe boyste x{d.} oᵬ. pur sa sustenance.
ITEM quant ascun frere du dite fraternite soit mort les freres de la dite fraternite serront la veyle al dirige et le jour al Messe et al dirige et al Messe del Moys obit et qˀ chescun tiel frere mort eit xxx messes de lour c͠oe Boyste et qˀ chescun frier qˀ soit absent sanz reasonable eucheson a ascun des ditz iiij foitz qil mette a lour c͠oe Boyste en noun de ses offrandes et dispences queux il deust auer fait sil eust este en p’sent iij{d.}
ITEM quant ascun Meistre de la dite Fraternite eit feme Mort qˀ les freres de la dite ffraternite soient a La Vigile et a la Messe le jour de sont enterment et a la Moys obit et quel frer qˀ soit absent a ascun de tres foitz qil paie pur chescun foitz qil soit absent en lieu des costages et autres dispences queux il ferreit sil feusse present a lour c͠oe boyst iij{d.}
ITEM qˀ nul frere de la dite Fraternite abette autri seruant hors des seruice son Meistre priuement ne apertement.
ITEM si ascun debate surdre pˀ entre ascuns des freres qˀ dieu defend et ces soit redresse per amour per la consideration des Meistres de la dite Fraternite . . . . . faire bonement et qˀ nul ne sue vers autre en autre manere autant qil ad assaie sil puisse pˀ leide des ditz Mestrez estre recorde.
ITEM qˀ chescun frere de la dite ffraternite veigne chescun quarter del an et paie son quarterage a Collectors decell issint qˀ les dits Collectors ne.
ITEM accorde est entre toutz les ditz freres qˀ quel de eux qˀ refuse son office quant ces vient a luy sil voet estre de ces allegge qil paie a lour c͠oe boyst.
ITEM si ascun frere soit absent a lour Messe et Manger quant il serra un foitz en lan qil paiera a tant en offrandes et toutz autres choes come un.
ITEM qˀ nul des ditz freres allowe autre hors de sa Meason.
ITEM si ascun frere per auenture tarie ses paiements entre añ et demy qil face gree demz les ij anz sanz rien outre le certain doñ. Et sil ad luy soient . . . . . . p’donez issint qil paie ce gest aderer. Et a ceux pointz tenir solonc amendement si mistier soit qils soient amendez ceste Fraternite sont entre jurez et ont chescun de eux pleine sa foy et si fra chescun qi serra de la dite ffraternite. Et accorde est entre eux . . . . . . endenture soient enclos en lour c͠oe boyst et lautre demurge vers les Mestres qˀ serront pur le temps de la dit fraternite.
ITEM chescun frere du dit fraternite paie en arres pur son Drap auant la mayn xl{d.} ameyns.
ITEM qˀ chescun frere garde la liuere ij anz enterrement deuant qil le donne ou vende ou aliene la liuere en ascun manere sur peyne de paier al compaignie un noble dor sur lour grace.
ITEM est ordeyne le dymenge ps̃ch ensuant lassumpc͠on de nr̃e Dame lan le Roy Richard sẽde xj{o.} qe les Surveiours du dit Mistier soient esluy per lassent de tout la ffraternite et nemy per les Mestres.
ITEM qˀ nul du dit Fraternite paie plus pur son mangre qˀ xiiij{d,} en apres.
ITEM ordeyne est qˀ chescun Meistre qˀ eslisera ascun autre home pur estre en son lieu cesta sauoir pur estre Meistre celuy qˀ eslisera tiel home pur estre Meistre apres lan serra obligee per mesme luy a la Compaignie pur la monoy en un obligacon.
Convenit cum Recordo WILLŨS COLET.
A COPY taken from a Bundle “of the Fraternities and Guilds of the City of London” which remains of record, as the same is seen in the Rolls of the Lord the King, at the Tower of London.
Anno 12. Richard II.
JOHN HEYDON and Henry Cook, Masters, William Chapman and William Gomine, Surveyors of the Company called the Fraternity of Barbers of the City of London of ancient time established, certifying to the Council of Our Lord the King, in his Chancery, the form manner and condition of all the articles, customs and their circumstances contained in the Records of the same Company in the form following:--The which Company have neither tenements nor rents to their common use, And these articles the said Company have not used in their time excepting only for to have their Livery once a year, and to pay their quarterage to maintain the poor folk of the same Company, and once a year to assemble to feast, and to elect new Masters and Surveyors without any other article of their writing to put forward except those which only are made to the honour of God; but, however, as they have found a document amongst the articles of the Records, made of the time to which memory runneth not, they have presented it to your most wise discretions.
THIS INDENTURE made in the name of the Omnipotent God, the Father and Son and the Holy Ghost, and of our Lady Saint Mary and of all the glorious Company of Heaven, concerning the foundation of the Government of the Fraternity of Barbers of the City of London Witnesseth how and upon what points the said Fraternity is founded and ordained.
FIRSTLY to the honour of God and all his Saints, and to stir up the Commons of the people to do well, and to have perseverance in well doing, it is ordained that if any brother of this Fraternity who has been of this Fraternity for seven years by chance fall into trouble or into poverty, and if he have nothing of his own by which he may be able to live, and it be not through his own folly, that then he shall have each week from their common box tenpence half penny for his sustenance.
ITEM. That when any brother of the said Fraternity dies the brethren of the said Fraternity shall go on the Vigil to the dirge, and on the day[31] to the Mass, and to the dirge and to the mass of the month’s obit, and that each such brother dead have thirty masses from their common box,[32] and that each brother who is absent without reasonable excuse at any of the said four times, shall put into their common box in place of his offerings and expenses, as he ought to have done if he had been present, three pence.
[31] The day of the funeral. [32] Thirty masses sung at the expense of the common box.
ITEM. When any Master of the said Fraternity has a wife dead, the brethren of the said Fraternity shall be at the Vigil and at the Mass on the day of her burial and at the month’s obit, and that brother who is absent at any of the three times shall pay for each time that he be absent, in place of the costs and other expenses which he would have borne if he had been present, three pence to their common box.
ITEM. That no brother of the said Fraternity entice any servant from the service of his master, privily or openly.
ITEM. If any dispute arise between any of the brethren, which God forbid, it is to be amicably settled by the decision of the Masters of the said Fraternity [and they are] to deal plainly,[33] and that no one sue another in other manner than at the assize (?) [and then only] if he be empowered by leave of the said Masters to be recorded.
[33] i.e., honestly.
ITEM. That each brother of the said Fraternity shall come each quarter of the year and pay his quarterage to the collectors[34] . . . . . .
[34] I am unable to complete this sentence.
ITEM. It is agreed between all the said brethren that whoever of them refuses his office when it comes to him, if he wishes to be relieved of it, that he pay to their common box.
ITEM. If any brother be absent from their Mass and Feast when it shall be once a year, he shall pay so much in offerings and all other things as one present.
ITEM. That none of the said brethren put [?] another out of his house.
ITEM. If any brother by chance delay his payments beyond a year-and-a-half, that he make acquittance within two years without any [penalty] beyond the ordinary fine. And if he be thus forgiven that he settle the matter at once.
AND to hold these points pursuant to amendment alone if the Mystery will that they be amended, this Fraternity are sworn among themselves and have each of them pledged his troth, and so from each who shall [hereafter] be of the said Fraternity. And it is agreed amongst them that this Indenture be enclosed in their common box, and the counterpart be held by the Masters for the time being of the said Fraternity.
The document which the Masters found amongst their records made in “the time to which memory runneth not” probably ends here, and the following Items (see the third one) were doubtless additional Ordinances made circa 1387.
ITEM. That each brother of the said Fraternity pay in pledge for his livery, when he has the same, forty pence at the least.
ITEM. That each brother keep the livery two whole years before he may give, or sell, or alienate it in any manner, under pain of paying to the Company for their pardon, a noble of gold.
ITEM. It is ordained that on the Sunday following the Assumption of our Lady in the 11th year of King Richard the Second,[35] that the Surveyors of the said Mystery be elected by the assent of all the Fraternity, and no longer by the Masters.
[35] 18th Aug., 1387.
ITEM. That none of the said Fraternity hereafter pay more than fourteen pence for his feast.
ITEM. It is ordained that each Master who shall choose any other man to be in his place, that is to say for to be Master; he who shall choose such man to be Master for the year shall be bound by himself for him, in an obligation to the Company for the money.[36]
[36] i.e., a guarantee for his honesty.
It agrees with the Record, WILLIAM COLET.
Coeval with our Company of Barbers there existed in the City of London, another Fraternity or Guild, that of the Surgeons, in no way connected with the Barbers, but, like them, existing by prescription only and unincorporated. It is not to be expected that these two Companies would, in the days of so much trade protection and jealousy, exhibit an over-friendly feeling towards one another, and the records of the period, though meagre, show that this was the case. The Surgeons’ Guild at no time appear to have been a numerous body, indeed there is reason to believe that frequently their numbers were less than a dozen, and they possibly never exceeded twenty.
In the researches undertaken for the purpose of this work, various references to the Surgeons’ Guild have turned up, and although at this early period there was much in common between the two Fraternities, I have considered it quite apart from the subject in hand to go into any detail concerning that Guild, more especially as it has recently been so ably and fully dealt with by Mr. D’Arcy Power in his “Memorials of the Craft of Surgery.”
1376. In the 50th Edward III, the Barbers made a complaint to the Mayor and Aldermen against unskilled practitioners in Surgery, and prayed that two Masters should be yearly appointed to inspect and rule the craft, and that none should be admitted to the freedom of the City, but upon due examination of their skill; and this was granted by the Court, entered of record and Lawrence de Weston and John de Grantone were chosen Masters. The following is a translation of the original record concerning this matter.[37]
[37] In this and some other cases I have adopted the able translations made by Mr. Riley in his “Memorials of London and London Life.”
To the honourable Lords, and wise, the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London, shew the good folks, the Barbers of the same city, that whereas from one day to another there resort men, who are barbers, from uppelande[38] unto the said city, who are not instructed in their craft, and do take houses and intermeddle with barbery, surgery, and the cure of other maladies, while they know not how to do such things, nor ever were instructed in such craft; to the great damage, and in deceit, of the people, and to the great scandal of all the good barbers of the said city:--therefore the said good folks do pray that it may please your honourable Lordships, for the love of God, and as a work of charity, to ordain and establish that from henceforth no such stranger, coming to the said City from uppelande, or from any other place, of whatsoever condition he be, shall keep house or shop for barbery within the same city, before that he shall be found able and skilled in the said art and office of barbery, and that, by assay and examination of the good folks, barbers of the same city, whom out of the said craft it may please you to ordain thereunto. And that it may please you to ordain and establish, that from henceforth there shall always be two good men of their said craft chosen by their common assent to be Wardens of the craft; and that such two persons shall be presented unto the Mayor, Recorder, and Aldermen, of the said city, and sworn before them well and lawfully, to the best of their power and knowledge, to rule their said craft; and that the said Masters may inspect the instruments of the said art, to see that they are good and proper for the service of the people, by reason of the great peril that might ensue thereupon; and that on the complaint of such two Masters, all rebellious persons in the said craft, shall be made to come before you, and whosoever shall be found in default against this Ordinance shall pay to the Chamber 40 pence. And that from henceforth no man of their craft shall be admitted to the franchise of the said city, if he be not attested as being good and able, upon good examination before you made. And that no foreigner shall keep house or shop in their craft within the said city, or the suburbs thereof. And that this Ordinance shall be enrolled in the Chamber of the Guildhall of London, for all time to last.
[38] The general name for country places in those days.
And the same was granted unto them. Whereupon, Laurence de Westone and John de Grantone were chosen Masters of the Barbers. [Letter-Book H. 28.]
The foregoing ordinance must surely have given umbrage to the Surgeons’ Guild as it placed the Barbers upon an equal footing with them in the examination of Surgeons, the inspection of their instruments, etc.; and this more especially as seven years previously (in 1369) the Surgeons had obtained from the same Court an Ordinance investing them with the power of presenting the defaults of all unskilful Surgeons.
1382. As an example of a quack Surgeon’s method of practice, and of his rogueries and punishment, the following case of Roger Clerk will be found interesting:--
Roger Clerk, of Wandelesworth,[39] on the 13th day of May in the 5th year (Richard II), was attached in the Chamber of the Guildhall of London, before the Mayor and Aldermen, to make answer, as well to the Mayor and Commonalty of the City of London, as to Roger atte Hacche, in a plea of deceit and falsehood: as to which, the same Roger said, that whereas no physician or surgeon should intermeddle with any medicines or cures within the liberty of the city aforesaid, but those who are experienced in the said arts, and approved therein, the said Roger Clerk, who knew nothing of either of the arts aforesaid, being neither experienced nor approved therein, nor understood anything of letters, came to the house of him, Roger atte Hacche, in the parish of St. Martin, in Ismongereslane, in London, on Thursday, the morrow of Ash Wednesday, in the 5th year, etc.; and there saw one Johanna, the wife of the aforesaid Roger atte Hacche, who was then lying ill with certain bodily infirmities, and gave the said Roger, her husband, to understand, that he was experienced and skilled in the art of medicine, and could cure the same Johanna of her maladies, if her husband desired it.
[39] Wandsworth.
Whereupon, the said Roger atte Hacche, trusting in his words, gave him 12 pence, in part payment of a larger sum which he was to pay him, in case the said Johanna should be healed. And upon this, the same Roger Clerk then and there gave to the said Roger atte Hacche an old parchment, cut or scratched across, being the leaf of a certain book, and rolled it up in a piece of cloth of gold, asserting that it would be very good for the fever and ailments of the said Johanna; and this parchment, so rolled up, he put about her neck, but in no way did it profit her; and so, falsely and maliciously, he deceived the same Roger atte Hacche. And he produced the said parchment here in Court, wrapped up in the same cloth, in proof of the matters aforesaid.
And the said Roger Clerk personally appeared, and the said parchment was shown to him by the Court, and he was asked what the virtue of such piece of parchment was; whereupon, he said that upon it was written a good charm for fevers. Upon being further asked by the Court what were the words of this charm of his, he said;--“Anima Christi, sanctifica me; Corpus Christi, salva me; in isanguis Christi, nebria me; cum bonus Christus tu, lava me.”[40] And the parchment being then examined, not one of those words was found written thereon. And he was then further told by the Court, that a straw[41] beneath his foot would be of just as much avail for fevers, as this said charm of his was; whereupon, he fully granted that it would be so. And because that the same Roger Clerk was in no way a literate man, and seeing that on the examination aforesaid, (as well as on others afterwards made,) he was found to be an infidel, and altogether ignorant of the art of physic or of surgery; and to the end that the people might not be deceived and aggrieved by such ignorant persons, etc.; it was adjudged that the same Roger Clerk should be led through the middle of the City, with trumpets and pipes, he riding on a horse without a saddle, the said parchment and a whetstone, for his lies, being hung about his neck, an urinal also being hung before him, and another urinal on his back. [Letter-Book H. 145.]
[40] “Soul of Christ, sanctify me; body of Christ, save me; blood of Christ, saturate me; as Thou art good, Christ, wash me.”
[41] In allusion, perhaps, to the custom of men who were ready to perjure themselves, as false witnesses, to go about with a straw sticking out from between the foot and the shoe--“men of straw.” [Riley.]
1390. In connection with the Surgeons’ Guild, four Master Surgeons of the City were sworn before the Mayor, etc., in this year, and they were to make scrutiny amongst persons practising the art of Surgery, and to present defaults. [Letter-Book H. 248.] It will be remembered that in 1369 a somewhat similar Ordinance was made for the Surgeons’ Guild, and this one in 1390 was probably obtained as a set off to the powers vested in the Barbers by their Ordinance of 1376, and by way of assertion of equal rights with them in matters surgical. Anyhow it is very clear that there were two distinct bodies within the City ruling the craft of Surgery at this period, each, no doubt, claiming jurisdiction over its own members, and both anxious and ready to interfere with outsiders, and probably with each other. It is curious to note that in the Ordinance of 1390, above referred to, the Masters inspecting are authorised to make scrutiny not only of men, but of “women undertaking cures, or practising the art of Surgery”; and here, in the 19th century, we find history repeating itself, and women again “intermeddling in matters surgical.”
As might be expected the dual scrutiny exercised over persons practising surgery, by two distinct and antagonistic Companies, produced considerable jealousy and unpleasantness, and there are various records extant indicative of cases of attempted interference with the Barbers’ privileges, one of which is distinctly stated to have been the work of the Surgeons and Physicians, as doubtless also were the others.
1410. By Letter-Book I. 94, it appears that the Ordinances for the Barbers made in 1376 were confirmed to them with the significant addition that they should enjoy the same, “without the scrutiny of any person or persons of any other craft or trade, under any name whatsoever other than the craft or trade of the said Barbers, either as to shaving, making incision, blood letting or any other matters pertaining to the art of Barbery or of Surgery, in the craft of the said Barbers now practised, or to be practised hereafter.” This Ordinance is, I think, clearly directed against the Masters of the Surgeons’ Guild, who had sought to exercise their authority over the Barbers using the faculty of Surgery.
1415. Complaint having been made to the Mayor and Aldermen, concerning the unskilful and fraudulent practice of certain Barbers in matters of Surgery, the privileges of the Barbers were again recorded, though the Company who had hitherto nominated their own Masters, were somewhat shorn of that privilege, as the Mayor, etc., directed the names of all the Barber (Surgeons) to be brought before them, and after due enquiry, they selected two of them for Masters, and gave them their charge and oath.
1416. “Certain trustworthy and discreet” Barber (Surgeons) complained to the Mayor, etc., that notwithstanding the last order, there were still unruly members in the craft, and a fresh Ordinance was enacted which imposed a penalty on offenders.
The Ordinances above referred to are to be found in Letter-Book I. 149, and are as follows:
Be it remembered, that on the 10th day of April, in the 3rd year, etc. (1415) it was intimated in a relation, and not without alarm, unto Thomas Fauconer, Mayor, and the Aldermen, how that some barbers of the said city, who are inexperienced in the art of surgery, do oftentimes take under their care many sick and maimed persons, fraudulently obtaining possession of very many of their goods thereby; by reason whereof, they are oftentimes made to be worse off at their departure than they were at their coming: and that, by reason of the inexperience of the same barbers, such persons are oftentimes maimed; to the scandal of such skilful and discreet men as practise the art of surgery, and the manifest destruction of the people of Our Lord the King.
And the said Mayor and Aldermen, wishing to obviate an evil and a scandal such as this, as also, to provide a fitting remedy for the same, and considering first, how that the said barbers by themselves, without the scrutiny of any other persons of any other trade or craft,[42] or under any name whatsoever, have supervision and scrutiny over all men following the craft of barbery, and within the liberty of the said city dwelling, as to all manner of cases touching the art of barbery or the practice of surgery, within the cognizance, or to come within the cognizance, of the craft of the said barbers;--as by a certain Ordinance, made and ordained in the time of Richard Merlawe,[43] late Mayor, and the then Aldermen, and in the Chamber of the said City of London enrolled, of record fully appears;--did determine and ordain that in future, by the more substantial part of all the barbers following the practice of surgery, and dwelling within the liberty of the said city, there should be chosen two of the most skilful, most wise, and most discreet men, of all the barbers following such practice of surgery, and dwelling within the liberty of the said city; seeing that oftentimes under their scrutiny and correction there would be found cases of possible death and maiming, where, if ignorant and indiscreet men should undertake the management thereof--the which might God forbid--in their judgment grievous errors might unexpectedly ensue, by reason of such unskilfulness. And that the same Masters, so often as they should be thus chosen, on election should be presented to the Mayor and Aldermen, for the time being, there by the said Mayor and Aldermen to be accepted and sworn etc.
[42] See the Ordinance of 1410. [43] Mayor 1409-10.
And lest perchance a difference of opinion might in future as to such election arise, therefore, the said Mayor and Aldermen, after taking counsel on the matter aforesaid, on Friday, the 3rd day of May, in the same year (1415), caused to be brought before them the name of every barber who followed the practice of surgery and dwelt within the liberty of the said city, in order that, after enquiring into the duties and experiences of their practice and skill, in manner theretofore approved and customary, they might be the better able to accept such Masters. And hereupon, because that, among other names, Simon Rolf and Richard Wellys, citizens and barbers of the said city practising the art of surgery, as well for their knowledge and probity, as for the different kinds of difficult cures that had been sagaciously performed and effected by them, were by trustworthy testimony, upon sound and umblemished information, commended before any others, precept was given by the said Mayor and Aldermen to Baldwin Tettisbury, one of the serjeants of the said Mayor, to summon the said Simon and Richard for Monday the 6th day of May then next ensuing, to appear before the said Mayor and Aldermen in the Chamber of the Guildhall aforesaid, there to make the oath to them by the said Mayor and Aldermen to be administered.
Upon which Monday the said Simon and Richard, by virtue of such summons, appeared before the Mayor and Aldermen in the Chamber aforesaid. And hereupon the said Simon and Richard were then accepted by the said Mayor and Aldermen, and sworn upon the Holy Evangelists of God, well and faithfully to watch over and oversee all manner of barbers practising the art of surgery, and within the liberty of the said city dwelling; to maintain and observe the rules and ordinances of the craft or practice aforesaid; no one to spare, for love, favour, gain, or hate; diligently without concealment to present unto the Chamberlain of the said City, for the time being, such defaults as they may find; at all times, when duly required thereto, well and faithfully to examine wounds, bruises, hurts, and other infirmities, without asking anything for their trouble; and what they should find, at their discretion, when duly required thereto, distinctly to certify unto the Mayor and Aldermen of the said City, for the time being; as also, well and faithfully to conduct themselves from thenceforth in future; and all other things to do and perform, which of right are befitting or requisite for the masters or overseers of such practice to do.
AFTERWARDS, on the fourth day of July, in the 4th year, etc. (1416) before Nicholas Wottone, Mayor, the Recorder, and the Aldermen, in full Court, upon truthful information of certain trustworthy and discreet men of the craft of Barbers, practising the art of surgery aforesaid, as of other able and substantial men of the said city, it was stated how that, notwithstanding the Ordinance aforesaid, very many inexperienced men of the said craft of Barbers, indiscreetly practising the art of surgery, did presume, and in their presumption pretend, that they were wiser than the Masters inspecting, and, as to certain infirmities--indiscreetly excusing themselves therein, on the insufficient grounds that they are not liable to the peril of maiming or of death--did altogether disdain to give notice of the same to the said Masters inspecting, according to the Ordinance aforesaid, or to be discreetly examined by them as to the same, or diligently to be questioned thereon. Upon which pretence, they did not hesitate daily to take sick persons, in peril of death and of maiming, under their care, without shewing such sick persons, or such infirmities and perils, unto the same Masters inspecting; by reason of which presumption or unskilfulness, such sick persons were exposed to the greatest peril, either of maiming or of death. Wherefore, the said Mayor and Aldermen were prayed that, for the common advantage of the whole realm, and the especial honour of the said city, they would deign to provide some sure remedy for the same.
And accordingly, the Mayor and Aldermen, assenting to the said petition, as being just and consistent with reason, having taken diligent counsel as to the matters aforesaid, and considering that very many of such persons in these times are more in dread of loss or payment of money than amenable to the dictates of honesty or a safe conscience, did ordain and enact, that no barber, practising the art of surgery within the liberty of the said City, should presume in future to take under his care any sick person who is in peril of death or of maiming, unless he should show the same person, within three days after so taking him under his care, to the Masters inspecting, for the time being, by the barbers practising the art of surgery within the liberty of the said City to be elected, and to the Mayor and Aldermen presented, and by them specially to be admitted; under a penalty of 6_s._ 8_d._ to the Chamber of London in form underwritten to be paid, so often as, and when, against this Ordinance they should be found to act; namely, 5 shillings to the use of the Chamber of the Guildhall, and 20 pence to the use of the craft of the Barbers.
1423. In this year certain Ordinances were made by the Mayor (Sir William Walderne) and Court of Aldermen which are entered in Letter-Book K. 6{B.} This record relates to what Mr. D’Arcy Power, in his “Memorials of the Craft of Surgery,” has termed a “Conjoint College” of the Physicians and Surgeons, and has little to do with our Company, beyond the fact that the scrutiny and oversight of persons practising Surgery is given to the Masters of the Surgeons’ Guild. The subject of these Ordinances and many very interesting remarks thereon and on the Conjoint College may be seen at p. 52, &c., of Mr. D’Arcy Power’s work; and the record itself is set forth in full at p. 299; furthermore, extracts from it, so far as the same relate to the privileges and practice of the Surgeons, are to be found in the beautiful old vellum MS. formerly belonging to that Guild, and now in the possession of the Barbers’ Company.
Armed with this additional authority, the Surgeons’ Guild again sought to interfere with and scrutinize the Barber-Surgeons of the Barbers’ Company. These latter, however, must have had good friends at Court, and were not slow in asserting and obtaining confirmation of their rights and privileges, as will be seen by reference to the following record in Letter-Book K. 27{B.}:--
1424. MEMORANDUM. That on Friday the 10th day of November in the third year of the reign of Henry the Sixth from the Conquest before John Michell, Mayor, Thomas Knolles and other Aldermen, and Simon Seman and John Bithewater, Sheriffs of the City of London, It was granted and ordained that the Masters of the faculty of Surgery within the craft of Barbers of the same city, do exercise the same faculty even as fully and entirely as in the times of Thomas Fauconer late Mayor, and other Mayors, it was granted unto them, notwithstanding the false accusation (calumpnia) which the Rector and Supervisors of Physic and the Masters of Surgery pretend concerning a certain ordinance made in the time of William Walderne late Mayor (1423) and entered in the letter book K, folio 6, the which, they now endeavour to enjoin upon the said Barbers.
1451. With the exception of a few references (which are noticed elsewhere) the City records are silent concerning the Barbers’ Company until this year, when the Master and Wardens, styled here “Gardiani,” with certain honest men of the Mystery of Barbers, brought a Bill before the Mayor and Aldermen, praying them to establish certain Ordinances, and to enter them of record, which was granted and done.
These Ordinances provided for the enforcement of stated penalties in cases of disobedience and related to attendance upon summons, settlements of disputes, refusal of office, admission of members, evil speaking, assemblies and payments, instruction of “foreyns,” employment of aliens. They are to be found in Letter-Book K. 250, and are the first written in English, all previous ones being either in Latin or Norman French in the originals.
MEMORANDUM q{d.} xxv{to.} die ffebruarii Anno regni Regis Henrici Sexti post conquestˀ vicesimo nono veniunt hic in Curˀ Dñi Regis in Camˀa Guyhald Civitatis london coram Nich̃o Wyfold Maiore & Aldermannis ejusdem Civitatꝭ magistˀ & Gardianˀ necnon cẽti probi homines misterˀ barbitonsoꝜ Civitatꝭ p’dcẽ & porrexerunt dcisˀ Maiore & Aldermannis quandam billam sive supplicacioñe vˀboꝜ sequentˀ seviem continentem Unto the ryght Worshipfull and Worshipfull lord and souvˀaignes Mair and Aldremen of the Citee of London,
BESECHEN most mekely all pˀsones enfˀunchised in the craft and mistier of Barbours wythin the said Citee That it please unto your lordshippˀ and Right wise discrecions for to consider howe that for as moche as certein ordin{a}nces been establisshed made and entred of Record in the ch{a}umber of the yeldhall of the said Citee all pˀsonnes of the said Craft have fully in opinion for to obeye observe and kepe theim and noon other in eny Wise, So been y{r.} many and divˀse defaultes often tymes amonges your said besechers not duely corrected for default of such other ordin{a}nces to be made and auctorised sufficiently of record in the said ch{a}umber, like it therefore unto your said lordshippe and grete Wisdoms of your blessed disposicons for the pˀpetuell Wele and good Rule of the said Craft for to establissh and make these ordinaunces here folowyng pˀpetuelly to endure and for to be observed and putte in due execucion in the same craft And to be auctorised of record in the said ch{a}umber for evˀ And your said besechers shall pray god for you.
FFIRST that evˀy barbour enfˀ{a}uncheised householder and other occupier of the same craft holdyng eny shopp of barberye wythin the Citee of london shall be redy att all manˀ som̃ons of the Maisters and Wardeins of the same craft for the tyme being that is to sey for the Kyng the Mair or for eny Worshipp of the said Citee And yef eny man occupying the said craft in manˀe and fourme aforesaid absent him from eny such som̃ons wythoute cause reasonable and thereof duely convict than he to pay at the ch{a}umber of the yeldhall xiij{s.} iiij{d.} that is to say vj{s.} viij{d.} to the same ch{a}umber and other vj{s.} viij{d.} to the almes of the said craft. Also that evˀy man enfˀ{a}uncheised under the fourme abovesaid that disobeyeth and kepeth not his houre of his som̃ons at eny tyme w{t}oute cause reasonable and yˀof[44] duely convict shall paye to the almesse of the said craft at evˀy tyme y{t.} he maketh such defaute ij{d.} And yef eny of theim what so evˀ he be of the same craft that disobeye this ordin{a}nce he shall paye to the ch{a}umber of the yeldhall iij{s.} iiij{d.} at evˀy tyme that he maketh such default.
[44] thereof.
ALSO that yef eny matˀe of debate or difference be betwene eny pˀsoones of the said craft Which god defend, that none of theim shall make eny pursuyt at the comˀon lawe unto the tyme y{t.} he that findeth him aggreved in that pˀtie hath made his compleint unto the maister and Wardeins of the same craft for the tyme being and they to ffynyssh the matˀe and the cause of the said compleint Wythin vj dayes after such compleint made and yef they conclude not and ffynyssh the same matˀe Wythin the said vj dayes that yanne it be lefull to either pˀtie to take the benefice of the comˀon lawe Wythin this Citee So alwayes that the pˀtye ageinst whom the compleint is made be not fugityf And what pˀsone of the said craft that doth contrarie this ordin{a}nce shall paye at evˀy tyme at the chaumber of the yeldhall xiij{s.} iiij{d.} that is to sey vj{s.} viij{d.} to y{e} said ch{a}umber and oy{r.} vj{s.} viij{d.} to y{e} almesse of y{e} said craft.
ALSO that noon able pˀsone of the said craft enfˀ{a}uncheised shall refuse eny manˀ office or clothing pˀtinent to the said craft Whan and What tyme that he be by his bretheren be abled and elect y{r}to upon pein to paye at the ch{a}umber of the yeldhall xl{s.} that is to wete xx{s.} to the same ch{a}umber and other xx{s.} to the said almesse Also what man of the said craft that absenteth him fro the said eleccion Wythoute cause reasonable or absent him fro the dyner to be made the same day and will not paye therto his pˀt thanne he shall paye at the said ch{a}umber iij{s.} iiij{d.} that is to sey xx{d.} to the same ch{a}umber and other xx{d.} to the almes of the said craft.
ALSO that the maisters and Wardeins of the same craft that nowe be or in tyme to come shall be, shall not take admitte or resceive eny pˀsone in to the bretherhede or clothing of the same craft Wythoute the com̃on assent of the bretheren of the said craft or the more pˀt of theim upon pein of eviˀch such maister or Wardein that doth cont{a}rie this ordin{a}nce xx{s.} that is to say x{s.} to the ch{a}umber and x{s} to the almesse of the said craft.
FFURTHERMORE it is ordeigned that from hens forward yef eny man occupying the said craft be imfouled and of evell Will and malice so be unavised to revile or reprof eny man of the same craft that is to seye for to lye him or wyth other dishonest Wordes misgovˀne him in presence of the said maisters and Wardeins or in eny oy{r.} places and pˀof[45] by the report of the said maisters and Wardeins be duely convict what so evˀ he be of the same craft that is so misgovnˀed at eny tyme shall paye at the said ch{a}umber for evˀy such default vj{s.} viij{d.} that is to say to the same chumber iij{s.} iiij{d.} and to the Almes of the said craft iij{s.} iiij{d.}
[45] Query “y{r} of” == thereof.
ALSO it is ordeigned that evˀy man enfˀ{a}uncheised of the said craft under fourme aforesaid shall assemble with his ffelashipˀ of the same craft by thassignement of the said maisters and Wardeins being for the yeer in a certein place limited by theim at iiij tymes of the yeer And at evˀy such quarter day in the yeer evˀy brother enfˀ{a}uncheised and being of the clothing therof shall paye to the almes abovesaid iij{d.} And evˀy man that is so enfˀ{a}uncheised of the same craft and is not of the clothing of the same shall paye to the same almes j{d.} Which iiij dayes be these that is to saye the tewesday next after all hallown day the tewesday next after candelmasday the tewesday next after Trinite sonday and the tewesday next after lammas day to thentent that the said maisters and Wardeins shall enquere amongꝭ the said compaignye so assembled that yef eny default ranker or discord be hadd or moved amongꝭ theim that thanne the said maisters and Wardeins shall sett theim at rest accord and in unite to that they canne or may, after the fourme and custume as have been before used And what parsonne of the said craft be absent eny of the said dayes wythoute cause reasonable he shall paye for evˀy such day iiij{d.} to the expenses of the said maisters.
ALSO it is ordeigned and establisshed that no barbour nor other able pˀsonne using barbourye shall enfourme eny foreyn nor him teche in no wise in eny manˀ point that belongeth to the craft of barbourye or surgˀye wherby the same foreyn shall pˀceyve and take by his own capacite and exˀcise unto the tyme that the same foreyn be bounden appˀntice to a pˀsone barbour or other pˀsonne able enfˀ{a}uncheised using the same craft Wythin the Citee of london upon peyne to paye at the ch{a}umber of the yeldhall for evˀy such defaute iiij marc, that is to say to the same ch{a}umber xxvj{s.} viij{d.} and to the Almes of the said craft other xxvj{s.} viij{d.}
AND also that no barbour nor other able pˀsoone occupying the same craft shall take eny Alien nor stˀ{a}unger in to his sˀvice unto the tyme that the same alien or stˀ{a}unger be examined by the maistˀ and Wardeins of the same craft of his abilite and Connyng And thereupon the maistˀ and Wardeins With other vj or viij of the moost able and Kunnyng pˀsonnes of the craft shuld taxe him after his abilite after that hem semeth that he be worthy to take yeerly for his salarie And also that no Barbour shall take eny alien or stˀ{a}unger that hath been or w{t}in sˀvice wyth an other barbour enfˀ{a}uncheised before that he knowe well that the same sˀvnt hath complete his coven{a}ntes wyth his former maister upon pein to paye for evˀy such defaute at evˀy tyme that he be founde defectif ayenst eny of these ordin{a}nces at the said ch{a}umber xiij{s.} iiij{d.} that is to wete to the same ch{a}umber vj{s.} viij{d.} and to the said almesse vj{s.} viij{d.} and also make restitucion of the damage unto the pˀtie that findeth him greved.
AND also that no man occupying the said craft shall pˀcure eny other mannes sˀvnt oute of sˀvise upon the peyn aforesaid and damage unto the pˀtie pleintif And also it is ordeigned that from hensforward that no harbour enfˀ{a}uncheised nor eny other able pˀsoons occupying the said craft shall not take into his sˀvice eny stˀ{a}unger or forein for lasse time thanne a yeer And what pˀsone enfˀ{a}uncheised or occupying the said craft disobeys this ordin{a}nce shall renne in the pein of xiij{s.} iiij{d.} that to be devided in manˀ and fourme above said.
AND also that no pˀsons of the said craft of barbours nor other able pˀsone occupying the same craft huyre no ffˀ{a}unchised man of the same craft oute of his shopp ne dwellyng place upon pein of xl{s.} that is to wete to the said ch{a}umber xx{s.} And to the Almesse of the said Craft other xx{s.}
Qua quidem billa coram dˀcĩs maiore & Aldermannis lectˀ & per eosdem plenius intellectꝭ Qua videtur eisdem qˀd omnes articuli in dˀca billa contentꝭ sunt boni & honesti ac racioni consomˀ, &c., &c. (The articles were ratified confirmed and ordered to be entered of Record in the books of the Chamber of London.)
Nothing is now heard of the Surgeons’ Guild for some years, although they were still in existence. It is quite probable, that finding the Barbers had invariably obtained the protection and countenance of the City authorities, whenever their privileges had been assailed or called in question, they had given over their attempts at interference with them as hopeless, and allowed our worthy predecessors to continue to “exercise the faculty of surgery,” in peace; and being unmolested they doubtless grew in numbers, in importance, and in the knowledge of their art, until it was admitted that their position as one of the Guilds, warranted them in applying for a Charter of Incorporation, which was granted to them by Edward IV in 1462.
1413. Before proceeding to refer to this important epoch in the history of our Company, it will be well to introduce a very remarkable letter, which was written by Thomas Arundell, Archbishop of Canterbury (formerly of York), to the Mayor, etc., of London, in which he complained that the Barbers, being, alas! “without zeal for the law of God,” kept their shops open on the Sabbath days, and he besought the Mayor and Aldermen (his “sons in Christ, and dearest friends”) to put a stop to this practice. No trade, perhaps, has from the earliest days, down to our own times, owned such persistent breakers of the Fourth Commandment as have the Barbers. Our records abound with by-laws, enacted and renewed over and over again on this subject, and details of the delinquencies of numerous Barbers in this respect, and of their punishments by fine and imprisonment crop up everywhere.
The Archbishop’s letter reveals to us the fact, that nearly 500 years ago, men were constituted much as they are now; in that “that which touches the body or the purse, is held more in dread than that which kills the soul,” and he shrewdly suggests that the clerical punishment of “the greater excommunication,” should be augmented by a fine to be levied by the Civil authority. This letter is so deeply interesting that no apology is needed for reproducing it here. The original is to be found in Letter-Book I. 125.
1413. On the 24th day of July, in the first year, etc. (Henry V) the Reverend Father in Christ, and Lord, Thomas, by Divine permission, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England, and Legate of the Apostolic See, sent here, to the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London, certain Letters Close of his, containing words as follow:--
“Sons in Christ and dearest friends.--We know that you do seek for the things which are of above, and that you will the more readily incline to our desires, the more surely that the things as to which we write are known to tend to the observance of the Divine law, the maintenance of public propriety, and the rule of the Christian profession. We do therefore write unto you on this occasion, to intimate that when we were presiding of late in our Provincial Council, holden at London, with our venerable brethren, the Suffragan Bishops, and our clergy of the Province of Canterbury, it was publicly made known unto us with universal reprobation, that the Barbers of the City of London, over the governance of which city you preside, being without zeal for the law of God, and not perceiving how that the Lord hath blessed the seventh day and made it holy, and hath commanded that it shall be observed by no abusive pursuit of any servile occupations, but rather by a disuse thereof, in their blindness do keep their houses and shops patent and open on the seventh day, the Lord’s Day, namely, and do follow their craft on the same, just as busily, and just in the same way, as on any day in the week, customary for such work. Wherefore we, with the consent and assent of our said Suffragans and clergy, in restraint of such temerity as this, have determined that there must be made solemn prohibition thereof in the City aforesaid, and that, of our own authority, and that of our said Provincial Council; and not there only, but also throughout the Diocese of London, and each of the cities both of our own Diocese and of our Province of Canterbury; to the effect, that such barbers must not keep their houses and shops patent or open, or follow their craft, on such Lord’s Days for the future, on pain of the greater excommunication; in the same manner as it has been enacted and observed of late in our time, as to the City and Diocese of York, as we do well recollect. But, dearest children, seeing that so greatly has the malice of men increased in these days, a thing to be deplored--that temporal punishment is held more in dread than clerical, and that which touches the body or the purse more than that which kills the soul, we do heartily intreat you, and, for the love of God and of His law, do require and exhort you, that, taking counsel thereon, you will enact and ordain a competent penalty in money, to be levied for the Chamber of your City, or such other purpose as you shall think best, upon the Barbers within the liberty of your City aforesaid, who shall be transgressors in this respect; that so at least, those whom fear of the anger of God does not avail to withold from breach of His law, may be restrained by a scourge inflicted upon their purse, in the way of pecuniary loss; knowing that we in the meantime, after taking counsel hereon, will devise measures for the prevention of this, and for the due publication of our Provincial enactment aforesaid. Fare you well always in Christ.
Written at Ikham[46] on the 13th day of the month of July.
[46] Near Wingham, Kent.
THOMAS, Archbishop of Canterbury.”
An Ordinance was forthwith made thereupon, to the effect, that no barber, his wife, son, daughter, apprentice, or servant, should work at such craft on Sundays within the liberty of the city, either in hair cutting or shaving, on pain of paying 6_s._ 8_d._ for each offence; 5_s._ thereof to go to the new work at the Guildhall, and the remainder to the Wardens or Masters of the Barbers within the city.[47]
[47] Riley p. 594.
1422. In August of this year Henry V died, and thirty-two of the City Companies assisted at his obsequies, going in procession and carrying torches. From an entry in Letter-Book K. 1{B.}, it appears that the Barbers bore four torches on this occasion.
1447. This year the Company seem to have contributed 40_s._ towards the cost of the Roof of the Chapel at Guildhall, as appears by the following entry in Journal IV, 198 (25th October, 26 Henry VI)--
Itmˀ gardiani misterˀ barbitonsoꝜ & importaverunt in Cur xl{s.} sterlingoꝜ pˀse & misterˀ sua ad coopturam Guyhaɫd Sc̃. Capelle.
THE BARBERS INCORPORATE.
Hitherto we have considered two distinct and somewhat hostile fraternities, the Surgeons on the one hand, and on the other the Barbers (consisting of Barbers and Barber-Surgeons), both of them City Guilds, existing by prescription, having independent rules and Ordinances for their government and the scrutiny and correction of abuses in their respective Crafts, the former Company few in number, the latter far more numerous and popular; the Surgeons without, and the Barbers with, a Livery.
Of these two fraternities, the Barbers by the regular and every day nature of their calling, as shavers and hair cutters, together with the practice of Surgery combined by so many of them, were the most likely to become the more popular Company; their fees would surely be on a lower scale than those of the more aristocratic Surgeons, and their numbers and constant intercourse with the citizens, in their capacity as Barbers, enabled them easily to extend their connection as Surgeons.
In all their contentions with the Surgeons’ Guild, as far as we know, they held their own well, and thus it was that their place in the City, as a Livery Guild of at that time an ancient standing, their position as the professors of useful and scientific arts, their numbers and presumable affluence, all rendered it desirable that they should be placed upon the same footing as the better class of Guilds, by their acquisition of a Charter of Incorporation, which they accordingly obtained from the young King Edward IV in the first year of his reign (1462).
Thomas Knot (Master, 1555) has recorded in one of our books, a Translation of this Charter, which Mr. J. Flint South (who does not appear to have seen the original Latin one) has transcribed, and this has been adopted by Mr. D’Arcy Power (page 326). Thomas Knot wrote a good hand, and was a zealous champion of the Barber-Surgeons in his time, but he made egregious blunders in some of the writings recorded over his signature, and although there is not great fault to be found with him in this instance, it is suggested that the Translation given below, is perhaps a more literal one than that which Knot has handed down.
The Charter is still preserved at our Hall, and is contained on a small skin of parchment; the initial letters of the title, which were at the time left to be illuminated have never been filled in, and the document is therefore not the work of art which one is accustomed to see in Charters of this period; it bears signs of having been frequently used, the ink in some places being worn, and the words only legible with the aid of a magnifying glass. The great seal pendant is not quite perfect, but is a beautiful specimen and highly artistic. The following is the text of the Charter:--
(E)DWARDUS dei grã (R)ex (A)nglie & (F)rancie & (D)ominus (H)ibñie. (O)mnibus ad quos pˀsentes lrẽ pˀuenint saltm̃ (S)ciatis q̃d nos considerantes qualitˀ Diɫci nõb prˀbi & liᵬi hoiẽs mistere BarbitonsoꝜ Ciuitatis nr̃e london vtentes mistera siue facultate SirurgicoꝜ tam circa vulña plagas lesiones & alias infirmitates ligeoꝜ nroꝜ ibidem curandˀ & Sauandˀ q{a}m in extracc͠oe sanguinis & denc̃iu hˀmꝰ ligeoꝜ nrõꝜ g{a}ndes & multiplices intendencias & labores pˀ longa tempora sustinuerunt & supportauerunt indiesqʒ sũtinere & supportare non desistunt qualitˀ etiam pˀ ignoranciam negligenciam & insipienciam nonnulloꝜ hˀmꝰ barbitonsoꝜ tam liᵬoꝜ hõim Ciuitatis nr̃e pˀdc̃e q{a}m alioꝜ SirurgicoꝜ forincecoꝜ & non liᵬoꝜ hõim eiusdem Ciuitatis indies ad eandem Ciuitatem confluenciũ & in mistera SirurgicoꝜ minus sufficientˀ eruditoꝜ q{a}m plurima ac quasi infinita mala diuˀsis ligeis nr̃is in vulnĩbʒ plagis lesionibʒ & aliis infirmitatibʒ suis pˀ huius modi Barbitonsores & Sirurgicos sauandis & curandis ob eoꝜ defc̃m ante hec tempora euenerunt quoꝜ quidem ligeoꝜ nroꝜ alii ea de causa viam vniuˀse carnis sunt ingressi alii autem eadem causa tanq{a}m insanabiles & incurabiles sunt ab omĩbʒ derelecti similia qʒ mala vel peiora infuturˀ in hac parte euenire formidatˀ nisi remedm̃ congruũ supˀ hoc pˀ nos cicius pˀuidetuˀ Nos enim attendentes & intime adũtentes qˀd huiusmodi mala ligeis nr̃is ob defc̃tuˀ debit supˀuis scrutinii correccõis & punicõis huiusmodi barbitonsoꝜ & SirurgicoꝜ minus sufficientˀ in eisdem misteris siue facultatibʒ vt pˀdcm̃ est eruditˀ & instructˀ euenire contingunt. Ad humilem supplicacoẽm dilc̃oꝜ nobˀ pˀdcoꝜ pˀboꝜ & liᵬoꝜ hõim pˀdcẽ mistere BarbitonsoꝜ in Ciuitate nr̃a pˀdcã concessimꝰ eis qˀd mistera illa & omẽs hoiẽs eiusdem mistere de Ciuitate p’dc̃a sint in re & noiẽ vnũ corpus & vna Coitãs pˀpetua. Et qˀd duo principales eiusdem Coitãtis vna cũ assensu duodecim vel octo pˀsonaꝜ ad minus Coitãtis illius in mistera Sirurgie maxime expert singulis annis eligˀe possint & facˀe de Cõitate illa duos magr̃os siue Gubñatores in mistera Sirurgicˀ maxime exp̃tˀ. Ad supˀuidendˀ regendˀ & gubñandˀ misterˀ & Cõitatem pˀdictˀ & omẽs hoiẽs eiusdem mistere negociti eoꝜdem imp̃pm̃. ET QˀD QˀDEM mãgri siue guᵬnatores & Coit̃as heañt successionem pˀpetuam & coẽ sigillum negociis dcẽ Coit̃atis impˀpm̃ sˀuiturˀ. Et qˀd ip̃i & successores sui impˀpm̃ sint pˀsone habiles & capaces ad pˀquirendˀ & possidendˀ in feodo & pˀpetuitate trãs tenˀ redditus & alias possessiones quascunqʒ usqʒ ad valorem quinqʒ marcaꝜ pˀ annũ ult{a} reprisas et qˀd ip̃i noiã magr̃oꝜ siue GuᵬnatoꝜ & Coit̃atis mistere barbitonsoꝜ london pˀlitare & imp̃litari possint coram quibuscuqʒ indicibʒ in Curiis & acciõbʒ quibuscuqʒ ET QˀD pˀdci magr̃i siue Guᵬnatores & Coit̃as & eoꝜ successores congregacoẽs licitas & honestas de seipˀis̃ ac statuta & ordinacoẽs pˀ salubri gubnacoẽ supˀuisu & correccõe misteria pˀdictˀ sˀcdm̃ necessitatis exigenciam quociens & quando opus fuit̃ facẽ valeant licite & impune siue occõne vel impedimento nr̃i heredimi vel successoꝜ nr̃oꝜ Justicˀ EscacioꝜ Vicecomitum CoronatoꝜ aut alioꝜ BalliuoꝜ vel ministroꝜ nr̃oꝜ heredemi vel successoꝜ nr̃oꝜ quoꝜcuqꝜ dum̃odo statuta & ordinacoẽs illa contˀ leges & consuetudines regni nr̃i Anglˀ nullo modo existant. PRETERIA VOLUMꝰ & concedimꝰ pˀ nos heredbʒ & successoribʒ nrĩs quantũ in noᵬ est qˀd magr̃i siue Guᵬnatores pˀdcẽ Coit̃atis pˀ tempore existenˀ & eoꝜ successores impp̃m h̃eant supˀuisum scrutinm̃ correccoˀem & guᵬnacoˀem om̃i & singuloꝜ liᵬoꝜ h̃oim̃ dcẽ Ciuitatꝭ SirurgicoꝜ vtencm̃ mistera BarbitonsoꝜ in eadem Ciuitate ac alioꝜ SirurgicoꝜ forincecoꝜ quoꝜ cuq̃ʒ mistera illa Sirurgicꝭ aliquo modo frequentancm̃ & vtencm̃ infra eandem Ciuitatem & suburbia eiusdem ac punicoẽm eoꝜdem tam liᵬoꝜ q{a}m forincecoꝜ pˀ delictis suis in non pˀfecte exequendꝰ faciendꝰ & vtendꝰ mistera illa necnon supˀuisum & scrutinm̃ omim̃odoꝜ instrumentoꝜ emplastoꝜ & aliaꝜ medicinaꝜ & eoꝜ receptꝭ pˀdcos̃ Barbitonsores & Sirurgicꝭ huiusmodi ligeis nris̃ pˀ eoꝜ plagis & vulnibʒ lesionibʒ & huiusmodi infirmitatibʒ curandꝰ & sauandꝰ dandꝰ imponendꝰ & vtendꝰ quociens & quando opus fuit pˀ comõdo & vtilitate eoꝜdem ligeoꝜ nr̃oꝜ ita qˀd punicio huiusmodi BarbitonsoꝜ vtencm̃ dc̃a mistera Sirurgicꝭ ac huiusmodi Sirurgicꝭ forincecoꝜ sit in pˀmissis delinquencm̃ pˀ fines am̃ciamenta & imprisonamenta corpoꝜ suoꝜ & pˀ alias vias rõnabiles & congruas exequaturꝰ. Et qˀd nullus BarbitonsoꝜ vtens dcã mistera Sirurgicꝭ infra dcãm Ciuitatem aut suburᵬ eiusdem aut alius Sirurgicus forincecus quicuq̃ʒ & exequendꝰ faciendꝰ & exẽcendꝰ eandem misteram Sirurgicꝰ aliquo modo infuturꝰ in eadem Ciuitate vel Suburᵬ eiusdem admittat{a} nisi primicũs pˀ dcõs magr̃os siue guᵬnatores vel eoꝜ successores ad hoc habiles & sufficientes in mistera illa eruditus approbetꝭ & pˀ plenarˀ comprobac͠one sua in hac parte maiori Ciuitatis pˀdictꝰ pˀ tempore existenꝰ pˀ eosdem magrõs siue Guᵬnatores ad hoc pˀsentet{a.} VOLUMUS eciam & concedimꝰ pˀ noᵬ heredibʒ & successoribʒ nr̃is quant̃u in noᵬ est qˀd dc̃i magr̃i siue guᵬnatores ac Coit̃as pᵭc mistere BarbitonsoꝜ nec successores sui nec eoꝜ aliquis quoquo modo infuturꝰ infra Ciuitatem nr̃am pˀdcañ & Suburᵬ eiusdem sumoniunt{a} aut ponant{a} neqʒ eoꝜ aliquis sumoniat{a} aut ponat{a} in aliquibʒ assisis iuratis enquestis inquisicõibʒ attinctis aut aliis recognic̃oibʒ infra dc̃am Ciuitatem & Suburᵬ eiusdem impostimi coram maiore aut vicecountꝭ seu Coronatꝭ dc̃e Ciuitatis nr̃e pˀ tempore existenꝰ capiendꝰ aut pˀ aliquem officiariũ siue ministm̃ sũu vel officiarios siue ministros suos sum̃oniandˀ licet iidem Jurati inquisicões seu recognic͠oes sum̃ fuiñt supˀ br̃i vel briᵬʒ nr̃i vel heredimi nroꝜ de recto SED qˀd dc̃i mag̃ri siue Guᵬnatores ac coit̃as mistere antedc̃e & successores sui ac eoꝜ quiᵬt vˀsus nos heredes & successores nr̃os ac vˀsus maiorem & vicecomites Ciuitatis nr̃e pˀdcẽ pˀ tempore existenꝰ & quoscũqʒ Officiarꝰ & ministros suos sint inde quieti & penitus exonãti impp̃m pˀ pˀsentes. ET VLTERIUS nos considerac͠oe pˀmissoꝜ de gr̃a nr̃a sˀpaɫi concessimꝰ pˀ noᵬ & successoribʒ nr̃is pˀfatis mag̃ris siue Guᵬnatoribʒ ac Coit̃ati dcẽ Mistera BarbitonsoꝜ & successoribʒ suis hanc liᵬtatem viᵭelt qˀd ip̃i pˀpetuis futuris temporibʒ pˀsonas habiles & sufficientꝰ eruditos & informatos in dct̃i mistera Sirurgicꝰ & pˀ mag̃ros siue Guᵬnatores mistera illius pˀ tempore existenꝰ in forma pˀdc̃ti approbatꝰ & maiore Ciuitatis pˀdc̃e pˀ tempore existenꝰ vt pˀdc̃am est pˀsentat in eandem misteram BarbitonsoꝜ ad libtat̃es dc̃e Ciuitatis hẽndꝰ & gaudendꝰ scᵭm consuetudinem dc̃e Ciuitatis admittẽ & recipˀe valeant & non alias pˀsonas quascũqʒ neqʒ alio Modo aliquo mandato aut requisic͠oe nr̃i heredimi seu successoꝜ nroꝜ pˀ brãs inscriptꝭ vel alitꝭ qualitꝭ cumqʒ incontrm̃ factꝭ seu faciendꝭ non obstantꝭ ET LICET iidem mag̃ri siue Guᵬnatores ac Coiãtas & eoꝜ successores hac liᵬtate continue in futurꝭ vsi fũint cont{a.} aliquod mandatum sine requisicõem nr̃i heredũ seu successoꝜ nroꝜ aut aliquoꝜ alioꝜ quoꝜcuq̃ʒ in forma pˀdc̃a fiendꝭ ip̃i tamen finem contempt̃u depˀditum erga nos heredes seu successores nrõs aut dampñu vel malum aliquod in bonis seu corporibʒ suis erga quoscumqʒ alios ea occ̃one nullo modo incurrant nec eoꝜ aliquis incurrat. ET hoc absqʒ fine seu feodo pˀ pˀmissis seu sigillac͠oe pˀsentum noᵬ faciendꝭ soluendꝭ vel aliqualitꝭ reddendꝭ aliquo statuto ordinac͠oe vel actu incontrm̃ ante hec tempora editꝭ factꝭ ordinatꝭ seu pˀuis non obstantꝭ. IN cuius rei testimonm̃ has lrãs nr̃as fieri fecimꝰ patentes. TESTE me ip̃o apud Westm̃ vicesimo quarto die ffebruarii Anno regni nr̃i primo.
PEKHAM.
pˀbrẽ de priuato sigillo de datꝭ pˀdct̃ auctoritate parliamenti & pˀ decem libris soluitꝭ in hanapˀio
(Endorsed.)
Irt̃o in Curꝰ Domini Regis in Cam̃a Guihalde Ciuitatꝭ Londõn in libro signatꝭ cum lit̃ta. l. folˀ tercio decimo. Anno regni Regis Edwardi quarti post conquestum Tercio.
TRANSLATION.
EDWARD by the grace of God, King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland, TO all to whom these present letters shall come, health. KNOW ye, that we considering how our beloved, honest, and free men of the Mystery of Barbers of our City of London, exercising the Mystery or Art of Surgery, as well respecting wounds, bruises, hurts, and other infirmities of our liegemen, and healing and curing the same, as in letting blood, and drawing the teeth of our liege men, have for a long time undergone and supported, and daily do undergo and support, great and manifold applications and labours; and also, how through the ignorance negligence and stupidity of some of the men of the said Barbers, as well of the freemen of our said City, as of other Surgeons foreigners and not freemen of the said City, and who daily resort to the said City, and in the mystery of Surgery are not sufficiently skilled, whereby very many and almost infinite evils have before this time happened to many of our liegemen, in their wounds, hurts, bruises, and other infirmities, by such Barbers and Surgeons, on account of their defect in healing and curing; from which cause, some of our said liegemen have gone the way of all flesh, and others, through the same cause, have been by all given over as incurable and past relief, and it is to be dreaded, that similar or greater evils may in future arise on this head, unless proper remedy is by us, speedily provided for the same. WE therefore, heartily weighing and considering that such evils do happen to our liegemen for want of the examinations, corrections, and punishments by a due supervision of such Barbers and Surgeons as are insufficiently skilled and instructed in the said mysteries or arts as aforesaid; have at the humble request of our aforesaid beloved, honest, and freemen of the said Mystery of Barbers in our said city, granted to them that the said Mystery, and all men of the said Mystery aforesaid, may be in deed and name one body and one perpetual Community, and that two Principals of the said Community may, with the consent of twelve persons, or at least eight of the said Community who are best skilled in the mystery of Surgery, every year elect and make out of the Community, two Masters or Governors of the utmost skill, to superintend rule and govern the Mystery and Community aforesaid and all men of the said Mystery, and of the businesses of the same for ever. AND THAT the said Masters or Governors and Community may have a perpetual succession and common seal to serve for the affairs of the said Community for ever, and that they and their successors for ever may be able and capable to acquire and possess in fee and perpetuity lands, tenements, rents, and other possessions whatsoever, to the value of five marks per annum, besides reprises. And that they, by the name of the Masters or Governors and Community of Barbers of London, may be able to plead and to be impleaded before whatsoever Justices in Courts, and actions whatsoever. And that the said Masters or Governors and Community, and their successors, may lawfully and honestly assemble themselves, and make statutes and ordinances for the wholesome government, superintendence, and correction of the said Mystery, according to the exigency of the necessity, as often and whenever it may be requisite, lawfully and unpunishably, without leave or hindrance of us, our heirs or successors, Justices, Escheators, Sheriffs, Coroners, or any other Bailiffs, or servants of us, our heirs or successors; provided that such statutes or ordinances are not in any ways contrary to the laws and customs of our Kingdom of England. WE FURTHER will and grant, for us, our heirs and successors, as far as in us lies, that the Masters or Governors of the aforesaid Community for the time being, and their successors for ever, shall have the superintendence, scrutiny, correction, and government of all and singular the freemen of the said City who are Surgeons, exercising the Mystery of Barbers within the said City, and of all other foreign Surgeons whomsoever, in anywise practising and using the said Mystery of Surgeons in the said City and the suburbs thereof, and the punishment of them, as well freemen as foreigners, for their offences in not perfectly following, practising and using that mystery, and also the superintendence and scrutiny of all kinds of instruments, plaisters, and other medicines, and their recipes, by such Barbers and Surgeons given, applied, and used for our liege men, for curing and healing their wounds, bruises, hurts and such kind of infirmities, when and as often as shall be requisite for the convenience and utility of our liege men; so that punishment of such Barbers exercising the said mystery of Surgeons, so offending in the premisses, be executed by fines, amerciaments, and imprisonments of their bodies, and by other reasonable and suitable means; and that no Barber exercising the said mystery of Surgeons in the said City and suburbs thereof, or any other foreign Surgeon whatsoever, shall in future be admitted to follow, practise and exercise the said mystery of Surgeons, in anywise, within the said City or the suburbs thereof, unless he be first approved by the said Masters or Governors, or their successors, for this purpose able and sufficient as skilled in the said Mystery, and for his plenary approbation in this behalf, by the said Masters or Governors to the Mayor of the said City for the time being, presented. WE ALSO will and grant, for us our heirs and successors, as far as in us lies, that neither the said Masters or Governors and community of the said Mystery of Barbers, nor their successors, nor any of them shall hereafter, in anywise be summoned or appointed on any assizes, juries, inquests, inquisitions, attainders, or other recognizances, within the said City or suburbs thereof for the time to come, before the Mayor or Sheriffs or Coroners of our said City for the time being, by any summoning officer or his servant, or summoning officers or their servants, although the said juries, inquisitions, or recognizances should be summoned by a writ or writs of right, of us or our heirs, but that the said Masters or Governors and Community of the aforesaid Mystery and their successors shall, from henceforth for ever, be peaceably and entirely exonerated towards us, our heirs and successors, and towards the Mayor and Sheriffs of our said City for the time being, and every of their officers and servants, by these presents. AND FURTHER, we, in consideration of the premisses, do of our special grace, for us and our successors, grant to the said Masters or Governors and Community of the said Mystery of Barbers, and their successors, this liberty, to wit, that they in all future times may admit and receive persons apt and sufficiently skilled and informed in the said Mystery of Surgery, and by the Masters or Governors for the time being of the said Mystery, in manner aforesaid approved, and presented to the Mayor of the said City for the time being as aforesaid, into the said Mystery of Barbers to the fredom of the said City, to be held and enjoyed according to the custom of the said City; and no other persons whomsoever, nor in any other manner, any mandate or requisition of us, our heirs or successors, by written letters or otherwise howsoever made or to be made to the contrary notwithstanding. AND ALTHOUGH the said Masters or Governors and Community and their successors should contumaciously use this liberty in future against any mandate or requisition of us, our heirs, or successors, or any others whomsoever to be made in form aforesaid, neither they nor any of them shall in anywise incur any fine, contempt, or loss towards us, our heirs or successors, or any damage or punishment in their goods or bodies, or towards any other persons whatsoever, on that account; AND this without fine or fee for the sealing of these presents, to be done paid or otherwise rendered unto us; any statute, ordinance, or any act to the contrary, before this time published made ordained or provided notwithstanding IN WITNESS whereof, we have caused these our letters to be made patent. WITNESS myself at Westminster the twenty-fourth day of February in the first year of our reign.
PEKHAM.
By writ of privy seal, and of the date aforesaid, by authority of Parliament, and for ten pounds paid into the hanaper.
(Endorsed.)
Inrolled in the Court of the Lord the King, in the chamber of the Guildhall of the City of London in the book marked with the letter l. folio thirteen in the third year of the reign of King Edward the Fourth from the Conquest.
The chief point which strikes us on reading the foregoing Charter is, that it contains a great deal relative to Surgery, and little, indeed nothing, concerning Barbery, and yet it is granted ostensibly to the Barbers!
Now the Surgical side being the more important one of the craft, and the raison d’être of the Charter being in a great measure to provide for the regulation of Surgery and the correction of abuses in that profession, this silence as to Barbery and recognition of Surgery would seem to be an evidence that the practice of the latter, more or less, was the rule rather than the exception with members of the Company of Barbers; and, as the Masters or Governors were empowered to make “statutes and ordinances” (by-laws) for the governance of the mystery, it was doubtless considered unnecessary to descend into any details concerning shaving and the like in a Royal Charter.
The preamble of this Charter is exceedingly quaint and interesting, reciting how through the “ignorance, negligence and stupidity” of various Barbers and other practitioners in Surgery, many of the King’s lieges had “gone the way of all flesh.” Then at the request of “our beloved, honest and free men of the said Mystery of Barbers,” the King grants to them, to be one body perpetual, etc., that two of the chief men of the Company (no doubt the two then existing Masters “exercising the faculty of Surgery”) may with twelve or at least eight other skilled Barber-Surgeons, elect two Masters annually: this provision in itself is singular, as it would seem to imply that the body then incorporated was to be ruled by two Masters only; but a reference to our list of Masters and Wardens will shew that from the year 1448 the Company has been ruled by four Masters, and so on in unbroken succession to the present time[48]; these other two Masters therefore were Masters of the Barbers proper, about whom nothing was said in the Charter, but who were chosen annually in accordance with ancient custom, the Chief or First Master being alternately a Barber, and a Barber-Surgeon.
[48] The term “Wardens” is a more modern designation used for convenience sake; the Master and the three Wardens are, strictly speaking, the four “Masters or Governors.”
The Corporation was to have perpetual succession, and a Common seal, to hold lands of a certain value, to be able to plead and to be impleaded, to make by-laws, to have the scrutiny and correction of (apparently all) Surgeons in the City and suburbs, as also the oversight of all their instruments and medicines, etc., and to have the power of inflicting punishment, by fine or imprisonment, on offenders. None were to practise Surgery until examined and approved by the Masters and presented to the Mayor, and authority was given for the freemen of the Company to be admitted into the freedom of the City.
Another clause in the Charter was one which, whilst it conferred a valuable privilege upon the Company, was a source of continual strife and conflict with the Civic authorities, for by it all our freemen claimed to be exempted from serving on Juries and inquisitions, and this immunity, though constantly disputed, was as often asserted and maintained, with various qualifications.
In The Times, November 26, 1839, is an account of the exemption of certain freemen of the Company from serving on Juries at the Central Criminal Court. In this instance neither the claimants nor the Recorder knew much about the matter--for one of the applicants said, in reply to the Recorder, “I rest my claim on the Charter of Henry VIII”!! And, further on in the discussion, the same bold Barber had the effrontery to declare that “the privilege was confirmed by an Act passed in the reign of George II.” This was the Act which separated the Surgeons from the Barbers, and which did not confirm to the latter the exemption claimed, but our freeman gained his point, and the Recorder only grumbled.
As recently as 1868, a case was submitted to Sir J. D. Coleridge (now Lord Chief Justice) as to the legality of the exemption, and he gave his opinion in favour of it. However, since then the Jury Act has, alas! swept away this cherished immunity, and thus let the Barbers down to the level of their fellow citizens.
With the possession of their Charter the Company were now in an unassailable position, and we hear no more of their molestation by the Guild of Surgeons.
1470. The Company about this period came into possession of some freehold houses in St. John the Baptist upon Walbrook, to be held both for trust and corporate purposes. These houses are stated in our books to have been devised to us by Will (dated 2nd Dec., 1470) of Robert Ferbras. There are three old title deeds of the period still at the Hall, relating to these houses, and in the Court of Husting at Guildhall are two Wills of Robert Ferbras, Surgeon, both proved, one dated 4th Nov., 1470, and the other 17th April, 1472--but neither of these contain the bequest to the Barbers. It is, therefore, probable that Robert Ferbras conveyed the houses to the Company in his lifetime, and this fact being overlooked in course of years, it came to be said that they passed by his Will.
1482. 26th April.--The Company applied to the Court of Aldermen, presenting a set of ordinances for the government of the craft and for the regulation of apprentices, praying that the same might be allowed and ratified, which was done. The official entry under this date is in Letter-Book L. 174, and the following are the Ordinances:--
[Sidenote: Ordinacio } BarbitonsoꝜ}]
Memorand qˀd sexto decimo die Aprilis Anno regni Regis Edwardi quarti post conq̃m vicesimo scᵭo pˀᵬi hõies Artis sive mistere BarbitonsoꝜ Civitatis london venˀ hic in Curˀ dc̃i Dnĩ Regis in Camˀa Guyhald Civitatꝭ pˀdcĩ coram Willm̃e Haryot milite ac maiore & Aldr̃is ejusdem Civitatis et porrexer̃nt eisdem maiore & Aldr̃is quand{a}m billam sive supplicacõem Cujus tenor sequitur in hec verba.
TO THE RIGHT hono{r}able lord the Mair And the right wirshipful Sovˀaignes the Aldermen of the Citee of London Mekely besechen your goode lordship̃ and maistershippes all the pˀsones enfraunchesed in the crafte and mistere of Barbours w{t}in the Citee of london That it wold pleas the same your lordshipp and maistershippes for the Wirship̃ of the said Citee And for the goode Rule to be had w{t}in the saide Craft to graunte and establissh thise articles folowyng And theym to be entred of Recorde in the Chambre of the said Citee before your said lordship and maistershippes hereafter for to be observed and executed.
FFIRST that there shall no ffraunchesed Barbo{r.} w{t}in the said Citee take any man or Child to be his Apprentice before that he hath pˀsented the same man or Child unto the maister and Wardeyns of the said Craft for the tyme being, to thentent that the same maister and Wardeyns may duely examyne ovˀsee serche and behold by the Colour and complexion of the said man or Child if he be avexed or disposed to be lepur or gowty maymed or disfigured in any pˀties of his body Whereby he shall fall in disdeyn or lothefulnesse unto the sight of the Kingꝭ liege people And also to be examyned of his birth and of his kynrede or if there be on hym any bonde claymed, And if he be founde defectif in any of thise poyntꝭ that than no fraunchesed Barbo{r.} of the saide Citee shall take hym to his Apprentice uppon payn to pay v{li.} Whereof that one half shall Remayn unto the Chambre of the said Citee.
ALSO that evˀy enfraunchesed barbour that taketh any apprentice shall pay to the almes of the said Craft for the same Apprentice iij{s.} iiij{d.} to be paied in fourme folowyng that is to sey, at the first pˀsentacion of the Appˀntice xx{d.} and that other xx{d.} in the same yeere When he shall be enrolled And the names of the maister and appˀntice and the yeres of appˀntishode of the same appˀntice shalbe writen in a book by the said maistˀ & Wardeyns And he that disobeith this article or orden{a}nce shall pay unto ye almes of the said Craft of barbours xiij{s.} iiij{d.} that one half thereof to be applied to thuse of the said Chambre and that other half to the almes of the said Craft. And if it so be that the said Apprentice Dye w{t}in the first yere, or voide so that the said maistˀ take none avauntage by the same Appˀntice, that than the same money stonde for the next Appˀntice, And if it hapne the said maister to take any pˀfet [profit] for the said Appˀntice by way of Sale or sˀvice and that so pˀved before the said maister and Wardeyns that than the saide maister of the said Appˀntice to be charged for the said iij{s.} iiij{d.}
Then follows the usual Ratification (in Latin) of the above Articles.
1487. The next notice which we have of the Barbers in the City books, indicates that there had been quarrels and dissensions among them, and that the rules of the Craft had been set at nought by its members, whereupon a Book of Ordinances was presented to the Court of Aldermen for approval and ratification and the same is entered at this date, 20 July 2 Hen vij, in Letter-Book L. 235{B.} as follows:--
MEMORANDUM qˀd xx{o.} die Julij Anno regni Regis Henrici septum secundo, Gardiani & aɫ pˀᵬi hõies Artꝭ sive occupacõis de Barbours Civitatꝭ london venerˀ hic in Curˀ dc̃i dñi Regis in Camˀa Guilhald ejusdem Civitatꝭ coram Henrico Colet milite maiore & Aldr̃is Civitatꝭ pˀdc̃i & porrexˀunt eisdm̃ maori & Aldr̃is quandã billam sive supplicaõem Cujus tenor sequit{r.} in hec verba,
TO the right honourable lord the maire and fulle discrete sovˀaignes thaldˀmen of the Citee of london Shewen mekely unto yo{r.} good lordeship and maistˀshippes the maister and the Wardeyns and the good ffolke of the Crafte or Science of Barbours Surgeons of the said Citee that Where as they of longe tyme have been in discorde and not of oon conformite, but evˀy man in effect of the said Crafte or Science hathe taken and folowed his own singuler way and apetite as menne be[49] under no Rule nor obedience, contrarie to all godly policie for lacke of good Rules and orden{a}ncꝭ hadde and used within the same Crafte or Science, and in especiall for takyng of over many appˀnticꝭ and settyng a werk of money[50] fforeyns comyng oute of Seint Martyns, Westmynster, Suthwerk and other placꝭ nere unto this Citee to the distruccion of the good ffolke enfraunchised of the said Crafte or Science, but if[51] a remedie by yo{r} noble and grete wisdomes the rather be pˀvided in that behalf. That it wold pleas yo{r.} good lordeship and maistershippes for the good Rule and sadde[52] guydyng hereafter to be hadde amongꝭ the good ffolkꝭ of the said Crafte within the same Crafte to graunt to yo{r.} saide besechers certeyn Articles hereaftˀ ensuying from hensforth to be obsˀved and kept and afore you here in this hono{r}able Court to be establisshed and entred of Record for ever to endure.
[49] Being = living. [50] Many. [51] But if = unless. [52] Wise.
FFIRST that no pˀsone of the said Crafte or science ne none other enfraunchised within the saide Crafte and kepyng open shoppe of the same Crafte or Science within the same Cite from hensforth in any wyse pˀsume to take uppon him to sette a werke within his house or Shoppe any sˀvaunt or sˀvauntꝭ or allowes[53] or other beyng fforeyns or estraungiers, but[54] evˀry suche pˀsone so enfraunchised in the saide Crafte or science or in any other and occupie the same Crafte or Science within the Citee aforesaid present any such sˀvaunt or sˀvauntꝭ allowes and other before the maistˀs and Wardeyns of the same Crafte or Science of Barbours for the tyme beyng within iij daies next after his comyng to his saide maister to thentent that the saide maister and Wardeyns have knowledge of their habilitie and cunyng[55] before they be sette any lenger in occupac̃ion in the saide Crafte or Science, And what manˀ pˀsone[56] aforesaid hereafter be founde doyng the contrarie of this orden{a}nce shall forfeit and pay at evˀy tyme that he is so founden defectif xl{s.} the oon half thereof to be applied to thuse of the Chambre of this hono{r}able Citee and the other half to the Coẽn boxe of the said Crafte.
[53] Hired servants. [54] Unless. [55] Skill. [56] Manner of person.
ALSO that no manˀ pˀsone[57] enfraunchised in the saide Crafte or in any other kepying an open Shoppe and occupieth the same Crafte within the Citee from hensforth take or set a Werke within his house or shoppe or ellꝭ where within the same Citee any moo[58] Sˀvaunts allowes at oones[59] beyng fforeyns or Straungiers but oonly ij pˀsones and the same ij pˀsones to be pˀsented by their maister before the maister and Wardeyns of the said Crafte or Science of Barbours for the tyme beyng within iij daies next comˀyng in to suche sˀvice to their suche maistˀ And that the same fforeyns or straungiers shall take or have of their saide maister suche wages for their suche sˀvice as it shalbe thought by the saide Maister and Wardeyns of the said Crafte of Barbours that they canne desˀve and none other, And what maner of pˀsone aforesaid hereafter be founde doyng contrarie to this orden{a}ncꝭ shall forfeit at evˀry tyme that he is founde defectif v{li.} to be divided and applied to suche uses as be aforeherced.[60]
[57] Manner of person. [58] More. [59] Once. [60] Afore rehearsed.
ALSO if it fortune hereafter any pˀsone enfraunchised in the saide Crafte of barbours or in any other occupying the same Crafte of barbours within the Citee to take any mo sˀvauntꝭ allowes at oones beyng fforeyns or straungiers than onely ij as is aforeherced[61] Wherethurgh[62] he renneth in the forfaiture of the said penaltie of v{li.} for the saide offence, and than that the maister and Wardeyns of the saide Crafte of Barbours for the tyme beyng havyng knowleche therof put not the said penaltie of v{li.} in execucion accordyng to the teno{r.} of the saide Acte thereof made, within xiiij daies after that the said maistˀ and Wardeyns have knowleche thereof, that than the said maistˀ and Wardeyns for the tyme beyng so founden defectif shall forfeit and lose at evˀy tyme xiij{s.} iiij{d.} to be divided and applied to suche uses as be aforeherced.
[61] Afore rehearsed. [62] Wherethrough = whereby.
ALSO that no manˀ pˀsones enfraunchised in the said Crafte or in any other occupying the same Crafte within the said Citee from hensforth take any moo appˀntices at oones than iij uppon payne of forfaiture of v{li.} at evˀy suche tyme as he is founde defectif doyng contrarie of this Article, to be divided and applied to suche uses as be afore reherced Savyng allway that it shalbe lefull to evˀy suche pˀsone oon yeere before the tˀme of appˀntishode of any his appˀnticꝭ be expired to take a nother appˀntice in the stede of hym that is nygh com̃yng oute of his tˀmes of appˀntishode to thentent that the same newe appˀntice may have his due erudicion and lernyng in the said Crafte or Science of Barbours before the tˀmes and [63] of the rather appˀntice.
[63] A blank in the original.
ALSO if any pˀson of the said Crafte or Science selle away his appˀntice to a nother manne within his tˀmes of appˀntishode that than it shalnot be lefull to any suche pˀsone so silling away his appˀntice to take any newe in his stede duryng the tˀme to come of appˀntishode of that appˀntice so sold Nevertheles if it fortune any appˀntice to dye within the tˀmes of his appˀntishode that than it shall be laufull to the mastˀ of that appˀntice so dying to take a nother in his stede when so evˀ it shall lyke hym.
PROVIDED all way that it shalbe lefull to evˀy pˀsone of the said Crafte nowe havyng many appˀnticꝭ to reteyne and holde fulle as many appˀnticꝭ as he hathe the day of makyng of this Acte or orden{a}nce unto suche tyme as the tˀme of their appˀnticialite shalbe fully accomplisshed So all way that no suche pˀsone take any mo appˀntices unto suche tyme as the nuˀbre of the said appˀnticꝭ be reduced and brought unto the said nuˀbre of iij appˀnticꝭ uppon payn of forfaiture of v{li.} to be divided and applied to suche uses as been afore reherced.
ALSO that no foreyn Barbour from this tyme foreward occupie the Craft or Science of Barbours or Surgeon Barbo{r.} within the ffraunchise of the said Citee but if he be lymytted and assigned therto by the maister and Wardeyns of the same Craft for the tyme beyng uppon payn of forfaiture of v{li.} as often as any suche pˀsone so be founde defectif, to be divided and applied to suche uses as be aforeherced. Provided allway that if it canne be thought for the wele of the kyngꝭ people that if any foreyn Barbours or foreyn Surgeon be founden of such habilitie and connyng of Surgerie or of that Crafte that it were necessarie to have hym to occupie within the ffraunchise of this Citee, that than he be admitted therto by the Chamᵬleyn of london and by the Maister and Wardeyns of the said Crafte of Barbours for the tyme beyng, With that the same fforeyn fynde suertie sufficient to be bounde to the said Chamᵬleyn and Maister and Wardeyns for to do make him self free of the saide Crafte or Science of Surgeon Barbours and to obey and pˀfourme the Rules and ordenn{a}ncꝭ of the same Crafte and to be under the correcion of the same Crafte, provided allway that the kyngꝭ people be served in price of their Cure and shavyng in tyme to come aswell and as safely as they have been in tymes passed.
Then follows the usual Ratification (in Latin) of the above Articles.
1490. A declaration made by one Bryan Sandford, dated 8th March, 1490, was produced to the Committee of the House of Commons in 1745, in which it was stated that the Company were at that time possessed of the freehold of their Hall in Monkwell Street.
1493. On the 12th July in this year, an agreement was entered into between the Barbers’ Company and the Surgeons’ Guild which would indicate that the two bodies were now on amicable terms, working harmoniously for the increase of the credit of the profession, and for the correction of inexperienced surgeons and empirics. This “Composition” is of so interesting a nature that it is here given in full, as extracted from the fine old Book of Ordinances at the Hall; it did not unite the two bodies in any way beyond this, that they agreed to follow the same rules and practice with regard to the government of all Surgeons; that each guild was to choose two Wardens, and that the four so chosen were to act in a conjoint capacity as rulers or masters in matters surgical, and thus comprehend all Surgeons, whether of the Barbers’ Company, the Surgeons’ Guild, or “foreyns.”
This present wrytyng endentyd of copˀosicyons made the xij{th} day of July iˀ the zere of owyr lord God M{t}CCCClxxxxiij and the viij{th} zere of the reyne of kyng harry the vij{th} William Martyn then beyng mayre of this cyte of london betwyxt the ffelishippis of surgeons enfraunchesˀ w{t} in the cyte of london on that on p’ty And the felishippis of barbours surgeons and surgeons barbours enfraunchessid iˀ the seyd cyte on the other parte witnesyth that the sayde felyshippys of ther comon assent and mere moc̃yons ben c͠odescẽdyd and agreyd togethir the day and the zere aboue sayd, in mañ and fourme folowyng. That is to sey that eũy pˀson and pˀsons of the faculte or scyens of surgeons admyttyd and sworne to eyth̃ of the sayde felyshippis from hens forward shall stond and a byde w{t} ther felyshippis as they now do and dyd before thys present composicyon.
Also that from hens forth non of the sayde felyshippis shall admyt nor reseyue in to ther felishippys any alyent straungˀ or foreyn vsyng the sayde faculte or scyens of surgery w{t}owten knowleg or c͠osent of the wardẽs of bothe the seyd felishippys. All so for the welth and suerte of the kyngꝭ lege people And the honour of the seyde felyshyppys, It is agreyd be twyxt the same two felyshippis that non alyent straunger nor foreyn shall use nor ocopy the seyde faculte or scyens of surg̃y withyn this cyte or subbers of the same unto such tyme as he shewhym selfe to the mayer for the time beyng, and by the iiij wardeyns of bothe the saide felishippis, that is to sey of eyth̃ of the sayde felishippis, tweyn, and othˀ suche as by theyr wysdomys they will call vnto them, be dewly examyned & approuyd to be sufficyent of conyng and habilyte in the sayde faculte. And yf any such pˀson or pˀsones bi the sayde iiij wardens as is afore sayde be taken reputed and a lowed to be sufficient of konyng and habylite iˀ the seyd faculte or scyens of surgery that then the pˀson or pˀsonys so knowen and admyttyd shall be sworne to all the good rewlys and ordenans of y{e} seyd faculte or scyens of surgery, and to be under the coreccyon of the iiij wardens for the tyme beyng to the entent that at all tymes he may be under dwe coreccyon for the sauegard of y{e} kyngis lege people. And if any suche alyent straungˀ or foreyn of pˀsumcon refuse to be examyned of the seyde wardens in mañ & fourme as is a fore seyd, Or yf any suche straunger or foreyn so examyned be the seyde wardens be Juged onsufficient of conyng and neũtheles takyth upon hym to occupy or vse the seyde faculte of surg̃y w{t}yn the seyde cyte or subbars of the same, Then take the name of hym or them so doyng and pˀsent hym by the sayd iiij wardens to the mayer for the tyme beyng, to the entent that by his wysdom, and advice of hys honerabyll brethern may set suche direccyon as shall be thought resonabil formacion[64] therof, restrayne hym from the ocupac̃on of the same scyens w{t} in the sayde cyte. Also it is agreyd and cõpoundyd betwyxte the sayde felyshippys that from hensforth eũy of the seyde felyshippis and seũally by them selfe, Chese of themselfe two discrete pˀsons usyng the fete of surgery to be seũally wardens of the sayde seũall felishippis, and that these iiij wardens for the tyme beyng when and as oftyn as nede shall requere, Shall haue the syght and good gounaunce of the seide faculte of surgery. And eũy pˀson or pˀsonys of eũy of the sayde felyshippis that happenys or shall fortune to haue any Jeopˀde[65] or dowtefull cure, dredyng deth or mãy,[66] he or they hauing at eny tyme to come, shall shew and pˀsent the cure or curys in as short tyme as nede shall be reqˀred, And at the leste at the thyrde dressyd[67] to the saide iiij wardens for the tyme beyng, Or any other pˀson or pˀsonys that is to seye, to one of yche of the seyde felishippis, and the same wardens and yf them seme nedefull shall call unto them ij or iij, or more if nede reqˀre, of the wysest and best expˀte mẽ of the said felishippis occupyeng the saide faculte of surgery as them semeth most expedyent, for the cause or causis aforesayde. Also in this coposycion yt is ordeyned and agreyd, that none of the iiij wardens for the zere beyng neyther any other pˀson of the sayde felishippis ocopyeng the crafte of surg̃i, Put any man of thes sayde felishipis oute of ther cure otherwyse then the honeste of the crafte wolle, but that yche of them be redy to helpe eche other w{t} counsell or deed, y{t} worship profyte and the honeste of the crafte, and helpyng of the seke be had and done on all sydis. And if ony of thes iiij wardens for the tyme beyˀg or any other pˀson or pˀsonys of the seyde felyshippis do the cõtrary that eche suche doer content the valvyr[68] of the cure, After discressyon and Jugem̃et of the same iiij wardens for the zere beyng, And also for his trespas to paye aftur discression and Jugem̃et of the iiij wardens. Also if any pˀson of the sayde felishippis dislaunder or depute any of the saide felishippis onrightfully ownonestly and ef it so maye be prouyd upon hym by two or thre witnesse, that he paye for that trespas iij{s.} iiij{d.}, and ouer that to make amendis to y{e} seide pˀsons the whiche he hath so disslaunderd aftur Jugement of onest men of the seyd felyshippis not founden in non suche defaute.
[64]? “For reformation.” [65] Jeopardy. [66] Maiming. [67]? “Day” or “dressing.” [68]? “Value.”
This pˀsent cõposicyon was made the daye and zere a bowe wreton by Roberd taylour, Rob{t.} Halyday, Thom̃s Koppisley, Thom̃s Thornton, Ihoñ Harte, Johñ Marhm̃, Roberd Beuerly, James Scote, James Ingoldysby, Johñ Taylour, Richard Swedenhm̃, Nicholas Leueryng, John Wilson. In rowlid in Raffe Osterigis tyme, mayer.
Of the persons assenting to this composition, the following were Barber-Surgeons, viz.: Rob{t.} Halyday (Master 1475, 1483, 1485, 1490, 1496), James Scott (M. 1493, 1498, 1500), James Ingoldysby (M. 1501, 1506), John Taylour (M. 1523, 1524), and Nicholas Leveryng(M. 1503, 1508), the others were most likely belonging to the Guild of Surgeons.
An Ordinance by way of addenda to the above was made, imposing penalties upon any who should break any of the foregoing rules; the first offence to be punished by a fine of 10_s._, the second 20_s._, and the third offence to be remitted to the Mayor and Aldermen for punishment after their discretion.
How long this agreement, so beneficial for the practice of Surgery, continued in force is unknown; but the probabilities are that the old jealousies soon re-appeared and that each Guild worked on its own lines until 1540, as, by the uniting Act then passed, it was specially remarked as desirable that the two Companies should come together, and be incorporated in one.
1497. We shall now present to the reader’s notice a highly important document, being a diploma granted by the Master and Wardens of the Barbers’ Company to one of their freemen, enabling him to practise as a Surgeon. This is in all probability the earliest English diploma of a Surgeon extant and cannot fail by the quaintness of its composition, and the details given, to prove of much interest. We notice in it, that our Company as usual, did not fail to rehearse its prerogatives and practice, and we also observe that thus early the Company provided an instructor and examiner in the science, Dr. John Smith, before whom came in the Common Hall, Robert Anson, and in the presence of a “great audience of many right well expert men in Surgery and others, was openly examined in divers things concerning the practice,” etc.
THE LETTˀ PAT̃E OF BˀBOURS & OF SURGEOS BˀBORS.
To all trew crysten people to whom thes present lettris shall come. ROBERD HALIDAI[69] mastur of barbours and of surgeon barbours of london, and Willm̄ Okeley, John Knote[70] and Thomas Dawes[71] wardens of the same gretyng, knowe ye that wher as the moste excellent Pryns in cryst and soũeyn lord Edward by the grace of god kyng of ynglõd and of ffraunce, lord of Ierlond, for many pˀfounde cos̃ideracyons his gc̃e movyng, hathe grauntyd the well to hym ĩ cryst, the approuyd fremen the coiãlte of barbours and of surgeon barbours of the cyte of londõ, The serche and oũsyght correcyon and ponyshement, examinacon & approbacion of all fremen usyng or hauntyng the conyng of surgery and barbory, And of all maner of men foreyns usyng or hauntyng any pˀticuler pˀte of surgery withyn the seyde cyte or subbers ther of, As a bowte new woundys, olde soris, and other lesyons what so eũ they be, Also in drawyng of teeth ventosyng scarificacons and suche othˀ manwall operac̃ons, lyke as the lettres patentes of owre seyde lege lord the kyng ther upon made planyly may apere. We therfore the saide Roberde, Willm̄, John̄ & Thom̄s at this tyme masturs and wardens of the saide felishyp, ffor the comyn pˀfyte weth[72] and relefe socour of owr lordis the kyngꝭ lege people, entẽdyng to pˀuyde men of good capasite and abill ĩ maners and conyng, sufficiently lerned, enfourmed, and labored by long experyens, and other in the seide craft of surgery,--haue prayed and requyred mastur John̄ Smyth doctour ĩ phesik, Instructour & examener of the seide feliship, and be[73] the same for that intent chosen and elect to entur & examynacyon for the cawses a boue saide, w{t} divers pˀsons whiche long tyme, w{t}owte auctorite, haue vsed and haunted w{t} experyens the conyng of surgery, wheruppon aftur dewe and dyuers monycions made in this be halue, ROBERD ANSON on of the seide coĩalte at the comyn hall of the same ĩ london appered, ĩ his pˀpyr pˀson, the first day of August last past, submyttyng hym selfe to the examync̃on and thaposicion,[74] wher and when the seide Roberd by the sayde John̄ Smyth, in a gret audiens of many ryght well expert men ĩ surgery & other, was op̃yly examyned ĩ dyuers thingꝭ cõcernyng the practise opˀatife and directif in the seyde crafte of Surgery. And the{r} albe it he hathe a fore this many tymys been well approuyd, ʒet now he is newly habelyd, be[75] the seyde doctour and felyship, and founde abyll and discrete to ocopy & vse the practise of surgery, as well a bowte new woundis, as cansers, fystelis, vlceracions & many other disessis & dyuers; & the same Robert thus aprouyd and abelyd we haue, as an expert man ĩ the seyd faculte, aprouyed and abeled to ocupy & practyse in the seyd faculte, ĩ eũy place, when and as ofte as hym best lyketh we haue lycensid hym and graũtid to hym by thes pˀsentes. ĩ witnes wherof we haue putte the comyn seale of barbours and of surgeon bˀbours of london, geuen at london ĩ the comyn hall of the seyd Comõnalte the viij day of August the zere of oure lord god M{t}CCCClxxxxvij.
[69] Master 1475, 1483, 1485, 1490, 1496. [70] Master 1510. [71] Master 1504. [72] Wealth. [73] By. [74] “The apposition”==the questioning. [75] By.
1499. In this year the Company obtained from Henry VII a confirmation of their Charter, paying but 20_s._ for the same. This Inspeximus Charter recites and confirms that of Edward IV with the very noticeable exceptions, that four Masters or Governors are named instead of two, and that they are described as of “the Mystery of Barbers and Surgeons,” and not “Barbers” only, as in Edward’s grant.
The original, in excellent preservation, with the great seal of England pendant, is at the Hall, and the text is as follows:--
HENRICUS dei gracia Rex Anglie Francie & Dominus Hibernie Omnibʒ ad quos pˀsentes littere pervenerunt, salutem. Inspeximus litteras patentes recolende memorie domine E. quarti nuper Regis Anglie progenitoris nostri factas in hec verba. EDWARDUS dei gracia . . . . . . . . Teste me ipso apud Westmonasteriũ vicesimo quarto die Februarii Anno regni nostri primo. NOS AUTEM litteras predictas ac omnia & singula in eis contenta rata habentes et grata ea pro nobis et heredibus nostris quantum in nobis est acceptamus & approbamus ac dilectis ligeis nostris Rico Haywarde Jacobo Holand Johanni Robertson et Johanni Boteler nunc Magistris sive Gubernatoribʒ mistere BARBITONSOꝜ et SIRURGICOꝜ infra Civitatem nrãm predc̃am & eoꝜ Successoribʒ per pˀsentes ratificamus et confirmamus sicut lrẽ predc̃e rõnabilis testantˀ IN CUJUS rei testiom̄ has lr̃as nr̃as fieri fecimus patentes. TESTE me ip̃o apud Westm̄ quinto die Decembris Anno regni nostri quinto decimo.
CLERK. pro viginti solidis solutis in hanaperio.
(Endorsed.)
Intratur in libro signato cum lr̃a. m. tempore Nich̃i Alwyne maioris Civitatis londoñ Anno Regni Regis Henrici septum quinto decimo.
PAKENHAM.
TRANSLATION.
HENRY by the grace of God, King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland, To all to whom these present letters shall come, health. WE have inspected the letters patent of the Lord Edward the fourth, of gracious memory, late King of England, our progenitor, made in these words, “EDWARD by the grace of God . . . . . . . . Witness my self at Westminster the 24th day of February in the first year of our reign.” WE ALSO, the aforesaid letters, and all and singular therein contained ratifying and granting, for us and our heirs, as much as in us lies do accept and approve, and to our beloved lieges, Richard Haywarde, James Holand, John Robertson, and John Boteler, now Masters or Governors of the Mystery of BARBERS and SURGEONS within our City aforesaid, and to their successors, by these presents, do ratify and confirm, as in the aforesaid letters is reasonably testified. IN WITNESS whereof, we have caused these our letters to be made patent. WITNESS myself at Westminster the fifth day of December in the fifteenth year of our reign.
CLERK. for twenty shillings paid into the hanaper.
(Endorsed.)
Entered in the book marked with the letter m. in the time of Nicholas Alwyne, Mayor of the City of London, in the fifteenth year of the reign of King Henry the Seventh.
PAKENHAM.
1511. In this year an Act of Parliament was passed, which infringed on the privileges of the Barbers’ Company, inasmuch as it placed the approbation and licensing of Surgeons in the hands of certain clerical dignitaries, to wit, the Bishop of London and Dean of St. Paul’s (while for the country the several Bishops or their Vicars general were nominated). This Act was possibly the outcome of some laxity on the part of our Company, or of an intolerable growth of quackery, with which it could not cope, the pretenders to surgical knowledge being a “great multitude” of ignorant persons, and women, using sorcery, witchcraft and noxious remedies. This Act of Parliament (3 Hen. VIII, cap. XI) as given below, is from an original copy in the possession of Mr. Charles J. Shoppee (Master 1878).
¶ AN ACTE CONCERNYNG THE APPROBATION OF PHISICIONS AND SURGIONS.
To the kyng our souerayne lorde, and to all the lordes spiritual and temporall, & comoñs in this present parlyament assembled. FORASMOCHE as the science and connynge of phisike & surgerie (to the perfet knowlege whereof, be requisite both great lernyng and rype experience) is dayly within this realme exercised by a great multitude of ignorant pˀsons: of whome the great part haue no maner of insight in the same, nor in any other kynde of lernynge, some also can no letters on the boke, so farforthe that common artificers, as smythes, weauers, and women, boldely and customably take upon them greate cures and thinges of greate difficultie: in the whiche they partly use sorcerye, and witchcrafte, partly apply suche medicines unto the disease, as be very noyous and nothyng metely therfore to the highe displeasure of god, great infamye to the facultie, and the greuous hurte, damage, and destruction of many of the kynges liege people: most specially of them that can not discerne the unconnynge from connynge. Be it therfore (to the suertie and comforte of all maner people) by auctoritie of this present parliament enacted, that no persone within the citie of London, nor within seuen myles of the same, take upon hym to exercise and occupie as a phisition or surgion, excepte he be fyrst examyned, approued, and admytted by the byshop of London, or by the deane of Paules, for the tyme beinge, calling to hym or them foure doctours of phisike, and for surgery, other experte persons in that facultie, and for the fyrste examination suche as they shall thynke conuenient, and afterwarde alway foure of them that haue ben so approued, upon the peine of forfayture, for euery moneth that they do occupie as phisitions or surgions, not admytted nor examyned after the tenour of this acte, of v.li. to be enployed the one halfe therof to thuse of our soueraine lorde the kynge, and the other halfe therof to any person that wyll sue for it by action of dette, in whiche no wager of lawe nor protection shalbe alowed.
¶ And ouer this, that no persone out of the sayd citie and precinte of vii. myles of the same, except he haue ben (as is aforesayd) approued in y{e} same, take upon hym to exercise and occupie as a phisition or surgion, in any diocesse within this realme, but if he be fyrste examined and approued by the bysshoppe of the same dyocese, or he beynge out of the dioces by his vycare generall: either of them callyng to them suche experte persones in the sayde faculties, as their discretion shal thynke conuenient, and gyuyng theyr letters testimonials under theyr seale to hym that they shall so approue, upon lyke peyne to them that occupie contrary to this acte (as is above sayde) to be leuied and employed after the forme before expressed.
¶ Prouyded alway, that this acte nor any thynge therin contayned, be preiudiciall to the uniuersities of Oxforde and Cambrydge or eyther of them, or to any priuileges graunted to them.
This Act seems to have invested the Bishops, etc., with the power of licensing all Surgeons, and if so, would have taken away that privilege from our Company; the point is however doubtful, and I am inclined to think that the Act did not operate to the prejudice of the Company, only in so far as it suffered from the existence of another licensing authority.
Mr. D’Arcy Power has pointed out that the Act very soon became unpopular, and that it was almost immediately practically repealed by another one, which provided that it should be “lawful to any person being the king’s subject, having knowledge or experience of the nature of herbs, etc., to minister in and to any outward sore or wound according to their cunning.” (Memorials of the Craft of Surgery, p. 85.)
This latter Act, which in its effect would flood the land with quacks, must however have remained the law until the Act of 32 Hen. VIII, whereby the Barber-Surgeons were reinstated in their ancient rights; and it is the fact, that down to the 18th Century the Ecclesiastics claimed and enforced their rights (under the Act 3 Hen. VIII) to license Surgeons, notwithstanding other Acts passed since then, which although not expressly extinguishing their power, certainly did not save it. The Barber-Surgeons’ Company seem to have examined the Surgeons, and, if approved, to have given a certificate under Seal, which was presented to the Bishop who thereupon issued his licence. This practice was not however universal, and I think only applied to some Surgeons who were not free of the Company. In some cases the Bishop licensed Surgeons, without reference to the Company, and thousands have been licensed by the Company without regard to the Bishop. It is almost impossible to say now what course was followed, the practice certainly varying with the times (see Surgery).
1513. In this year an Act of Parliament was passed exempting Surgeons from juries, inquests, etc. This must have been passed in the interest of the Surgeons’ Guild, as the Barber-Surgeons were surely exempt under their Charter from Edward IV.
1512. The Barbers’ Company having applied to the King (Henry VIII) for a confirmation of their Charter, their request was acceded to. Henry is, on more than one occasion, spoken of in the books as “our patron,” and there is no doubt but that he was very friendly both to our Company and to individual members of it, as witness his gift of the grace cup, and the legacies in his will to various members of the Company, with some of whom, as Pen, Harman, Ayliff, etc., he was on as intimate terms as a king could be with a subject; there would therefore be, we may be sure, but little difficulty in obtaining an Inspeximus.
In one of our Minute Books, Thomas Knot (Master 1555) has transcribed what purports to be a copy of Henry’s Inspeximus Charter with the date 12{th} of May “in the xviij{th} yere of our Reigne” (i.e., 1526), and he appends a certificate that he has compared and agreed it with the original! Now we possess the original at Barbers’ Hall and it is dated 12{th} March 3{rd} Henry VIII (i.e., 1512), and it would indeed be a strange thing for Henry VIII in 1526 to recite and confirm Henry VII’s Charter, when he had already done so in 1512. Moreover I have searched the Patent Rolls and whilst there is no record in 1526, there is the entry of the 1512 Charter, and further to fix the date, both Philip and Mary, and Elizabeth in their Inspeximus Charters recite the 1512 Charter.
It has been necessary to enter into this detail, as the date of the Charter is important when we come to consider Holbein’s picture; and as my friend Mr. D’Arcy Power has (p. 338) quoted this pretended Charter not having seen the real one, he, very naturally trusting old Thomas Knot’s statement, has fallen into the pit dug some three hundred years ago.
The following is the Text of the Charter, and it will not be necessary to append a translation, as it follows much on the same lines as that of Henry VII:--
HENRICUS dei gracia Rex Anglie et Francie et Dominus Hibernie OMNIBUS ad quos presentes Irẽ pˀvenerunt saltmˀ INSPEXIMUS litteras patentes domini H. nuper Rˀgis Anglie septum patris nostri precarissimi de confirmacione factas in hec verba HENRICUS dei gracia . . . . . . Teste me ip̃o apud Westmonasterium quinto die Decembrˀ Anno regni nr̃i quinto decimo. NOS AUTEM litteras predictas ac omnia & singula in eisdem contenta rata hentẽs & grata ea pro nobis & heredibus nr̃is quantum in nobis est acceptamus & approbamus ac dilectis ligeis nr̃is Johĩ Peerson Wil̃l̃o Kyrkeby Thome Gybson & Thome Martyn nunc Magistris sive Gubernatoribus mistere BARBITONSORUM et SIRURGICORUM infra Civitatem nrãm predictam & eorum successoribus per presentes ratificamus & confirmamus sicut lrẽ predicte rõnabiliter testantur. IN CUJUS rei testimonium has lrãs nrãs fieri fecimus patentes. TESTE me ip̃o apud Westmonasterium duodecimo die Marcii Anno regni nr̃i tercio.
YONG.
pro viginti solidis solutis in Hanapˀio.
The Great Seal, though still pendant, has been considerably damaged.
1525. This year the Company received a Precept from the Mayor, ordering them to provide for the “Midsummer Watch.”
TO THE WARDENS OF THE BARBER SURGEONS,
We woll and charge you that for the hounour of this Citie ye do ordeyne & pˀpare ageinst the watches to be kept within this Citie in the nightꝭ of the vigilles of Sent John Baptist & Seint Peter nowe next comynge iiij honest & comely pˀsones suche as ye will answere for, w{t} Bowes & arrowes clenely harneysed and arrayed yn Jakettꝭ of whytte, havynge tharmes of this Citie, to waytte and attende uppon us in the said Watches, And to come to Blackwell Hall and there to be, for the not fayllynge hereof as ye tendre the honour of this Citie and also will answere at your pẽlls. Gyven in the Guihall of the said Citie the xiiij day of Junij the xvij year of the Reigne of our Soveraigne lorde King Henry the viij{th.}
An Act of Parliament was passed in the 20th Henry VII, which provided that the governing bodies of Guilds should not make any by-laws or ordinances, without the same should be approved by the Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer, and the Chief Justices of the King’s Bench and Common Pleas, or any three of them, etc., and in 1530 our Company, being desirous of settling many points for the government of the mystery, drew up a long set of interesting Ordinances, which were presented to Sir Thomas More the Chancellor, Sir John Fitzjames and Sir Robert Norwiche the Chief Justices, and were signed by them on the 14th May, 1530. The original (with More’s autograph) is at the Hall, and after reciting the Act of 20th Henry VII, ordains the following oaths and articles:--
The oath of a freeman. The oath of the Masters and Governors with directions as to searches. Ordinance as to attending on summons. " " quarterage. " " presentation of apprentices. " " number of servants to be kept by freemen and liverymen. " " wages of servants. " " enticing away of servants. " " opening shop. " " teaching the mystery to any but apprentices. " " sueing brother freemen at common law. " " “opprobrios condicions or dishonest wordes.” " " refusal to come on the Livery, and admission into the Livery. " " Sunday trading. " " presenting patients in danger of death. " " reading Lectures concerning Surgery. " " supplanting another of his patient. " " the Dinners. " " excess of words in debate. " " departing from the Common assembly. " " seniority. " " Barbers setting up shop.
Sir Thomas More’s Ordinances, as above, will be found in full in the Appendix B, the transcript being made from the original.[76]
[76] The copy of these Ordinances given by Mr. D’Arcy Power (p. 339) is taken from one made by our old friend Thomas Knot, and is not literally, though it is substantially, accurate.
1540. This year is one of the most memorable in the annals of the Barber-Surgeons, as it witnessed the union of the unincorporated Guild of Surgeons, with their more accredited fellow-craftsmen, the incorporated Company of Barbers. It has been suggested by more than one writer that such an union is shrouded in mystery, difficult of explanation, and that in those days, with science advancing (slowly, it is true), it might have been expected that we should read of a divorcement, rather than a combination of two crafts, which then, as now, were dissimilar both in their operations, and in the training and intelligence necessary for their practice.
But it is essential to bear in mind that though the Charter of Edward IV was ostensibly to the Barbers, it really was granted to a fraternity, which to a great extent practised as Barber-Surgeons, some of whom were Surgeons pure and simple, others combined both branches, while others still carried on the more humble craft of Shavers and Hair-Dressers; those of the Company who practised Surgery did no doubt consider it a reproach to be dubbed “Barbers,” and for distinction sake called themselves and were well known as “Barber-Surgeons,” indeed they had so far established this title to themselves and to their Company, as to get it recognised and so named in the Inspeximus Charter of Henry VII (less than forty years after their original Charter as “Barbers” had been granted to them). This is to a great extent confirmed by the words of the Act now about to be referred to, which distinctly says that there was then a Company of “Surgeons occupyinge and exercisynge the sayde scyence and faculty of surgery . . . . . . commonly called the Barbours of London.”
The Union therefore was not a joining of Barbers with Surgeons (THAT had existed from the earliest times), but was the consolidation of the “Guild of Surgeons” with another body of Surgeons who were incorporated, and practised under the name of “Barbers” in conjunction with actual working Barbers; and, as the Act provided what the Surgeons should and should not do, and the like as to actual Barbers, limiting their operations also, most if not all difficulty and apparent incongruity in the union seems to vanish.
The Act (32 Hen. VIII, cap. 42) which will well repay perusal, settled the Barber-Surgeons in their corporate capacity for many a long year; under it the old rival society disappeared, it being declared that the two Companies should be united, so that by their assembling together, the science of Surgery might be fostered and improved; whereupon it was enacted that they should be incorporated under the style of “THE MAISTERS OR GOVERNOURS OF THE MYSTERY AND COMMINALTE OF BARBOURS AND SURGEONS OF LONDON.” The property of the old Company of Barbers was handed over to the new Corporation (the Guild of Surgeons are not said to have had any property to bring into the new concern). The usual grant of a common seal, of power to plead and to be impleaded, to hold lands, etc., will be seen at large in the Act. The Surgeons of the Company were to be exempt from bearing armour or being put into watches and inquests. The dead bodies of four malefactors were assigned to the Company yearly for dissections. And, inasmuch as various persons exercising the faculty of Surgery used to take into their houses for cure, people afflicted with the pestilence and other contagious diseases and “do use or exercise barbari, as washynge or shavyng and other feates thereunto belonging,”[77] the same was declared “veraie perillous,” and it was enacted that no one using the faculty of Surgery should practise Barbery, and that no Barber should practise any point in Surgery, the drawing of teeth only excepted. The Surgeons were to exhibit a sign in front of their houses, and no Barber was to exercise his calling unless free of the Company. Four Masters were to rule the Company, whereof two were to be Barbers and two Surgeons. A penalty was named for offenders against the articles, all were to pay scot and lot, and private persons might keep their own Barber or Surgeon, without interference by the Company.
[77] Here we have the common practice of the joint craftsman, the “Barber-Surgeon,” clearly indicated.
The Act was passed on the 24th July, 1540, and will be found in Appendix C. being taken from the original Black-letter copy in the Author’s possession.
We now refer to the Company’s chief treasure, the Holbein picture, and are at once met with a difficulty; does it represent the granting of a Charter to the Company? if so, the year was 1512; or does it illustrate the union of the Barbers and Surgeons by Act of Parliament? if so, the year was 1540.
The picture exhibits a Charter with the Great Seal pendant, and has always been popularly known and described as the “granting of the Charter to the Barber-Surgeons.” On the other hand, however, the King was but 21 years of age in 1512 and 49 years in 1540, which latter age accords with the picture; moreover, Vicary, Ayleff, Harman, and the others represented, were members of the Court in the latter year, but not in 1512. These considerations are sufficient to demolish the “Charter” theory, and point to the hypothesis that it is the Union of the Barbers’ Company with the Guild of Surgeons, accomplished by Act of Parliament in 1540, which is commemorated, but then we must admit a licence on the part of Holbein (which deceived no one at the time), when he indulged his artist’s fancy by putting into the King’s hand a Charter with seal pendant, instead of an Act of Parliament, which latter would not indeed have been the King’s function to hand to the Company, and would probably, if represented, have been depicted as a mere roll, and not therefore so artistic or effective as a Charter with a Seal in the King’s hand.
The Act received the Royal Assent 25th July, 1540; this would be towards the close of the year of John Pen’s mastership. Vicary, who is receiving the Instrument, was Master from September, 1541, to September, 1542; there is every probability that the painting was executed during his year of office, and that is why Holbein paid him the compliment of putting him in the chief position in the painting, which after all was intended, not as a strictly historical, but rather as a commemorative picture.
The picture is 10 feet 2 inches long by 5 feet 11 inches high, painted on oak panel and contains nineteen figures; it represents a room in the palace (said to have been Bridewell), which is hung with beautiful tapestry and appears to have been gilded; the King is seated on a throne, his age apparently about fifty, the complexion florid, the hair sandy, the eyes small but animated and restless; the expression on the countenance is impatience, and he seems thrusting the document hastily into the hand of Thomas Vicary, who receives it kneeling, on his left; the face altogether might be pronounced handsome, were it not for the low forehead and contracted eyebrows; he has on his left thumb a signet ring, and other rings on the first and fourth fingers of his right hand with which he holds a sword of state resting on his knee; on his head is a jewelled crown; on his left leg the garter, and round his neck the collar of the Order; the mantle is short and of crimson velvet; all these ornaments are most beautifully executed and are as fine as miniature painting; every hair of his head is distinct, and the texture of his robe is finely given; his impatience seems to have warmed him, and the rising colour flushing over his face is most admirably painted. On the King’s right are three grave and closely shaved personages on their knees. The first is Dr. John Chambre, one of the Royal Physicians, he is represented in a skull cap and furred gown, the sleeves very large and in which his hands are enwrapped; from the expression of his countenance it would seem that he was anything but pleased with the provisions of the Act, as the face has a sullen and discontented look; next to him is the celebrated Dr. William Butts, also one of Henry’s Physicians, and behind him is Thomas Alsop, the Royal Apothecary, his hair is long and lank, and features coarse and hard.
On the King’s left are fifteen members of the Court on their knees, and in livery gowns, evidently specially sumptuous for the occasion, being of brocaded or damask silk, trimmed with fur, and each man wears a livery hood of red and black upon his shoulder. The first of these is Thomas Vicary, Serjeant-Surgeon, who wears a gold chain; next comes Sir John Ayleff, Surgeon to the King, also with a gold chain and a ring on his finger, the next is Nicholas Simpson, King’s Barber, who, like Vicary and Ayleff, wears a skull cap, all the others have their heads bare. Then comes Edmund Harman, King’s Barber, and one of the Witnesses to Henry’s Will, he wears a gold chain; next him is James Monforde, King’s Surgeon, then John Pen, the King’s Barber, and Nicholas Alcocke; the expression on the countenances of all these men is grave and solemn; the next, Richard Ferris, who has a somewhat merrier face, and was also King’s Surgeon, completes the front row. The moustaches and beards of the whole, including the King, would appear as if they had had great care and attention bestowed upon them. Of the remaining seven figures in the back row, the names of but two have been preserved, viz., Christopher Salmond and William Tilley.
This picture of Holbein’s is not surpassed, if indeed it is equalled, by any other of that master, every part is most elaborately and delicately finished; the position of none of the figures is constrained, and there is no attempt at theatrical effect, yet every person represented is in action, the colouring is chaste, and kept down, nor is there any of that hardness and stiffness often observed in Holbein’s pictures. Its reputation has been truly said to be world-wide, whilst it has been eulogistically described by some one to be “as glowing as a Titian, and minutely faithful as a Gerard Dow.”[78]
[78] Part of the above description has been adapted from an anonymous paragraph, which I found interleaved in Allen’s History of London, at the Guildhall Library.
The names of the persons represented have been somewhat rudely affixed to their effigies, probably a few years after the picture was painted, and whilst we cannot but deplore the disfigurement, it is more than compensated for, as the means of identification of so many of our illustrious predecessors. The tablet, with inscription, has been said to be of later date than Holbein’s work, and to have been painted over a window, through which was once seen the old church of St. Bride; this, however, is most improbable, as it is personally dedicatory to Henry. The inscription is as follows:--
HENRICO OCTAVO OPT MAX: REGI ANGLIÆ FRANCIÆ ET HIBERNIÆ FIDEI DEFENSORI AC ANGLICANÆ HIBERNICÆQ ECCLESIÆ PROXIME A CHRISTO SVPREMO CAPITI SOCIETAS CHIRVRGORVM COMMVNIBVS VOTIS HÆC CONSECRAT.
TRISTIOR ANGLORVM PESTIS VIOLAVERAT ORBEM INFESTANS ANIMOS CORPORIBVSQVE SEDENS HANC DEVS INSIGNEM CLADEM MISERATVS AB ALTO TE MEDICI MVNVS JVSSIT OBIRE BONI LVMEN EVANGELII FVLVIS CIRCVMVOLAT ALIS PHARMACON AD FECTIS MENTIBVS ILLVD ERIT CONSILIOQ TVO CELEBRANT MONVMENTA GALENI ET CELERI MORBVS PELLITVR OMNIS OPE NOS IGITVR SVPPLEX MEDICORVM TVRBA TVORVM HANC TIBI SACRAMVS RELIGIONE DOMVM MVNERIS ET MEMORES QVO NOS HENRICE BEASTI IMPERIO OPTAMVS MAXIMA QVE QVE TVO.
TRANSLATION.
To Henry the Eighth, the best and greatest King of England, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, and next to Christ, supreme head of the Church of England and Ireland, the Company of Surgeons dedicate these, with their united prayers.
A grievous plague had ravaged the region of England, Afflicting man’s spirits and penetrating his frame; God, pitying from on high this remarkable scourge Commanded thee to perform the office of a good physician.
The light of the gospel flies around on glowing wings, This will be the balm to enfeebled minds: Whilst the disciples of Galen meet to raise a monument to thee, And all disease is swiftly dispelled by thy power.
We, therefore, a suppliant band of thy Physicians, Solemnly dedicate this house to thee, And mindful of the favour with which thou, O Henry, hast blessed us, Invoke the greatest blessings on thy rule.
The following fragmentary notices of the persons represented in the picture, will be found of some interest.
The first figure to the left is Thomas Alsop; he was the King’s Apothecary, and Henry VIII, by his will, left him 100 marks.
Next to him is Dr. William Butts, one of the King’s physicians, ever famous for his memorable interference with the King on behalf of Archbishop Cranmer in 1544, when the Roman Catholic party in the Council endeavoured to procure Cranmer’s committal to the Tower. A full account of this incident will be found in Strype’s Memorials of Cranmer (Oxford Ed., 1812, pp. 177-181), and Shakespeare in his play of Henry VIII (act v., sc. 2) has also graphically described it. Cranmer’s Secretary, aware of Butts’ great influence with the King, sent for the Doctor, and acquainted him with the slight which had been put upon the Archbishop by keeping him standing in the ante-room of the Council Chamber among lacqueys and servingmen, upon which Butts immediately repaired to the King, and said:--
“I’ll show your Grace the strangest sight, The high promotion of his Grace of Canterbury: Who holds his State at door, ’mongst pursuivants, Pages and foot boys.”
whereupon Henry replies,--
“Ha! ’tis he indeed! Is this the honour they do one another? ’Tis well there’s one above them. Yet, I had thought They had parted so much honesty among ‘em (At least good manners) as not thus to suffer A man of his place and so near our favour, To dance attendance on their lordships’ pleasures, And at the door too, like a post with packets, By Holy Mary! Butts, there’s knavery. Let them alone, and drawn the curtain close: We shall hear more anon.”
Henry spoke his mind so freely to the Council, that they one and all shook hands with the Archbishop, and, as Strype says, “Never more durst any man spurn him during King Henry’s life.”
Dr. Butts must have had the best practice of any man of his time; there are several references to him among the State papers at the Record Office, of which the following are a few examples, and indicate that his patients were the aristocracy of the day.
25th May, 1524. Among the funeral expenses of Sir Thomas Lovell, K.G., is this item:--“To John Hewson, riding to Cambridge, to fetch Dr. Buttes when my master was sick, 4_s._ 8_d._”
28th April, 1525. The Duke of Norfolk, writing to Cardinal Wolsey, says that last night at 7 o’clock the Lord Marney was “drawyng the draghts of deth, and Mr. Butts determyned he shuld not lyve after 5 owrys” (hours).
14th October, 1525. A warrant was signed by Wolsey, directed to Sir Andrew Windsor, for delivery to Dr. Butts, who had been appointed physician to my lady Princess, of a livery in blue and green, in damask for himself, and in cloth for his two servants.
17th May, 1528. In a letter from the Duke of Norfolk to Wolsey, the Duke says that Mr. Butts had come to him from the King, without whose aid he thought that he should not have recovered from his sickness.
23rd June, 1528. In a letter from Brian Tuke (to Cardinal Wolsey) he speaks of an infection which had been much about of late, and how the King told him that Mistress Ann Boleyn and my lord Rochford both have had it; what jeopardy they have been in, by the turning in of the sweat before the time; of the endeavour of Mr. Buttes who hath been with them in his return; and finally of their perfect recovery.
19th January, 1530. A letter from De Augustinis, written from the palace at Esher, to Cromwell, desires that Dr. Butts or Dr. Walter Cromer may be sent to the Cardinal and requesting that Balthazar the physician, may be spoken to, to obtain some leeches; no time was to be lost and the doctors were to bring with them some vomitive electuary.
Dr. Butts was a personal friend of Henry’s, who, in 1537, granted him the manor and advowson of Thornage, in Norfolk. He died 17th November, 1545, and lies buried in Fulham Church, where there is (or was) a monument to his memory.
Next to Butts, and immediately to the King’s right, is Dr. John Chambre; he was physician to and a great favorite of Henry’s, holding several clerical preferments as well. He was a Fellow and Warden of Merton College, Oxon, where he was admitted Doctor of Physic, 29th October, 1531. In the list of persons to whom Wolsey, in 1526, assigned lodgings at the King’s house, when they should repair thither, occurs the name of Dr. Chambre. There is also a catalogue of the King’s new year’s gifts, in 1528, by which it appears that the Doctor had a piece of plate weighing 24-3/8 ozs., at the same time the Cardinal’s gift was 40-1/4 ozs., and that of the Archbishop 31 ozs.
In Brian Tuke’s letter (23rd June, 1528), before referred to, he tells Wolsey that when he called on the King with his letters, he found him in “secret communication with his physician, Mr. Chambre, in a tower, where he sometimes sups apart.”
Dr. Chambre was Dean of St. Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster, Canon of Windsor, Archdeacon of Bedford, Prebendary of Comb and Harnham in Salisbury Cathedral, Treasurer of Wells Cathedral, and beneficed in Somersetshire and Yorkshire. Truly the lines had fallen unto him in pleasant places!
He was one of the physicians in attendance on Queen Jane, at the birth of Edward VI, and in a letter written by him to the Privy Council, concerning the Queen’s critical state, he signs himself “priest.” He was also in attendance on Anne Boleyn, in her confinement with Elizabeth. His name is mentioned with that of Linacre and three others, in the Charter to the College of Physicians, in 1518.
Sir William Compton, K.G., in 1522, nominated Dr. Chambre one of his executors, in conjunction with the Bishop of Exeter, and Sir Henry Marney, Lord Privy Seal.
Dr. Chambre built a “very curious cloyster,” in St. Stephen’s Chapel, which cost him 11,000 marks, and he gave the canons of that chapel some lands. He died in 1549.
On the King’s left is, first, Thomas Vicary (sometimes Vicars and Vyccary), Master of the Barbers in 1530, and of the Barber-Surgeons in 1541, 1546, 1548 and 1557. He was a man of great eminence in his profession, having been Surgeon to St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, and Serjeant-Surgeon to Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary and Elizabeth. He was the author of “The Profitable Treatise of Anatomy” in “The Englishman’s Treasure, with the true Anatomie of Man’s Body.” An account of Vicary will be found in D’Arcy Power, pp. 102, etc., and several particulars relating to his connection with St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, are recorded in a paper by Dr. Norman Moore (Hospital Reports, vol. xviii, pp. 333-358); see also Dr. Furnivall’s exhaustive account (Early English Text Society).
Next comes Sir John Ayleff (Aylif, Aylyff, etc.). He was Master of the Barbers in 1538, and Surgeon to the King, with whom he was doubtless on terms of friendship, as Henry bequeathed him 100 marks. Ayleff treated Henry for fistula and cured him, at Brinkworth in Wilts, for which the King bestowed upon him a great estate there in gratification. He subsequently became a Merchant of Blackwell Hall, Sheriff of London in 1548, and Alderman of Bridge Without in 1550.
17th July, 1550. In the Repertories of the Court of Aldermen is a Record that the Court of the Barber-Surgeons gave their assent to the Translation of Sir John from theirs to the Grocers’ Company, of which Company he was crowned Upper Warden 9th June, 1556.
Sir John Ayleff was buried 20th October, 1556, in the Church of St. Michael Bassishaw, where there was formerly a marble tomb with this inscription thereon--
In Chirurgery brought up in youth, A Knight here lyeth dead; A Knight and eke a Surgeon such As England seld hath bred. For which so soveraigne Gift of God Wherein he did excell, King Henry VIII call’d him to Court, Who lov’d him dearly well. God gave the Gift, the King gave Goods, The Gift of God t’enhance; Where God and such a Prince do joyne, Such Man hath happy Chance. King Edward for his service sake, Bade him rise up a Knight, A name of Praise and ever since He, Sir John Ailiffe hight, Right Worshipful, in name and charge In London lived he than, In Blackwell Hall the merchant chiefe First Sheriffe, then Alderman. The Hospitals bewaile his death The Orphan children mone, The chiefe Erector being dead And Benefactor gone. Dame Isabel who lived with him, His faithful Wife and Mate, With him (as dearest after death) Doth not her Knight forsake The Knight the 24[79] of October. Yeelded up his breath, And she soon after followed To live with him in death.
[79] Probably a mistake for 14th.
19 April, 1558. My lady Aylyff gave a fyne table cloth of damaske worcke to sr̃ve for the uppermost table in the hawle the w{ch} of her jentyllness she gave frely unto this hawle.
John Ayleff (son of the Knight) was admitted to the freedom of the Barber-Surgeons, 3rd June, 1552.
Next to Sir John Ayleff, is Nicholas Simpson, concerning whom nothing is known to me, but that he was “King’s Barber,” and Master of the Barbers in 1537.
Edmund Harman, “King’s Barber,” follows next; he was admitted to the freedom in 1530, and served Master in 1540. Henry VIII bequeathed him 200 marks, and he was one of the attesting witnesses to the King’s will. There are several references to him among the State Papers and Household Ordinances. His dignified bearing and expression in the picture are very striking.
James Monforde (or Mumford), “King’s Surgeon,” is next; he was Upper Warden in 1540 and again in 1543, but never served as Master. He gave the Company their silver hammer, still used by the Masters in presiding at Courts.
Then comes John Pen (Penn or Penne), “King’s Barber,” and Groom of the Privy Chamber; he was admitted to the freedom in 1527 and was Master 1539. He married Lucy, daughter and heiress of Edmond Chevall, of Coddicote, Herts, by whom he had a good estate and seven children (vide Harl. Soc. Pub. xxii., 82 & 116).
In Liber Niger Domus Regis (Harl. MS. 642) among the orders made for the regulation of the Household of Henry VIII was one, that none but fifteen persons whose names are specified should be allowed to enter the Privy Chamber, and one of these is John Penne.
The following quaint regulation, concerning the King’s Barber, is to be found in the same MS.--
Item. It is alsoe ordeyned that the Kingꝭ Barbor shalbe daylie by the Kingꝭ upriseinge readdye and attendant in the Kingꝭ Privye Chamber there haveinge in reddynesse his Water Basons Knyvesꝭ Combes scissourꝭ and such other stuffe as to his Roome doth appertaine for trymminge and dressinge of the Kingꝭ heade and bearde. And that the sayd Barbour take a speciall regarde to the pure and cleane keepinge of his owne p’son and apparrell useinge himselfe allwayes honestlye in his conversationne withoute resortinge to the Companye of vile personnes or of misguided woemen in avoydeinge such daunger as by that meanes hee might doe unto the Kingꝭ most Royall person not fayling thus to doe uppon payne of looseinge his Roome and farther punnishement at the Kingꝭ pleasure.
In this MS. is also to be found an earlier order, of the time of Edward IV touching the King’s Barber, which is curious, as indicating that Saturday night was then (as still it is with many) “tub night” with the King; and we may also infer from the expression “if it please the King to cleanse his head, legs or feet,” that it was not a fixed rule for him to do so every Saturday night.
A BARBOUR for the Kingis most highe and drad p’son to be taken in this Court, after that he standeth in degree gentleman yoman or groome. It hath bin much accustomed to one or two well knowne officers of the Ewrie in housold Daily of such as bene for the monthe Sergeant or othir. Also we finde how this hath bene used amonge by a weele betrusted yoman of chambre ffor lacke of cunning of these other men. It is accustomed that a knight of the Chambre or elles squire of the bodie or both be p’sent every time when the Kinge wolle shave. This Barbour shall have every satterday night if it please the Kinge to cleanse his head leggꝭ or feete and for his shaveing two lovis[80] one pitcher wine. And the usher of chambre ought to testifie if this be necessary dispensed or not.
[80] Loaves.
It is said that the portrait of Pen was greatly admired by Sir Robert Peel, who frequently came to the Hall to look at it, and who is reported to have offered the Company £2,000 for the head, if it might be cut from the picture, he undertaking to make good the damage! He is also alleged to have said at one of his visits, that he should like to sleep on the table at the Hall, so that the first thing he would see on waking in the morning might be Pen’s head. Had Sir Robert known the legend[81] of the table he would perhaps have suggested a different bed. Henry VIII left, by his Will, 100 marks to Pen.
[81] Said to have been part of the dissecting table!
Concerning the next man, Nicholas Alcocke, nothing is known beyond that he was Surgeon to Edward VI, and was admitted to the freedom in 1523. He was doubtless a member of the Court, though he never served as Warden.
The last on the front row is Richard Ferris (or Ferrers), Master in 1563 and Serjeant-Surgeon to Elizabeth. Like others of his brethren, he also benefited under Henry’s will, to the extent of 100 marks, and was one of the King’s Surgeons.
In the back row are seven figures, but of these the names of only two survive, viz., William Tylley, Upper Warden 1546, and Christopher Samon (Salmon, Sammond), admitted to the freedom in 1528, and Master in 1553. By Domestic Papers, Henry VIII, vol. 5, p. 690, it appears that one Christopher Samon was living in Lombard Street in 1532: this might be the same man.
29 August, 1668. Dear old Samuel Pepys visited us this day, and thus records his intentions and opinion concerning the picture--
And at noon comes by appointment Harris to dine with me: and after dinner he and I to Chyrurgeons Hall, where they are building it new, very fine; and there to see their theatre, which stood all the fire, and which was our business, their great picture of Holben’s, thinking to have bought it by the help of Mr. Pierce,[82] for a little money: I did think to give £200 for it, it being said to be worth £1,000; but it is so spoiled that I have no mind to it, and is not a pleasant, though a good picture.
[82] James Pierce (or Pearse) Surgeon to Charles II and to the Duke of York. Master in 1675
James I seems to have entertained a high opinion of this picture, and borrowed it of us to be copied: his letter applying for it is preserved at the Hall, and is as follows.
JAMES R.
Trustie and welbeloved Wee greete you well. Where we are informed of a Table of painting in yo{r} Hall wherein is the Picture of o{r} Predecesso{r} of famous memorie K. Henry the 8{th}, together with diverse of yo{r} Companie, w{ch} being both like him, and well done, Wee are desirous to have copyed. Wherfore o{r} pleasure is that you presently deliver it unto this bearer Our Welbeloved Servant S{r} Lionell Cranfield Knight, One of Our Maisters of Requests, whome Wee have commaunded to receave it of you and to see it w{th} all expedition copied and redelivered safely; and so Wee bid you farewell. Given at Our Court at Newmarket the 13{th} day of Januarie 1617.[83]
[83] i.e., 1617/8.
The Court of course agreed to lend the picture, though doubtless with some misgivings; contrary however to the practice of the time when money was “lent” to the King, it found its way back to the Hall.
In 1627, Charles I, a more suspicious borrower than his father, had it to Whitehall, but here again we fortunately had it returned.
The Royal College of Surgeons possess some Cartoons, from which, it has been said, this picture was painted; this is, however, very doubtful. Some particulars as to these Cartoons may be seen in Mr. D’Arcy Power’s book, p. 96.
In 1734 the Company agreed with Mr. Bernard Baron for him to engrave the picture for 150 guineas, and several details relating thereto are recorded in the Minutes. It was published in 1736, and is a faithful reproduction, much sought after by collectors. Baron has however copied the picture, exactly as he saw it on to the copperplate, so that when the impressions were struck off, everything was reversed. His original study, a red crayon, beautifully executed, is preserved in the Court Room, and the copperplate is still used, each Assistant on his election being presented with a copy of the engraving. The Company also possess a rather rough proof before letters.
The print is dedicated to the Earl of Burlington, with a Latin inscription, of which the following is a translation.
“To the Most Noble Lord Richard Boyle, Earl of Burlington and Cork, &c., Knight of the Most Illustrious Order of the Garter. For the restoration, with the greatest liberality, at his own costs, of the Anatomical Theatre built a hundred years before, with the greatest skill, by the very celebrated Architect Inigo Jones, and decayed by lapse of time. This painting of Holbein representing the granting of a Charter given with his own hand by Henry VIII, King of England, &c., to the Society of Surgeons in London and preserved in their Hall, is by the Society of Surgeons of London humbly dedicated.”
This inscription, written at a time when the relations between the Barbers and the Surgeons of the Company were becoming strained, was evidently drawn by a Surgeon, who coolly ignored the Barbers throughout.
A very good pen and ink drawing of the picture was made by Austin Travers Young (aged 16) in 1883, and presented by him to the Company, for which he received the thanks of the Court.
1537. In “Chapter House Book” B. 1. (at the Record Office) is a list of the freemen of the several Companies of London at this date, which gives the names of 2,468 freemen in 39 Companies (an average of about 63 to each). The Barbers outstripped in numbers all the others, having a roll of 185 members; next to them came the Skinners with 151, then the Haberdashers with 120, so on down to the Bowyers, who mustered but 19. The premier Company, the Mercers, numbered but 55, whilst the ancient Weavers had only 30 members.
The following is the list of our freemen, the first twenty-six being members of the Court, and Nicholas Symson, Master that year.
Nicholas Symson. | John Raven. | Thomas Wilson. Willm Kyrckby. | Robert Hutton. | John Smythe. Thomas Vycars.[84] | Henry Pemberton. | Willm Hiller. John Bankꝭ. | Willm Shirborne. | Richard Tholmod.[85] John Potter. | George Genne. | John Awcetter. Thomas Twyn. | Thomas Johnson. | John Johnson. | Robert Spegnall.[86] | Richard Sermond. John Holland. | Richard Boll.[87] | Hugh Lyncocke. Willm Rewe. | Nacholas Alcoke. | John Bordman. John Aylyff. | Willm. Tylley. | Rauf Stek. Edmond Harman. | John Northcote. | Henry Hogekynson. John Peñ. | Willm. Wetyngton. | John Tomson. Richard Tayler. | Henry Yong. | Hugh Dier. Harry Carrier.[88] | Cristofer Samond. | Edward ffreman. Rauf Garland. | Robert Waterford. | Thomas Mone. John Enderbye. | Henry Atkyn. | Willm Yenson. Peter Devismand.[89] | Christofer Bolling. | John Banester. Robert Postell. | Robert Stocdale. | Willm Trewise. John Bird. | Mathiewe Johnson. | Christofer Hungate. James Tomson. | Davy Sambroke. | John Hutton. Willm. Kydd. | John Atkynson. | John Browne. John Yong. | Thomas Waryn. | John Grene. Thomas Sutton. | Robert Grove. | John Tymber. Charles Wyght. | Robert Brownhill. | John Shrene. John Newman. | Willm Spencer. | Thomas Staynton. Thomas Grome. | Thomas Butfilane.[90] | Thomas Pays. | Robert fforster. | Thomas Mede. Willm Higgꝭ. | Edmond Tyrell. | John Anger. John Dene. | John Philpott. | Thomas Worseley. Thomas Surbutt. | John Thowlmod.[91] | John Gilberd. Willm Billing. | Edward Ingalby.[92] | Cristofer Haynes. Willm. Lyghthed. | Richard Elyott. | Willm. Smythe. John Mosseley. | Willm. Downham. | John Smerthwaite. Willm. Hill. | Rogier Skynner. | John Lybbe. George Wenyard. | John Gerard. | George More. John Barker. | Richard Rogiers. | Thomas Burnett. Willm. Barker. | Thomas Dicson. | John Hamlyn. James Wod. | Thomas Gylman. | Richard Child. John Stere. | Thomas Dester. | Thomas Baily. Willm Hetherley. | Edward Hewett. | George Vaughan. Olyver Wilson. | John Dormot. | Thomas Wetyngh’m. Willm. Grene. | George Batman. | John Bonair. Henry Rawshold. | Thomas Vivian. | Richard Cokerell. Bartilmewe Dobynson. | George Brightwelton. | Willm. Walton. Henry Patterson. | John Waren. | Geferey ffraunceis. Philip Pegott. | John Greenway. | Thomas ffayles. Robert Downys. | John Bell. | John Edlyn. Antony Barowes. | Laurens Mollyners. | John Samond. James Hogeson. | John Cobbold. | Henry Bodeley. Robert Wevir. | Willm. Draper. | Thomas Stanbrige. John Surbut. | Richard Smythe. | Willm. Borrell. Willm Sewell. | Robert Ledꝭ. | Richard Nicols. John Denys. | John Gamlyn. | Edward Hughbank. John Page. | Thomas Cutbert. | John Charterane. Robert Dodwell. | Robert Chamber. | Henry Wotton. John Cutberd. | Lewis Bromefeld. | Robert Hastyngꝭ. John Gray. | Richard Worseley. | Alex Mason. Willm. Dauntese. | John Oskyn. | Thomas Darker. Thomas Appilton. | John Robynson. | Thomas ffyshe. John Cragell. | Richard Coley. | Edward Rollesley. Thomas Arundell. | John West. | John Braswell. Willm. Johnson. | Willm. Welfed. | Willm. Symsyn. Henr’. Adam. | |
[84] Vycary. [85] Tholmwood. [86] Sprignall. [87] Bowle. [88] Cazier? [89] Daiseman. [90] Butphillian. [91] Tholmwood. [92] Ingolsby.
The forty-two names following the Court and ending at John Awcetter were Liverymen, the remaining hundred and seventeen being Yeomanry.
1543. A few years previously the King had set the example of wearing his hair and beard short, and now the City seems to have discountenanced long beards, as I find the following in Letter Book Q. 87. (10th July, 35 Henry viij.)
AN ACTE AGAYNST} BEARDED MEN. }
ITEM for dyvˀse & sundrye consyderac͠ons & causes movyng this Cor̃te it is this daye orderyd & decreid & establyshed by the same that from henseforward there shall no Cytezen or other iñhit{a}unte[93] of this Cytie usyng or havyng a greate berde of more notable pˀlyxitie[94] or length then other the seid Cytezens of this Cytie do nowe use or have hertofore of late yeres usyd to were, either be iñhited pˀmytted or suffred to Receyve or take eny orphanage into his handes and custodye albeit that he wolde fynde nevˀ soe good suertyes for the same nor yet be admytted from henseforward to this Co{r}te for eny Recognito{ns} or suertye for eny suche orphange And yt is also assentyd & agreid that no pˀson havynge eny such berde shalbe admytted by redempc͠on into the lybt̃ies & fredome of this Cytie as longe as he shall were eny such berde.
[93] Inhabitant. [94] Prolixity.
1544 and 1545. In Repertory XI (at Guildhall) ff. 73{B.,} 176, 187{B.,} 229{B.,} 232 and 234 are various records relating to the vexed question of the Barber-Surgeons going on inquests, bearing armour and serving as constables, from all which offices they claimed exemption under their Charters and Act of Parliament.
By the earlier entry, it seems that the Wardens were warned to appear before the Court of Aldermen to shew cause why they refused to pass upon inquests, etc.; then came a petition from the Company praying to be discharged of all offices save the Inquest of Wardmote once a year; this does not appear to have satisfied the Authorities, and the Company were directed to draw up further Articles to be submitted to the Court of Aldermen. Great pressure was no doubt put upon the Barber-Surgeons, the result being that they abandoned most of the privileges of exemption which they had claimed, and submitted a Bill of Articles, which was finally approved, and entered of record on fo. 234. A copy of this lengthy document is at the Hall, and from it it appears that on the 22nd October, 1545, the Company appeared before the Court of Aldermen as “humble Besechers” to be shorn of their privileges, the ground of their petition being “That forasmoche as some grudge and displeasure is lately sith the unyon and conjunction of their said ffelowshippes in to one entyre Company growen conteyned and taken against them and their said ffelowship, by dyverse of theire neighbours being citezeins of this citie, as they be, by reason that they your said suppliauntꝭ” are discharged by their Charters and Act of Parliament from bearing offices, etc., “that other the Cittzeins of this citie are ellygible and lyable unto, ffor the whiche grudge and displeasure your besechers are not a little sorye. ffor the playne declarac͠on thereof and for the eschewyng advoyding and utter extinguysshement of the said grudge and displeasure from hensforwarde,” they are content that it shall be ordained that they shall go upon all Wardmote Inquests, but not upon any inquests between party and party (i.e., sit as jurymen in civil actions); that all freemen of the Company not practising Surgery shall be contributory to all assessments, serve as Constables and keep watches in their turn as other citizens, but that all Surgeons shall be free from bearing armour, etc.
Notwithstanding this compromise, entered in the City books, it seems in course of time to have been overlooked, and, as has been previously remarked, the exemption of all freemen of the Company from juries, etc., has been claimed and allowed down to quite recent days.
1550. The first of our Court Minute Books which has been preserved, commences in the 4{th} Edward VI, and bears this title,
~Orders and Awardes~ made ordered and awarded within the tyme of Maister George Geen Thomas Johnson Thomas Stocdall and Mathew Johnson Maister and Wardeins of the Company and fellowship of BARBORS SURGEONS of London for one hole yere begynnyng the xxvj{th} day of Auguste in the fowerthe yere of the reigne of our Sovereigne Lorde Kynge Edward the Syxte with thassent and consent of the Assistaunces of the same Companye as hereafter ensuethe.
From this and the succeeding Minute Books, the following extracts are principally taken as illustrative of the Company’s History from this period:
1556. At the end of the first book is a very long memorandum written and signed by Thomas Knot, Master, to the effect that on the 26th March, 1556, he made humble suit to the Lord Mayor, Sir Will{m.} Garrett and the Aldermen, in the name of the Company, for the exemption of the Company from finding or setting forth any soldiers or men of war at any time thereafter, when it might be that the Citizens of London should be required to do so, either by sea or land, “fforasmoche as the same Company are alwayes at every such tyme and tymes very sore burdened and chardged otherwise hereafter expressed, that is to saye, They are comaunded and bounden to prepare and fynde so manye Surgeons and so many other men attendinge upon them at every tyme and tymes that it shall fortune the King” to send out soldiers by sea or land, and “the same Company doe alwayes prepare fynde and send furthe for every one houndreth of suche Souldyers one Surgeon and a man attending upon him.” Upon which representations the Lord Mayor and Aldermen were pleased to grant to the Company, that on future occasions when the like requisitions might “fortune to be layed or appointed to or upon theym, that then they in every suche case upon their gentle suyte and request made unto the Lorde Mayor and courte of Aldermen for the tyme beinge for and concernynge their sayd dischardge for and in consyderac͠on of the causes above remembered, shalbe as gentelye and charytably holpen eased and releaved in that behalf as the wayte and ymportaunce of the burden that the Cytie at every suche tyme shalbe chardged w{th} all will reasonablye permytt and suffer.”
The memorandum then proceeds to state that the Lord Mayor and Aldermen advised the Master to cause a remembrance of the above (being only a promise by word of mouth) to be entered and recorded in the Book of Ordinances of the Company, which was done.
1555. In Henry Machyn’s Diary for this year, is the following reference to a Romish procession, winding up with a dinner at Barbers’ Hall.
The xxvij day of May was the Clarkes prossessyon from Yerdhall[95] college, and ther was a goodly masse to be hard, and evere clarke havyng a cope and garland, with C.[96] stremers borne, and the whettes[97] a playng round Chepe, and so to Ledynhall unto Sant Albro[98] chyrche, and ther thay putt off ther gayre, and ther was the blessyd sacrament borne with torche-lyght abowt, and from thens unto the Barbur-hall to dener.
[95] Guildhall. [96] A hundred. [97] Waits. [98] St. Ethelburga.
Charter from Philip and Mary, which is still in our possession, and has a most beautifully executed title, the initial letter representing the King and Queen seated on the throne, and the border containing various heraldic badges; the seal unfortunately is damaged.
PHILIPPUS ET MARIA, Dei gracia Rex et Regina Anglie hispaniarum ffrancie utriusque Sicilie Jerusalem & hiᵬine fidei defensores Archiduces Austrie Duces Burgundie Mediolani & brabantie Countes haspurgi fflandrˀ & Tirolis.
~Omnibus~ ad quos presentes lr̃e pervñint salt̃m.
INSPEXIMUS quasdam lrãs patentes domini H. quondam Regis Anglie septum[99] fc̃as in hec verba, HENRICUS dei grã, &c. . . . . . . . . Teste me ip̃o apud Westmonastiũm duodecimo die marcii Anno regni nr̃i tcĩo. Yong. pro viginti soliᵭ solut̃ in hanap̃io. NOS AUTEM lrãs pˀdcãs ac omnia & singula in eisdem contenta rata heñtes & grata ac ea pro noᵬ heredibʒ & Successoribʒ nr̃m prefate Regine quantum in noᵬ est acceptamus & approbamus ac ea dilc̃is noᵬ Thome Vicary nunc magistro mistere barbitonsoꝜ Thome Whytyngame Jacobo Wood & Johĩ Warren Gubernatoribus ejusdem mistere & Successoribʒ suis ratificamus & confirmamˀ p’ut lrẽ p’dc̃e in se r̃onabiliter testantur. IN CUJUS rei testimonĩu has lr̃as nrãs fieri fecimus patentes. TESTIBUS nobis ip̃is apud Westmonasterium octavo die Junii Annis regnorum quarto & quinto.
[99] A clerical error, for Henry VIII.
LUTLEY.
Taxat̃ finis ad x{l.}
Nico eboꝜ Canc.[100]
[100] Assessed at a fine of £10. Nicholas (Archbishop of) York, Chancellor.
It is noticeable in this Charter that the confirmation is to the Governors of the “Barbers,” and not “Barber-Surgeons,” although the latter was then the legal style of the Company, but probably this was another clerical error.
1560. This year (6th January) the Company obtained an Inspeximus Charter from Elizabeth, still preserved at the Hall; it has a title in much the same style as the preceding charter, but the seal is very much damaged.
ELIZABETH, Dei gracia Anglie FFrancie, et hibernie Regina fidei defensor, &c. ~Omnibus~ ad quos presentes littere pervenerint salutem.
INSPEXIMUS litteras patentes Dn̄i P. et Dn̄e M. Sororis nr̃e precharissime nuper Regis et Regine Anglie de confirmac͠oe factas in hec verba PHILIPPUS et MARIA dei gracia, &c. . . . . . . . . TESTIBUS nobis ip̃is apud Westmonasterĩu octavo die Junii Annis regnoꝜ nr̃oꝜ quarto et quinto. NOS AUTEM lrãs predcãs ac omĩa et singula in eisdem contenta rata habentes et grata ea pro nobis heredibus et successoribus nr̃is quantum in nobis est acceptamus et approbamus ac ea Diɫcis nobis Georgio Geñ nunc magistro mistere BarbitonsoꝜ Willm̄ Grene Thome Bayly et Joh̃i Smarthawyte Gubernatoribus ejusdem mistere et Successoribus suis ratificamus et confirmamus prout lrẽ predcẽ in se racionabiliter testantur. IN CUJUS REI TESTIMONIUM has lrãs nrãs fieri fecimus patentes. TESTE me ip̃a apud Westmonasteriũ sexto die Januarii Anno regni nr̃ secundo.
COTTON.
Taxat̃ finis ad x{l.} vj{s.} viij{d.}
In Machyn’s quaint Diary, we find the following entries:--
1561. The xxiiij day of Feybruary whent to hang xviij men and ij women, and serten ware browthe[101] to be bered in serten parryches in London; the barbur surgens had on[102] of them to be a notheme[103] at ther halle.
[101] Brought. [102] One. [103] Anatomy.
1562. The xx day of June was a gret shutyng[104] of the Compene of the Barbur Surgeantes for a gret soper at ther owne hall for a xxx mess of mett,[105] for they dyd make ij godley[106] stremars agaynst that day of their harmes,[107] the whyche they wher agmented by the most valeant kyng at armes master . . . . . . and they had vj drumes plahyng and a flutt; and ij gret ansutts,[108] and as a shot was wone, downe whent that and up the thodar,[109] and as they whan the shut; and master Gall[110] and ys syd[111] wan the soper--the master of the Compene.
[104] Shooting, probably at Moorfields, with bows and arrows. [105] Meat. [106] Goodly. [107] Arms. [108] Ancients (flags). [109] The other. [110] Thomas Galle. [111] His side.
The x day of August was Barbur surgyons fest, and they capt ther communion at Sant Alphes[112] at Crepull-gat, and master Recherdson dyd pryche,[113] the skott; ther was good syngyng; and after to ther halle to dener, and after dener a play.
[112] St. Alphage. [113] Preach.
1567. Elizabeth inaugurated the first State Lottery in England, as a means of providing money, and a very peremptory mandate was directed by the Lord Mayor to the various City Companies, commanding them to adventure therein.
1st February, 1568. The Barber-Surgeons put in 40{s.} for the “use, profet and benefyt of the hall,” but did not draw a prize, and indeed none of the Companies reaped any advantage by the speculation, the Lottery being simply a trap into which they were ordered to walk.
The proposal for this Lottery was as follows:--
A verie rich Lotterie Generall without any Blancks contayning a great No. of good prices, as well of redy money, as of Plate & certaine sorts of marchaundizes having been valued & prised by the commaundement of the Queenes most excellent Majestie by men expert & skilfull and the same Lotterie is erected by hir majesties order, to the entent that such Commoditie as may chaunce to arise thereof, after the charges borne, may be converted towards the reparation of the Havens and strength of the Realme, & towardes such other publique good workes. The No. of lots shall be foure hundreth thousand, and no more: and every lot shall be the summe of tenne shillings sterling onely, and no more.
Stow says that this Lottery was commenced to be drawn on the 11th January, 1569, at the West Door of St. Paul’s, and continued drawing day and night until the 6th May following.
It was a common practice of the Companies to put in their money under mottoes, and some curious ones are recorded, many being composed with a quaint sarcasm on the probability of prizes being obtained.
Herbert (Hist. of the Twelve Livery Companies) gives some interesting particulars of the State Lotteries, and quotes a motto used by the Merchant Taylors which pretty clearly indicates their opinion of the business;
One byrde in the hande is worth two in the wood, If we get the great lot, it will do us good.
Some of the prizes were ridiculously small, e.g., 1_s._ 2_d._, 2_s._ 1_d._, etc., and great dissatisfaction was expressed at the principal prizes remaining unpaid to the winners.
1573. The Company received a precept from the Lord Mayor for a “loan” of money to make provision of wheat for the City, and the same was by the Court ordered to be complied with. This “corn custom” is very fully treated of by Herbert, and was virtually a tax upon the companies, who were each rated and compelled to find a certain proportion of corn to be stored by the City, and sold at such times as when, there being a scarcity, the markets would otherwise rise, were it not for the immense stock kept by the City. This custom survived for many years under certain modifications; as we shall see hereafter, our Company built a granary in 1633, and stored their own corn.
The precept above referred to was as follows--
Forasmuche as all comon polecye requyreth the prevenc͠on of extremities, and consideringe as you knowe the urgent and present necessitie, and the lacke of provision of wheate and other grayne for furniture of this so great and populous citie, of the want whereof the queenes ma{tie} and her most honorable coñsell are not ignorant; but havinge spˀcial regard to the same, are not a lytle offended and displeased, with some grefe that there bene no better pˀvision heretofore made, and that presentlie the cittie shoulde be no better stored, by reson wherof the prices of corne and grayne is now muche dearer in this cittie than in any other parte of this realme, have not only at sundrye times and gentle meanes, but also w{th} some terror, as welle in the Starre-chamber as in other places afore the counsell, given us admonicion that the same her ma{ties} cittie and chamber may not be unfurnished for lacke of good pˀvision. And we, as our duties is, havinge great care and especial consideracion of the same, and pˀcevynge by order of the harvest past, and the unkynd season of the yeare, sith that the prices of corne is verry likely to encrease and be advanced to a greater and higher price than yet is, have thought good and verrye necessarye for the avoyding of greater inconvenyences, to make immediate pˀvision of a great masse and quantity of wheate and other grayne, as well w{th}in the realme as beyond the seas for the provision aforesaid, w{ch} cannot be done w{th}out a great some of money presentlie to be defrayed, w{ch} is not to be levyed but by the good assestens of you and others, good coustomers and cittezens of this cittie; have therefore assessed your Company of Barber Surgeons at the some of[114] which is agreed upon by acte of coˀen counsell, w{ch} some of we do not only require you, but also streaghtle charge and comande you, immediatelie upon the recept hereof, calling your companye together in your comon hall, you do forthw{th} tax, levy, and gather of the welthiest and most able persones of the same the sum aforesaid, in such wise that you fayle not to pay the same, and evrie pˀcell thereof, to the hands of George Helton, of the cittie of London, w{th} all expedicion, and w{th}out repayment thereof to you. Fayle not hereof, as you tender the mytigac͠on of our sovereigne ladye the queens majesties displeasure already conceived, and do tender the com̃on weale of this cittie, together w{th} your private condytte, and as you will answer for the contrarye.
[114] The amount is left blank.
The next entry would seem to indicate some contemplated State interference with the Company’s property, and the answer was probably not in exact accordance with the truth, for on the 28 May, 1576, a precept in the Queen’s name, having been received, calling upon the Master and Wardens to return to the Guildhall an account of the revenue of their lands, and of their goods, “the answere was that the true revenewe of the landes was xx{ti} markes whereof the most pˀte went forthe and is disbursed in peñcons, and that we had no goods.”
1578. A precept was received as follows,
[Sidenote: TO THE WARDENS } BY THE MAIOR. OF THE COMPANIE} OF BARBOR } SURGINS. }]
THYES shalbe to will and require yo{u} and in her maiesties name streitlie to charge and comaunde yo{u} that w{th} all convenient spede yo{u} appointe and pˀvide the number of twelve hable and sufficient pˀsons being Iournemen appnˀtices or others wc{h} are fremen of this Cittie and inhabitinge w{th}in the same beinge of agilitie and honest of behavio{r} betweene the age of xix yeres and xl{ti} w{ch} are fitt to be trayned for harquebus shott, evˀy one of them havinge a murrion, a sworde and dagger, and a caliver w{th} sufficient furniture for the same, and one half pounde of powder, besides touche powder whereof Three of the same pˀsons to be house holders and free men of yo{r} saide Companie, and that yo{u} certyfie me the saide Maior the names and sir names of all yo{r} saide number where and w{th} whome they dwell, of what Companie they be free, and what Captaynes or other skilfull men that be of yo{r} saide Companie or whome yo{u} knowe inhabitinge w{th}in this Cittie fitt to trayne or leade the same men of there names and dwellinge places. And that they be all in a redines furnished as aforesaide to muster in there hose and dublets onlie, or dublets hose and jerkins w{th}in xiiij{en} daies next ensuinge the date hereof. And for the levyenge of monie for the saide furniture And for the charge of powder yo{u} shall collect suche reasonable somẽs of monie as yo{u} shall finde mete for the saide pˀporc͠on, by waie of reasonable assesment of evˀy sevˀall welthie and hable pˀson of yo{r} Companie. Wherein we require yo{u} in anie wyse to spare the powrer sorte of ffremen although yo{u} somewhat more largelie burden the ritche. YOVEN at the Guildhall of this Cittie of London the xv{th} daie of Marche 1577.[115]
[115] i.e., 1578.
SEBRIGHT.
In pursuance of this precept a levy was made upon ninety freemen, who contributed £19 17_s._ 11_d._ (in sums ranging from 1{s} to 6{s} 8{d}) and upon ten “foreins” who paid in all £3. The Expenses of the soldiers, and their arms, powder, etc., are all set out in detail (see Appendix D).
1585. It was agreed “that o{r} Companie by reason of the often and earnest preceptes from the Lorde maior to move unto some liberall puttinge in of monie into the Lottery for Armo{r}, that o{r} Companie should put in x{li} yf that might satisfie for all the Companie viz{t} the Clothinge vj{li} xiij{s} iiij{d} and the yeomanry v m’kes.”
29th September, 1586. The Lord Mayor had issued sundry precepts to the Company for the “buyeinge of certein goune powder amountinge in waight to of one Mr. Henry Dale Hab’dassher at the price of x{d} le ɫi. and yt was agreed the saide powder should be bought and that Mr. Swaldell [Master, 1593] should go to chuyse it, and he to have the same powder for viij{d} the pounde.”
10th March, 1589. It was ordered that the gunpowder directed by another precept to be provided by the Company, should be bought and that it should be kept “in the Armorie howse in convenient place for feare of daunger of ffier.”
29th March, 1596. It was ordered that £40 “ship money” should be “lent” by the Company to the City, which is the earliest mention of this obnoxious tax in our books.
8th August, 1596. “Yt was agreed that the som̃e of £xxx{ti} shalbe lent unto the Cytty for the payenge of Souldiers wages and other charges diffrayed about the Spanishe voyage.” This was an Expedition of certain ships (furnished by the City) under the Earl of Essex and Sir Walter Raleigh “to annoye the King of Spaine.” The English then sacked and burned Cadiz, burnt the Spanish navy, and on their return home, says Stow, “great triumph was made at London for their good successe.”
18th August, 1598. At this Court came a precept from the Lord Mayor, commanding the Company in Her Majesty’s name to “lend” £100 to the Queen for six months, for suppressing rebels in Ireland. The demand was, as usual, of a most peremptory nature, and the Court ordered £100 to be paid to the Treasurers appointed by the City.
6th August, 1599. A precept came from the Lord Mayor in the Queen’s name, commanding the Master and Wardens to deliver to the freemen the Company’s armour in “suche order as it maye be, in safetye readie for her Maiesties service,” whereupon the Master took for his own use “one muskett fflaske and tuche boxe one headepeece and one rest.” Eleven other members of the Company had armour delivered out to them, as “one caliver fflaske and tuche boxe, sworde and dager girdle and hangers and headepeece.”
1599. A precept was received on 11th November, commanding the Company to be in attendance on the Queen in her progress from Chelsea to Westminster, which is not only curious for the quaintness of its description of the persons who were to be appointed, but affords a glimpse at the magnificence of Royal processions three hundred years ago.
[Sidenote: TO THE MAISTER } BY THE MAIOR AND WARDENS OF } THE COMPANYE OF } BARBOR-SURGEONS.}]
WHERE her Ma{ts} moste gratiouse pleasure and comaundement is this pˀsente daie signified unto me the lorde Maior from the right ho: the lorde Chamberline of her Ma{ties} moste honorable householde that myselfe and my Bretheren thaldermen with a conveniente number of the beste and moste graveste Cittyzens of this Citye shoulde uppon Tewesdaie nexte in the Afternoune wayte and attende uppon her highnes royall pˀson from the Towne of Chelsey unto her highnes princlie pallace at Westminster in as honorable and statelye sorte as conveinentlye maye be pˀformed. In accomplishment of w{ch} her highnes said comaundement, These shalbe to chardge and comaunde you in her Ma{ts} name to pˀpare not onlye your selves, but alsoe provide and have in a readines the full number of eighte pˀsons of the moste graveste talleste and comliest pˀsonages of your saide Companye, everye of them to be well horsed and appareled in velvet coates and chaynes of goulde And that not onlye your sealves but alsoe everye of the saide eighte pˀsones maye have one footeman with twoe staffe torches to waite and attende upon him, and to be all in a readines well and substancially horsed appareled and appointed as aforesaide in Cheepeside by twoe of the clocke of the saide afternoone to attende uppon me and my bretheren thaldermen to waite upon her moste excellente Ma{tie} from Chelsey aforesaide to her highnes saide pallace of Whitehall, WHEREOF see you faile not at your pˀill and as you will answere the contrarye if throughe your negligence any parte of this service shall not be thoroughelye pˀformed. Guihalde the ix of November 1599.
SEBRIGHTE.
In pursuance of the above precept the Master with seven other Members of the Court were appointed to attend, and eight freemen were nominated as torchbearers.
1600. The fee simple of three houses in Monkwell Street was this year purchased by the Company of William Fyninge for £112!
11th November, 1600. In obedience to a precept it was ordered that twelve members of the Court “well mounted on horseback and apparrelled in all poynts accordingely,” together with twelve freemen “to wayte uppon them w{th} evˀy one twoe staffe torches in his hande,” were to meet at the Hall on the following Thursday (13th November) and to ride with the Lord Mayor to Chelsea to conduct the Queen to Westminster. This procession is thus referred to in Stow’s Annals; “On the thirteenth of November 1600, her Maiestie being most honourablie attended on, by the most honourable Prelates, and Nobles, and Judges of the Realme, was received neere unto Chelsey, by the Lord Maior of London, with his brethren the Aldermen all in Scarlet, besides to the number of five hundred citizens, in coates of velvet, and chaines of gold, on horesbacke, every of them having two staffe torches to attende on them: And they all waited on her, to her royall Pallace at Westminster.”
9th November, 1602. Various members of the Company “were appoynted to ryde w{th} the M{r} to meete her Ma{tie} on Saterdaie next” at Chelsea.
9th April, 1603. A precept was received commanding the Company to contribute £12 10_s._ 0_d._ towards the cost of the reception of James I by the City, whereupon an assessment was made upon the freemen for the same, and the Masters made “choyce of sixe pˀsonable menn for Wiflers to attend the Livˀye of this Companye when his Ma{tie} goeth to be crowned.”
20th April, 1603. The following precept requiring the Company to assist in the reception of the King “in greater number and more statelie and sumtiows shewe then hath bene at any time heretofore within the memory of man in the like case pˀformed,” will be read with interest;
[Sidenote: TO THE M{RS} AND WARDENS } BY THE MAIOR OF THE COMPANY OF } BARBOR SURGEONS }]
WHERE the most high and mightie Prince James o{r} most dread & soveraygne Lord is by the grace of god shortlie to make his repaire from his Kingedom of Scotland into this his Realme of England and so consequentlye to this his honorˀble Cittie and chaymber of this his imperyall Crowne. And for that it is agreed by mee and my Breethr{n} the Aldrẽn of the same Cittie that not onelie o{r} selves but the full number of five hundred of the best and gravest Cittizens should accordinge to o{r} dueties wayte and attend uppon his royall pˀson at his approch nere to this Cittie in greater number and more statelie and sumtiows shewe then hath bene at any time heretofore within the memory of man in the like case pˀformed, Towards the accomplishm{t} of w{ch} number your company is appoynted to pˀvid the full number of Twelve pˀsonns, THESE therefore shalbe to chardge and commaund you in his Ma{ties} name to prepare not onely yourselves but also to p’vid the full number of Twelve persons of the most grave and Comlyest pˀsonages of youre said Companye, everie one of them to be well horsed and apparrelled w{th} velvet Coates and w{th} sleaves of the same and chaynes of golde, and not onely yourselves but every of the saide pˀsons to have one comely pˀson well apparrelled in his dublet and hose to attend uppon him one[116] foote. All which pˀsons to be in redines well and substonciallie horsed apparrelled and appoynted as aforesaid w{th}in one daies warneing to be signified unto you to attend on mee and my Bretheren the Aldrẽn of the same Cittie, to attend and wayte uppon his most exelent Ma{tie} as aforesaid. And that uppon Saturdaie morneinge next you doe certifye to mee in wrytinge the names and S{r}names as well of youre selves as of all other pˀsons free of youre company that you shall appointe for this service. Of all w{ch} pˀsons you are to have a regard that noe man for insufficiency in any respect be turned back to the disgrace and discredit of youre company, nor a mann unfitt furnished and appointed for so honorable a service. And hereof fayle you not, as you will answer the contrary if through youre defalt any parte of this service shal not be fullie pˀformed.
[116] On.
Guyldhull this Twenteth of Aprill 1603
SEBRIGHT.
9th August, 1603. James soon attempted to borrow (as he termed it) of the Companies. “Where a pˀcept was directed to õr M{rs.} for the lone of money to the Kinge, wee are to answer that wee have none.”
Perhaps this reply sufficed on this occasion.
22nd October, 1603. London was this year visited with a great Plague, and in consequence there was no Lord Mayor’s Show.
[Sidenote: TO THE WARDES̃ OF } BY THE MAIOR. THE COMPÃIE OF } BARBOR SURGEONS }]
THEISE are to will and require you that you take speciall knowledge herby that for avoydinge of infecc̃on by assemblie of people this tyme of gods vizitac̃on It is thought meate therbe noe shewe made the morrowe after Simond and Judes daie next, it is intended that youre Companie be dischardged thereof for their Attendac̃e for that tyme.
SEBRIGHT.
This xxij{th} of October 1603.
7th February, 1604. The Court having considered the many abuses “comited against the weale of this Company” decided to apply for an Act of Parliament which should confer upon them extended powers, and appointed a Committee for the purpose, with the Recorder and Mr. Wilbraham as counsel.
20th October, 1604. From an entry of this date, it seems that it had been decided to apply for a fresh Charter, instead of an Act of Parliament, and a summary of the clauses (twenty-seven in number) which it was desired to have embodied therein is set out in full. As the Charter was obtained, it is unnecessary to give these suggested clauses here (they may be seen in Mr. D’Arcy Power’s book, p. 361). The 16th one is, however, curious enough, declaring the “openinge searinge and imbalmeinge of the dead corpes to be pˀply belongeinge to the science of Barbery and Surgery, And the same intruded into by Butchers Taylors Smythes Chaundlors and others of macanicall trades unskillfull in Barbery or Surgery, And unseemely and unchristian lyke defaceinge disfiguringe and dismembringe the dead Corpes, And so that by theire unskillfull searinge and imbalmeinge, the corpes corrupteth and groweth pˀntlie contagious and ofensive to the place and pˀsons approachinge.”
30th January, 1605. The Charter of James I is of this date, but not now in our possession; there are, however, two copies of it at the Hall, one of which was made in a vellum book in 1658. It was in Latin of prodigious length; but the following are the clauses as I make them out, and will suffice for this work.
1. It grants to the Company of Barber-Surgeons that it shall be ruled by four Masters or Governors and twenty-six Assistants.
2. Power given to the Masters to make lawful assemblies, to keep Courts in their Common Hall, and therein to consult, counsel and decree touching their Statutes, Laws and Ordinances, for the good rule, state and government of the Company.
3. Power to make laws, etc., for the government of the Masters or Governors, and of all and singular persons using the mysteries of Barbery or Surgery within the City of London, the liberties and suburbs thereof.
4. Power to punish offenders by penalties, fines, and imprisonments.
5. Fines to be levied by distress by the officers of the Company.
6. Nomination of John Laycock as Master, and of the three Wardens.
7. The present Masters to continue in office until the Monday next before the feast of St. Bartholomew the Apostle, and until the election of new Masters.
8. The present Masters and Assistants to continue on the Court for life, unless removed for misbehaviour or other good cause.
9. Upon the death or dismissal of an Assistant, the vacancy to be filled up by the Court.
10. Assistants to be sworn on admission.
11. The Masters, or the more part of them, to choose twelve persons of the mystery (six whereof to be expert Surgeons), which twelve were to be the Electors to choose the new Masters or Governors on the Monday next before the feast of St. Bartholomew.
12. Of the four Masters, two to be Surgeons.
13. The Masters elected to be sworn to the due execution of their offices.
14. Any member elected a Governor, to be ever after an Assistant.
15. If a Governor be dismissed for misconduct, another to be chosen in his place in the form provided.
16. The twelve Electors to be sworn.
17. Power of search, oversight, reformation, government, and correction, as well of free as of foreign professors of Barbery and Surgery in London and its suburbs.
18. Power of entry into Shops of Barbers and Surgeons.
19. Power to oversee and approve or condemn plasters, ointments, instruments, etc.
20. Power to examine Barbers and Surgeons.
21. Power to prohibit ignorant persons, or such as shall wilfully refuse to be examined, from practising.
22. Power to admit skilful persons to practise Surgery.
23. Power to reject and destroy all noxious or improper medicines, ointments, instruments, etc.
24. The Masters finding on their search any impostors, ignorant persons, or refusers to be examined, the same to be bound to their good behaviour.
25. No butcher, tailor, waxchandler or other persons, to cut, dissect or embalm any dead body, but the same to be done by members of the Company approved and appointed by the Masters or Governors of the Barber-Surgeons.
26. The Masters or Governors and admitted Surgeons, to be discharged from Watch, Ward, Inquests or Juries, and the office of Constable, and from assessments for the same.
27. Power to purchase lands, etc.
28. Ratification of the old liberties and franchises of the Barber-Surgeons, and of their lands.
29. All Mayors, Bailiffs, etc., to be aiding and assisting the Masters or Governors in the execution of their offices.
TESTE meipˀo apud Westm̃ Tricesimo die Januarij Anno Regno nr̃i Anglie ffrancie et Hibernie sc̃do et Scotie Tricesimo octavo.
pˀ Brẽ de privato Sigillo.
Christian IV, King of Denmark, brother-in-law of James, paid a visit to England in 1606, and was sumptuously entertained. In accordance with the custom of the time, there was a grand pageant and procession in the City, in which all the Companies took part, and the following precept for the same was received by us;--
BY THE MAIOR.
TO THE M{R} & WARDENS OF THE } COMPANY OF BARBOR SURGEONS }
FFOR the bewtefieinge of the streetꝭ and lanes w{th}in this Cittie against the passage of the Kingꝭ most excellent mat{ie} and the Kinge of Denmarke their nobilitie and trayne from the Tower through this Cittie. THEIS are in his Ma{t}ꝭ name straightlie to charge and command you that all delayes & excuses sett aparte you have and provide yo{r} rayles in a readines for the livery of yo{r} company to stand in and to be sett up in the streetꝭ against wednesday the xxx{th} day of July at the furthest. AND likewise that yo{r} railes against that tyme be hanged with blew azure cloth & garnished w{th} Banners & streamers in the most bewtifull manner that may be, as formerlie in like solempnities hath bin accustomed. AND that you likewise have and provide sixe whifflers at the least to evˀy score of yo{r} livery well apparrelled w{th} white staves in their handes to stand with their backꝭ to the Common railes over against your yo{r} Companies railes for the better and quieter ordering of the streetꝭ through which his ma{tie} shall passe. AND hereof faile you not at yo{r} pˀill. This xxj{th} of July 1606.
SEBRIGHTE.
Three days after the receipt of the above, came another precept demanding £5 from the Barber-Surgeons towards the City’s expenses to be incurred about the Pageant.
The two Kings landed at the Tower, from Greenwich, on the 31st July, on which day the City gave itself up to the gayest doings and rejoicings. A curious and interesting description of the pageant is to be found in a rare tract by H. R., 1606, preserved at Guildhall Library. Howes also gives an entertaining account of the proceedings, and relates how the King of Denmark “seriously observed the unimaginable number of gallant Ladies, beauteous virgins, and other delicate Dames filling the Windowes of every houss with kinde aspect saluting” him as he passed by. He also tells us of the melodious harmony, the Latin speech, the pastoral device, and the fountains which ran with wine, etc.
It seems that on this great occasion one of the Marshalls had endeavoured to take our Company “down a peg” in order of precedence. This was, however, successfully resisted, and the Clerk proudly records the following in the Minutes on the same day:
MEMORAND: that the Kingꝭ ma{tie} w{th} the Kinge of Denmarke & the Prince of Wales came through this Cittie from wardes the Tower of London attended uppon with the Lordes and gentry of this Land on the last day of this instant moneth of July Att which tyme M{r.} ffoxe beinge one of the Comittees for placeinge of the Companies standingꝭ would have displaced us But by the Lord maiors order wee were placed in the seaventeenth place accordinge as wee ought to be placed.
1606. Notwithstanding the new charter granted in the previous year, the Court found itself unable to regulate the practice of Barbery and Surgery without an extended set of By-Laws, which were now obtained and are still preserved at the Hall. They are in English, on eight large skins of parchment, beautifully engrossed with a handsomely illuminated title, the initial ~T~ containing the Barber-Surgeons’ arms, and distributed over the heading are the arms of the Master and Wardens in 1606, viz.: John Peck, Edward Rodes, William Fynynge and John Fenton.
The By-Laws are allowed by Thomas Lord Ellesmere, Lord Chancellor; Thomas Earl of Dorset, Lord Treasurer; and Sir John Popham, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas; who send “greeting in our Lord God Everlasting,” and enact Ordinances of such fearful length, that to a layman it passes comprehension how the draughtsman could have kept his head clear whilst he travelled through such a sea of prolixity, and, to a great extent useless, repetition. If the Chancellor and his colleagues troubled themselves to read through and understand the document to which they have appended their seals, they must have uttered very sensible sounds of relief when they came to the sealing; the recapitulation of the mere heads of this extraordinary production, will probably be found wearisome to the reader, viz{t}:
1. Recital of an Act of Parliament, 24th Feby., 19 Henry VII.
2. Oath of a freeman.
3. Oath of the Masters or Governors.
4. Oath of an Assistant of the Livery.
5. Oath of the Electors.
6. Oath of the Clerk.
7. Oath of a “foreign” Surgeon.
8. Oath of the Wardens of the Yeomanry.
9. Oath of an Assistant of the Yeomanry.
10. Oath of the Beadle.
11. Oath of the Porter.
NOTE.--Some of the foregoing oaths contain over 500 words in each!
12. Every person shall appear upon summons under a penalty of 3{s.} 4{d.}, and for not keeping the hour, a fine of 2{d.} to be imposed.
13. Masters neglecting the day of Election, the distribution of Ferbras’ alms, or the payment of rents, to forfeit £5.
14. No great Election dinner to be kept without the consent of a Court of Assistants, under a penalty of £5.
15. The allowance for a great dinner to be 20 marks, and for a small one £4.
16. Manner of Election of Masters or Governors.
17. Time of Election.
18. Twelve Electors to be chosen.
19. Electors to be sworn.
20. The Masters omitting any next in Election out of their Bills, the Electors to choose others.
21. The order after Election.
22. A refuser of the office of Master or Governor to be fined 40{s.} and to be eligible to be chosen again.
23. Or may be absolutely discharged of such office on payment of £10.
24. And on refusal to pay such fines, to be dismissed out of the Court of Assistants and out of the Livery.
25. If the Electors choose such refuser to further place, before he have paid his fine, each Elector to forfeit 40{s.}
26. Every person chosen into the Livery to pay £5 if he have not served as Warden of the Yeomanry, and if otherwise then 40{s.}
27. Election of two Stewards of the Mayor’s feast, and two Stewards of the Anatomy; £8 to be allowed to the former and £6 to the latter.
28. Refusers of the Office of Steward to forfeit £13 6_s._ 8_d._ each.
29. The Common Seal to be kept under lock and key.
30. Time of the audit and appointment of eight auditors.
31. Day for reading “General Rules.”
32. View of the Company’s lands to be made yearly in October.
33. Allowance for the view dinner.
34. “Search” to be made twice in the year.
35. Apprentices to be presented within one month after they are retained in service, under a penalty of 40_s._
36. Indentures to be prepared by the Clerk before presentation.
37. The Clerk to make all indentures.
38. Every liveryman may keep three apprentices.
39. No decrepit, diseased or deformed apprentice to be retained by any Barber or Surgeon.
40. No person to teach any but his apprentice.
41. No person to put away his apprentice, without an order of Court.
42. No person to entice away another’s apprentice or servant.
43. Every person to enroll his apprentice.
44. The Court to punish disobedient apprentices after its discretion.
45. No freeman to “open shop” before he hath served one year as journeyman.
46. No Barber to use more than one shop.
47. No Surgeon to serve by sea or land before he and “his furniture” be examined and viewed.
48. Reformation of abuses in disobedient masters and servants.
49. No person to serve as a journeyman unless free of the Company.
50. No person to use surgery before he be examined and admitted.
51. No person to examine but the Examiners.
52. No Examiner to be chosen but by the Court.
53. Every Surgeon to be at every lecture on Surgery.
54. No Surgeon to defraud another of his patient.
55. No Person to shew his porringers, saucers or basons with blood therein.
56. Every patient in danger of death or maim to be presented to the Masters.
57. No person to take such presentation but a Master or Governor.
58. Ordinance against unskilful practice in Surgery.
59. No Anatomy to be dissected out of the Common Hall.
60. Anatomies to be decently buried.
61. Warrant to create a Yeomanry.
62. No “Courts of Assistants” to be held on Tuesdays.
63. No Court of Assistants to be under the number of sixteen persons.
64. Order of precedence in speaking.
65. Every Member to go and sit in his due place.
66. Ordinance against contentious and troublesome persons.
67. Ordinance against revealers of Court secrets.
68. No alien or stranger to bear the office of Master or Governor.
69. Ordinance against unseemly behaviour towards the Masters or Governors.
70. Ordinance against blotting or defaceing of books, pictures or monuments.
71. Ordinance against any of the Livery refusing to attend in his Livery gown.
72. Pensions for decayed members.
73. Warrant to search for hurt persons and malefactors.
74. As to quarterage.
75. Third Warden’s duties as to receipts.
76. And as to payments.
77. Duties of Fourth or Renter Warden.
78. Renter Warden to furnish accounts.
79. As to the Audit.
80. Ordinance against Sunday trading by Barbers.
81. As to fines and penalties.
82. Power to the Beadle to distrain (under a Warrant signed by the Masters) for all fines; also power to dismiss disobedient persons, and to inflict corporal punishment.
Penalties of varying amounts are specified for breaches of any of the foregoing Ordinances.
The By-Laws are signed “Ellesmere, Canc̃,” “T. Dorset” and “Jo: Popham,” and the three seals of their arms are pendant.
8th September, 1606. This daie it is ordered that the M{rs} shall pay v{li} to M{r} Michaell the Lord Cheif Justices man for his paynes in penninge of o{r} ordynaunces.
5th February, 1607. This day it is ordered that a Court howse be errected upon the Bulwarke behind the Hall of this Company for the M{rs} or Governors to kepe their Courtꝭ at the charge of this Company And M{r.} ffenton and M{r.} Jenkins are to joyne with the M{rs} of this Company in the same buildinge.
This Court Room was built within the circular Bulwark at the west end of the old Livery Hall, from which it was shut off by a screen wall or partition; many years later this screen was removed, and the whole thrown into one large apartment, and used as the Livery Hall.
21st January, 1608. The pˀnt M{rs} are this daye authorized to furnishe the newe Roome in the Bulwark w{th} cloth of Arras or tapestry or w{th} waynscot as they shall think fittest at the chardge of this howse, and the Chimney peece & wyndowes to be waynscotted.
1608. The Colony of Virginia (so named from the Virgin Queen Elizabeth, in whose reign it was discovered) was in an unsatisfactory condition by reason of its scanty population, want of enterprise and other causes; whereupon the Council of Virginia endeavouring the prosperity of the Colony, sent a letter to the Lord Mayor propounding a scheme of emigration and colonisation to be undertaken by the City, which should ease the Metropolis “of a swarme of unnecessarie inmates,” make the fortunes of the emigrants (and of the “undertakers”) and benefit the Colony. This letter is so interesting that no apology is necessary for reproducing it here.
WHEREAS the lords of his Ma{tes} councill, commissioners for the Subsedie, desirous to ease the cittie and suburbs of a swarme of unnecessarie inmates as a continuall cause of dearth and famine, and the verie origenall of all plagues almost that happen in this kingdome, have advised yo{r} lordshippe and yo{r} brethren, in an ease of state, to make some voluntarie contribuc͠on for their remove into the plantation of Virginia, w{ch} we understand you all seemed to like as an action pleasing to God and happie for this com̃onwealth; We the councell and companie of this ho{ble} plantation, willing to yelde unto your lop̃p and them all good satisfac͠on, have entered into consultac͠on w{th} o{r}selves, what may be everie mans chg̃es, and what of everie private familie, w{ch} we send herew{th} at large, not as a thing w{ch} we would exact from you, but that you may see, as in a true glasse, the true chg̃e, w{ch} we wholly commend unto yo{r} grave wisdoms, both for the somme and man{r} of leavie; onlie give us leave thus farre to enforme you that we give no bills of adventure for a lesse some than 12{li} 10{s.} ps̃uminge it wont be an infinite trouble now, and confusion in the retribuc͠on, but if your lop̃ make any seasment, or raise any voluntarie contribuc͠on out of the best disposed and most able of the companies, we are willing to give o{r} bills of adventure to the m{r} and wardens, to the general use and behoof of that companie, yf by wards, to the good of that ward, or otherwise as it shall please you and your brethren out of y{r} better experience to direct. And if the inmate called before you and enjoyned to remove shall alledge that he hath no place to remove unto, but must lie in the streats, and being offerd this journey shall demand what shalbe their pˀsent maintenance, what their future hopes, yt may please you to lett them know that for the pˀsent they shall have meat, drink, and clothing, w{th} an house, orchard, and garden for the meanest familie, and a possession of lands to them and their posteritie, one hundreth acres for everie man’s pˀson that hath a head or a body able to endure labour, as much for his wife, and as much for his child that is of yeres to do sˀvice to the colonie, w{th} further pˀticular reward according to theire pˀticuler meritt and desert; and yf yo{r} lordshipp and yo{r} brethren shalbe pleased to put in any private adventure for yo{r} selves in pˀticuler, you shalbe sure to receive according to your pˀporc͠on of the adventure, equall pˀts w{th} us adventurers from the beginning, both of the comodities returned or land to be divided; and because you shall see (being aldermen of so famous a cittie) we beare you due respect, we are contented, having but one badge of grace and favor from his Ma{tie}, to participate w{th} you therein, and to make as many of you as will adventure 50{li.} or more, fellow councellors from the first day w{th} us who have spent double and treble as much as is required, abidden the hazard of three sevˀall discoveries, w{th} much care and diligence, and many days adventure, and as yo{r} deputies, and yo{r} assistants, in yo{r} private wards, so shall as many of them as will adventure but 25{li.} present money, be made pˀties of this companie and assistants of this councell; and thus as an action concerning God and the advancement of religion, the present ease, future hon{r} and safety of this kingdome, the strength of o{r} navie, the visible hope of a great and rich trade, w{th} many secrete blessings not yet discovered, we commend the cause to the wisdome and zeale of yo{r} selfe and yo{r} brethren and you, and it, and us, to the holie pˀtection of the Almightie.
The City took up the scheme heartily, a large sum was subscribed and a great number of emigrants crossed the water. The Barber-Surgeons invested £25, but never received anything for it again.
23rd March, 1609. This daye it is ordered that the pˀnt M{rs} shall advent{r} xxv{li.} uppon a Bill of Exchange for the plantac͠on of Virginia, of the stock of this howse.
6th January, 1609. In obedience to a precept from the Lord Mayor, £10 was paid to the Chamberlain, towards the construction of a Garner for the use of the City.
25th May, 1610. A precept came from the Lord Mayor calling upon the Company “to be readie in yo{r} bardge well and richlie sett forthe before vii of the clocke in the morning” on the 31st January, to go to Chelsea to meet the eldest son of James I, on which occasion he was to go from Richmond to Whitehall to be created Prince of Wales; whereupon the following minute is recorded:--
AT this Court a precept beinge sent from my lord Maior unto this Company w{ch} beinge at this Court read, the effect whereof was that our Company on Thursdaie next shalbe reddie to attend my Lord Maior in their barge for the honor of this Citie in the enterteynement of the high & mightie prince at Chelsey. It was ordered that none of the Company shold be warned for this service but onely those w{ch} ware of the Assistaunce of the Clotheinge to goe in the Barge, the reason thereof is that a barge cold not be gotten large enough to carry the whole lyvery.
1611. In this year came a precept from the Lord Mayor, by authority of the King, complaining of “the abuse growing by excesse and straunge fashions of apparell, used by manye apprentises, and by the inordynate pryde of mayde servaunts and women servaunts in their excesse of apparell and follye in varietie of newe fashions, and to admonish them to have a due and speciall care to see a spedye reformac͠on had in everye one of their servaunts.” What effect this had upon the apprentices and servants of the Barber-Surgeons we are not told, but doubtless they were properly admonished.
1st July, 1614. A precept was received to the effect that the King had determined to borrow £100,000 of the City, and that the Barber-Surgeons were assessed at £600 towards this loan, which they were to lend, or which they were coolly informed they could compound for, by an absolute fine of £30! As the Court well knew that they would never again see a halfpenny of the £600 if lent, they quickly and wisely determined to pay the £30.
Profiting by past experience, the next extracts show that the Court proceeded warily in the matter of “adventuring” in the State Lottery.
29th April, 1614. Att this Court the M{r} propounding how they had receaved Letters from the Lordꝭ of the privy Councell and from the lord Maior thereby exhorting & intreating them to call their assistauntes together and to admonishe the genˀall body to be adventurers in the great lottery w{ch} is comyng forth, Whereupon the same lrẽs being considered on at this Court, it is thought fitt and ordered that the M{rs} shall att their pleasures call together the body of the Company, and they being gathered together, to admonish & pˀswade them to be adventerers in the same Lottery.
17th October, 1614. The Court having collected a sum of money for the Lottery, it was ordered that it should not be paid to the Treasurer, Sir Thos. Smith, until the Company shall be “assured” by a Bill of Adventure under seal “for their adventure unto virgynia, as also that it shalbe published in print certeynelie when the lotterey shalbe drawen.”
The College of Physicians had been for many years very jealous as to the Barber-Surgeons trespassing on their preserves, and as far back as 12th November, 1595, wrote a long letter to their “verie loving freends” the Master and Wardens, cautioning the members of the Company against practising physic, and stating that no few of them were culpable in the matter, but that the College had hitherto forborne to molest or punish them; the letter continues, “but for that we now see by daily experience that upon our lenetie and sufferance this inconvenience more and more increaseth, insomuch that both in credit and otherwise, it seemeth to touch us more neere than well can be indured; We have therefore thought it good to put you in mynd thereof, and therewithal earnestly and freendlie to request you, that among yourselves some such discreet order may be taken heerin, that the like offence hereafter maie not be committed by them or any of theirs. Wherein if we shall perceave you as ready to fulfil our honest request, as we are willing to maintain good amytie and concord with you and your Companie, we wilbe very glad thereof and geve you thanks therefore. If not, then as we are fully minded to defend our privileges and to deal with the particular offendors therein, as order of law and our ordinances in that behalf requireth; so we trust the body of your Societie will not be offended therewith. And so we bid you most hartelie farewell.”
The above letter is taken from Dr. Goodall’s History of the College of Physicians. Dr. Goodall gives several instances of Barber-Surgeons and Apothecaries being fined or imprisoned for practising physic; and, indeed, there seems to have been a strife waging between the College and the Company for a long period.
1617. The Physicians in 15 James I obtained a Charter confirming their Charter of 10 Henry viij, with several additional privileges and clauses in restraint of the privileges of the Barber-Surgeons, who thereupon petitioned the King that that Charter might not be confirmed by Act of Parliament, as the Physicians were desirous that it should be. The King on 4th February, 1620, ordered that the petitioners should be left to seek any lawful remedy either in Parliament or otherwise, as they might be advised, and accordingly on 23rd April, 1624, they presented a petition to the House of Commons, who ordered that the Physicians’ Patent should be brought into the Committee of Grievances, and both parties heard by Counsel, the consequence of which was that the Physicians proceeded no further with their Bill.
1632. Later on the Physicians endeavoured again to obtain a supremacy over the Barber-Surgeons, and on 13th June, 1632, procured an Order in Council which made it incumbent upon Surgeons in certain serious and specified cases of Surgery, to call in a “learned Physitian,” and to enforce this order they procured the Attorney General to exhibit a Bill in the Star Chamber in which the obnoxious clause was inserted, but on a Petition of the Barber-Surgeons complaining of the injury that would thereby accrue not only to themselves, but to the public, the King, by an Order of Court dated 22nd July, 1635, directed the clause to be struck out.
After the Restoration, the Physicians again endeavoured to procure an Act of Parliament confirming their Charter, whereupon the Barber-Surgeons claimed to have a clause inserted in the Act in the nature of a proviso that nothing therein contained should be construed to the prejudice of their privileges, and again the Physicians seem to have been checkmated, for they allowed their proposed Act to fall through.
Kings’ Barbers and Kings’ Surgeons seem to have secured substantial benefits from their official positions, as the following notices (from Domestic State Papers at the Record Office) testify.
25th August, 1625. There is a letter of this date from Sir James Fullerton to Secretary Conway, intimating that it is His Majesty’s pleasure to grant to Michael Andrews (Master 1635 and King’s Surgeon) a pension of £150 per annum for life.
17th December, 1625. And at this date is a grant to Thomas Caldwell (Master 1627 and King’s Barber).
A graunt to Thomas Caldwell esq{r} his Mat{s} servant of ye som̃e of one thousand poundes To be received as well out of the remainder of three hundred pounds due to his Ma{tie} by Richard Harbin sometime Collecto{r} of his Ma{t}ꝭ greenwax before his accesse to the Crowne and out of the arrerages of grenewax money then due unto his Ma{ty.} As also out of the other grenewax moneys now accrewing to his Ma{tie} not being in farme. And is granted to him as of his Ma{ts} bounty in lieu of 800{li} formerly graunted unto him by his Ma{ty} of w{ch} he received no benefitt. Subscrˀ by Mr. Attorney Genˀall upon significac͠on of his Ma{t}ꝭ pleasuere by the Lord Trẽr.
In addition to stray grants like the above, the perquisites and fees attaching to the Office of King’s Barber were very lucrative, and Mr. Caldwell must have done exceedingly well out of the following stroke of business.
January, 1626. Whereas his Ma{tie} hath bene pleased to appoint Mr. Thomas Caldwell his Ma{ts} servant and Barber to make provisions of all such necessaries as are to be used at the Ceremony of Bathing the Kn{ts} of the Bath at this his Ma{ties} Coronac͠on to be holden on the 2{d} day of February next at Westm{r} as to his place by auntient custome belongeth I do therefore will and require all such whome it may concearne to take notice thereof hereby for permitting him to doe and performe all such services as hath bene accustomed in that behalfe & for delivering such necessaries in kynd or allowance of money to the valeu thereof as shalbe by him required for the same according to the auntient custome heretofore used therein. The number of the said Kn{ts} for whome such provisions are to be made being 80, by his Ma{tie} appointed to receave that degree.
ARUNDELL & SURREY.
Examined by W{m} Ryley } Lancaster Herald }
Mr. Caldwell does not appear to have left his widow well provided for, as we read under date 10th July, 1643:
Upon the distressed Petic͠on of Widdow Thamar Caldwall late Wife of M{r} Thomas Caldwall deceased there is given to her of the gift of this House v{li.}
1624 and 1625. In the minutes of this period are constant notices of the “visitation,” and of “the contagious tyme.” The Plague raged with great severity in London in 1625, and it is said that over 40,000 died of it in the year. The Company appear to have been very liberal in their gifts of money to any who had the least claim upon them, the relief being frequently stated to have been given by “reason of the hardnes of the tymes.”
11th April, 1625. This daye the pˀcept for provision of corne sent unto o{r} Companie by the lord Maio{r} of london was here read in Courte, And this Courte is fullie resolved that the present M{rs} doe give unto the Lord Maio{r} and returne him this answeare that the Companie is provided of their proportion of corne and more they are not able to provide or receive into their charge.
1628. This year the Company were compelled to “lend” the King £360, which they with great difficulty raised, the greater part being borrowed at interest to enable them to do so. They also paid £30 towards a “present” (?) of £5,000 given by the City to the Palsgrave (Frederick, Prince Elector Palatine, son-in-law of James I).
15th August, 1629. On this day was sealed the Company’s new Charter from Charles I. It is in Latin on five large skins of parchment with the Great Seal of England pendant. There is a portrait of the King with a stiletto beard in the initial letter, and an ornamental heading along the top of the first skin. This Charter ratifies that of James I, directs that public lectures on Surgery shall be given, and confirms and somewhat varies the old regulations for the governance of the practitioners of that science.
22nd October, 1629. The Company evidently began now to kick at the numerous demands made upon its purse by the authorities, for a precept coming from the Lord Mayor demanding £12 10_s._ contribution towards a pageant, it was ordered that it be not paid until the Court was satisfied that it could be legally demanded, and enquiry made as to whether or no other Companies had paid similar contributions.
1632. The fabric of old St. Paul’s being in a lamentable state of decay, the celebrated Archbishop Laud wrote a letter to the Barber-Surgeons asking a contribution towards its repair. Ever ready to assist in good works, the Company cheerfully devoted a very considerable sum towards that object, notwithstanding the comparative poverty to which they had been reduced (in consequence of the grievous impositions made upon them by the authorities in the shape of forced loans and other unconstitutional demands). Moreover, they recorded their benefaction, in a delightfully expressed minute, which will be found at the end of the following letter.
9th April, 1632. The letter written by William Lord Bishopp of London and directed to this Court concerneing our contribuc͠on towardꝭ the repaire of St Paulls Church in London being now much ruined was here in Court reade, the teno{r} whereof is as followeth, vidz{t}
To the right worp{ll} my very worthy ffreindꝭ the Maister Wardeins and Assistantꝭ of the Companie of Barbar surgions London, theis
S. in xp̃o.[117] After my verie hartie comendac͠ons, you cannot but take notice of his Ma{t}ꝭ most hon{ble} and pious intention for the Repaire of the decayes of S{t} Pawles Church here in London, being the Mother Church of this Citty and Diocess, and the greate Cathedrall of this Kingdome. A greate dishono{r} it is not onely to this Citty but to the whole State to see that Auncient and goodly Pyle of building soe decayed as it is, but it will be a farr greater if care should not be taken to prevent the fall of it into ruin, And it would be noe lesse disgrace to Religion happily established in this Kingdome, if it should have soe litle power over the mindes of men as not to prevaile with them to keepe those eminent places of Gods service in due and decent repaire which their fforefathers buylt in tymes by their owne confession not soe full of the knowledge of gods truth as this present age is. I am not ignorant how many worthy workes have bene done of late in and about this Citty towardꝭ the building and repayring of Churches which makes me hope that every mans purse will open to this greate and necessary worke (according to Gods blessinge upon him) soe much tending to the service of God and the hono{r} of this nation. The generall body of the Cittye have done verie worthily in their bounty allready as alsoe the lord Maio{r} Aldermen and Sheriffes severally for their owne pˀsons. Theis are therefore accordinge to their examples hartily to pray and desire you the Maister Wardeins and other Assistants of the worthy Company of Barbar Surgions to contribute out of y{e} publicke Stock, to the worke aforesaid what you out of y{r} Charitye and devotion shall thinke fitt, and to pay the Summe resolved on by you into the Chamber of London at or before our Lady Day next, praying you that I may receave by any servant of yo{r} Companye a note what the Summe is which you resolve to give. And for this Charity of yo{rs} whatsoever it shall prove to be, I shall not onely give you harty thankes, but be as ready to serve you and every of you, as you are to serve God and his Church. Soe not doubting of yo{r} love and forwardnes to this greate worke, I leave you to the grace of God, and shall soe rest
[117] Health in Christ.
Yo{r} very loving ffreind
GUIL: LONDON:
London house, January 30. 1632.
And thereupon this Court deepely considering the contentꝭ of that letter together with the pˀnte ruines and dilapidac͠ons of the said Church, and as faithfull and charitable members obliged largely to contribute to soe pious and religious a worke Doe nowe order that out of the stock and revenew of this house there shalbe paid into the Chamber of london towardꝭ the said repaire x{li} pˀntely and x{li} yearely for nine yeares followeing to make it upp compleate a C{li} as of the free guift of this house. And if att any tyme hereafter the worke doe cease that then our payementꝭ to cease likewise.
1633. This year the Company built a granary at the Hall, for the store of Corn.
12th July, 1633. A new set of By-Laws was framed and allowed by the proper authorities. These are extant on twelve great skins of parchment, more wordy and of greater length than those of 4th James I! They are, however, very similar to those, with technical alterations and amendments here and there, and provision is made for Lectures on Surgery, demonstrations of anatomy, and for the better Examination of Surgeons. Clause 19 provides that any freemen of the mystery who shall use any arts, trades or sciences other than Surgery “shall be accepted, reputed, adjudged and taken for Barbars.” Empirics and impostors were to be rigorously dealt with, and the Court was to have supervision over all Navy Surgeons, their chests, medicines and instruments. No Barbers or Surgeons were to be impressed for the Navy without license of the Court, and numerous regulations were made for the government of the Company.
The document is signed by Richard Earl of Portland, Lord Treasurer; Sir Thomas Richardson and Sir Robert Heath, the Lords Chief Justices; the seals of the first two are still pendant, but that of Sir Robert Heath is missing.
1636. Spurred into further action for the advancement of the science of Surgery, which their extended powers under the new By-Laws had conferred upon them, the Company determined upon building a Theatre for the delivery of Lectures, and for anatomical purposes, etc. This they set about in 1636, employing the great Inigo Jones as their Architect, who about this period also designed and carried out the present beautiful Court Room or Parlour, one of the best proportioned and prettiest rooms in London.
11th February, 1636. Upon the moc͠on of o{r} M{r} to this Court concerneing the want of a publique Theater for Anatomycall exercises and Sceletons and a lesser roome for private discections, This Court doth order that if the M{rs} or Governo{rs} upon their petic͠on to the Lord Maio{r} and Aldrẽn they have the bullwarke & long stripp of ground lieing betwixt the gould smiths tenement & clothw: tenemtꝭ & london wall at the one end & the Companies hall & pˀlor & london wall at the other end, by purchase in fee farme or a long lease from the Cittie, that then a Theater to the largenes of the upper ground betwixt the goldsmithes tenem̃t & the clothworkers tenem{t} on the one side & london wall on the other side shalbe be ovally built for the Wor̃p[118] and comiditie of this Companie at the Charge of this house.
[118] Worship.
The piece of ground on which it was proposed to erect the Theatre was then on lease to the Company from the City. The Lease was dated 29th March, 7 Charles I (1631), and made between the Mayor, &c., of London, of the one part and the Masters, &c., of the Barber-Surgeons, of the other part. In consideration of £20 paid by the Company the City leased to them lwark and the houses Roomes and buildings therein or thereupon made or erected, And all that ground or garden plott with thappurtenñces scituat lyinge and beinge in the parish of St Olave in Silver Street in the Citie of London next unto the Wall of the same Citie there of the one side, and the landes of the saide Maisters or Governors and others on the other side late in the tenure or occupac͠on of the right honoro{ble} Henry late Lord Wyndsor deceased or of his assignes and now in the tenure or occupac͠on of the said Maisters,” etc., from the feast of the Annunciation, 1631, for forty-one years at a rent of £3. The lease contained the usual covenants of a repairing lease, as also one “that neither they the saide Masters or Governors their successors nor assigns shall or will att any time or times during the said Terme suffer any Inmate or Inmates to dwell in any part of the premises afore demised.”
5th May, 1636. There is an Indenture of Lease of this date made between the Mayor, &c., of London, and the Masters, &c., of the Barber-Surgeons, which after reciting the last mentioned lease proceeds: “And whereas the said Maisters or Governors of the Misterie and Comonaltie of Barbars and Surgians of London for the better enhableing of them in the Arte of Surgerie Doe intend to erect and build a decent Roome or Theatre on part of the premisses for the keeping therein A learned and constant Lecture in the Theorie and practiqʒ partꝭ of Surgerie As also to pˀforme their publique operac͠ons of Anatomies and other exercises thereunto belonging, Which will be verie chargeable to them Wherein the said Maior and Cominaltie and Citizens are desirous and willinge to aide and further the saide Maisters or Governors in the setting forward of soe necessarie and comendable a worke tendinge to the generall good of the whole kingdome,” wherefore the Mayor, &c., leased the said premises to the Company for a further term of 200 years upon the expiry of the lease then running, at the same rent of £3 per annum, the Lessees covenanting to build the Theatre within seven years.
16th May, 1636. Upon o{r} M{rs} report to this Court that the Lord Maio{r} & Aldrẽn have freely graunted to this house a new lease of CC yeares comenceing from the expirac͠on of o{r} lease now in being It is ordered with the generall consent of the whole Court here present that the Theater shalbe proceeded in and built according to the plotts drawne by his Ma{t}ꝭ Surveigher.
3rd August, 1636. It is ordered by this Court that the Companies Armes with Helmett Crest supporters and mantlings shalbe sett up in Portland Stone under the Cantilaver does of the Theater being over the Windowe next the Granarye.
Alsoe the mottoe viz{t.} SPECIOSUM HOC THEATRUM ANATOMICUM ERECTÑ FUIT MICHAELE ANDREWS CHIRURGO REGIO AC COMUNIONI BARBITONSOꝜ ET CHIRURGOꝜ Pˀ TEMPORE PRÆFECTO, GUARDIANIS VERO JOANNE WARDE NICOLAS HEATH ET WILHELMO HUCKLE ANNO AB EXHIBITO IN CARNE MESSIÆ SUPRA MILLESIMUM SEXCENTESIMUM TRIGESIMO SEXTO shalbe engraven in the voyde stone worke over the greate doore into the Theater.
A plan of the Theatre is preserved in a collection of the works of Inigo Jones, at Worcester College, Oxford, and a short description of it is found in Hatton’s New View of London, 1708. The curiosities in the Barber-Surgeons’ museum of those days will excite a smile when compared with the collection now at Lincoln’s Inn Fields. Hatton says that the Theatre was built in “an elliptical form, and commodiously fitted up with four degrees of seats of cedar wood, and adorned with the figures of the seven liberal sciences, and the twelve signs of the zodiac. Also containing the skeleton of an ostrich, put up by Dr. Hobbs, 1682, with a busto of King Charles I. Two humane skins on the wood frames, of a man and a woman, in imitation of Adam and Eve, put up in 1645; a mummy skull, given by Mr. Loveday, 1655. The sceleton of Atherton with copper joints (he was executed) given by Mr. Knowles in 1693. The figure of a man flead, where all the muscles appear in due place and proportion, done after the life. The sceletons of Cambery Bess and Country Tom (as they then call them), 1638; and three other sceletons of humane bodies.”
Hogarth has, in ghastly style depicted the dissection of a criminal in this Theatre, in which the skeletons above referred to are seen in niches in the wall.
The plan of the Company’s Estate, has been kindly supplied for this work by Mr. Charles John Shoppee, as surveyed by him in 1869, previous to the demolition of the old Livery Hall, Kitchen, etc. The Theatre had been pulled down in 1784, and houses erected on its site; the Theatre is, however, shewn upon this plan, as being more interesting than the houses which supplanted it. In 1636 the Company commenced the erection of the Livery Hall and present Court Room, the work being carried out from the designs and under the superintendence of the celebrated Inigo Jones, the Livery Hall was, however, burnt in 1666, and that shown upon the plan is the one which was erected after the Great Fire.
5th September, 1636. The Plague was again abroad in London, and the Court, for fear of infection by meeting together, resolved as follows:
In regard of the now greate visitac͠on of the plague This Court doth deferre the Courts for the daye of Rules the Vew daye & other publique Courts till it shall please God to cease the Sicknes.
23rd September, 1636. The Lord Mayor having requested the Company to nominate “twoe Surgians to take care of those that were infected with the plague in this Cittie & liberties,” the Court thought that two was a wholly insufficient number and nominated six Surgeons to be presented to the Court of Aldermen.
2nd October, 1636. £5 was ordered to be paid in to the Chamber of London towards the relief of the poor, stricken with the Plague.
30th March, 1637. The Company were assessed to pay £10 “ship money,” whereupon an order was made that they should forbear to pay it, and a Committee appointed to wait on the Court of Aldermen to petition against the assessment. The application was, however, unsuccessful, as by an Order of Court, 29th March, 1638, the money was directed to be paid.
8th November, 1638. The Court of Aldermen having assessed the Company to furnish 80 quarters of corn in lieu of 60 as heretofore provided, it was resolved to petition against it. This would be a very important matter to the Company as the assessments for all public purposes were made upon the City Companies pro rata with their corn quarterages, and if the 80 quarters were allowed to stand, it would raise all the future assessments 33 per cent. The result however, of the protest does not appear in the minutes.
28th October, 1640. On receipt of a precept from the Lord Mayor, it was ordered that three barrels of Gunpowder should be bought and stored.
1640. The Company unwillingly agreed to lend the King £400, and were put to great inconvenience in raising the money, which was required by Charles for his campaign in Scotland.
After several skirmishes with the Scots, the English Army was at length disbanded, and the King went himself to Scotland to negotiate the difference which had arisen by his attempted interference in Church matters in that Kingdom; he returned to London in November, 1641, and the following minute refers to the preparations made by our Company to meet him.
22nd November, 1641. Upon reading the Lord Maiors precepts for the Companyes enterteyning the King upon his returne from Scotland It is ordered that the Ma{r} and Wardens, Mr. Serjeant Clowes, Mr. Richard Wateson, Mr. Woodall, Mr. Powell, Mr. Burgin, Mr. Heath, Mr. Henry Wateson, Mr. Bignall, Mr. Dye, Mr. Arris, Henry Boone, and Thomas Turner, shalbe attendant on Twesday next well mounted on Horseback in plush or Velvett with Chaines of Gold, and that John Perkins shall beare the Pendon with our Coate of Armes on Horseback and that these 18 ffree men shalbe Decently cladd in the Companyes Colours of White and Greene, each of them with a greene flatt Cap with a white Ribbon about it, a greene Cassock and Drawers of the same Stuffe Whiffler like laced with a white Lace a white ribaning and a greene Ribbin athwart theire Brests, and each of them a Truncheon in theire hands in the forenoone, and in the aftˀnoone each of them 2 Torches, and these 18 to attend perticulerly one of them to each of the Horsemen, viz{t.}
(Then follows a list of the freemen chosen.)
The “Riding out” on this occasion must have been a magnificent sight, if all of the Companies spent proportionately to the outlay of ours, which was no less than £39 17_s._ 10_d._ upon decorations, etc., for those taking part in the procession. Strype informs us that--
The Lord Mayor on horesback wearing a gown of crimson velvet & a collar of SS, and attended by his suite, rode in the front of the procession to meet the King. Then followed the Aldermen in scarlet gowns and the City council and chief officers in black gowns. Upon reaching Moorfields, there waited in a readiness to attend his Lordship and the service, about five hundred horsemen selected out of the Liveries of the several Companies, being Masters, Wardens, and prime men of each Company in velvet or plush coats and suits, with chains of gold, being well horsed and gallantly furnished, every Company having a horseman in the front carrying a pendant with that Company’s arms to which he did belong (for distinction sake), and a footman to attend each horseman of the Livery with truncheons and torches as before, both horsemen with the pendants and footmen being suited cap-a-pee with the Company’s colours on which they waited. There were also fourteen Trumpeters, with trumpets, banners and scarfs, who were placed two between every hundred of the horse, and four at the head of the troop. The procession moved on to Kingsland, where the Lord Mayor and Aldermen and the Companies awaited the Kings approach, while the Sheriffs attended by seventy-two men in Scarlet Cloaks trimmed with silver lace (the colours of the City) with javelins and feathers and four trumpeters, rode as far as Stamford Hill, and there met their Majesties and escorted them to Kingsland.
His Majesty was accompanied by the Queen, the Prince, the Duke of York, the Princess Mary and the Prince Elector Palatine, and after receiving an address, the Royal party joined the civic procession to London, entering it at Moorgate, and proceeded through London Wall, Bishopsgate Street, Cornhill and Cheapside, to the banquet at Guildhall, amidst the City Companies in their formalities and stands on each side of the streets, the City conduits running with a diversity of wines.
1643. The relations between the King and the City having become estranged in the fearful distractions of these times, Charles endeavoured to conciliate the citizens with a message, which was publicly read at Guildhall on the 13th January, and later on he sent a circular letter to the Masters of the several Companies requiring them to call their freemen and apprentices together, to read to them a copy of a letter which he had sent to the City on the 17th January. The Court of the Barber-Surgeons met on Tuesday, 24th inst., and cautiously record that they would have summoned their freemen for the next day, but that it was a fast day and that in the interim an order had come from the Committee of Safety that the letter, etc., should not be read.
24th January, 1643. The Kings Letter sent to the M{rs} & Wardens of this Company was read in Court and the printed Letter in it and the Cittyes Petic͠on and his Ma{ties} gracious answer unto it. And but that the morrow was fast day being the last Wednesday in this Moneth the ffreemen and apprentices of this Company could not be summoned to appeare then, it should have bin read. Soe that in the Interim an Order of Comand from the Lords and Comõns was directed to this Company to countermaund the said Letters in these words,
Die Martis 24{to} Januarii, 164-2/3. At the Comittee of Lords and Comõns for the safety of the Kingdome.
Whereas there are divers Letters pretended to be sent by his Ma{tie} to the M{rs} and Wardens of the severall Halls in the city of London with Two litle Bookes therein closed the one intituled The humble Petic͠on of the Maior, Aldermen and Comõns of the City of London to his Ma{tie.} And the other intituled his Ma{ties} Letter and declarac͠on to the Sheriffes and City of London Dated the 17{th} of January, which evidently tendeth to sedition and setting of the whole State in a Combustion. These are therefore strictly to charge & comand the M{rs} and Wardens of every Hall in the City to whome the said Letters and Bookes inclosed shalbe directed to forbeare to publish or open any of them till both the Houses of Parliament shall give further order therein. And the M{rs} and Wardens of every Hall are required to bring the said Letters with the Messengers thereof to this Comittee which they will take to be an Argument of theire good Affection to the Parliament
Pembroke Montgomery Bolingbroke Ed: Manchester W. Say & Seale Ed: Howard Jo: Evelin Jo: Pym Antho: Nicoll.
17th January, 1644. It is ordered that in respect of the greate troubles and distractions of these times there shalbe noe publique Anatomy this yeare dissected.
1644. The Company seem to have become greatly impoverished by the venture in Ireland, the rebuilding of their premises, and the forced loans to the King and the Parliament. In a certificate given by the Master and Wardens (5th September, 1644) to be produced in a suit in which they were defendants, they state that their debts are £3,000, and that they can get no return of any of the money lent for public purposes, or even the interest of it.
If the Stuarts acted in an unconstitutional manner in their oppressive demands upon the Companies, the Roundheads were as bad, with just this difference, that, with all their pretensions to purity, piety and high-mindedness, they did not hesitate to practise actual dishonesty in their modus operandi of squeezing the Companies, as the following painful incident from our books testifies:--The Company had borrowed from Mr. Richard Wateson, one of the Assistants, £1,200 upon sealed bonds, for the express purpose of meeting the demands which had been made upon them by the King and Parliament from time to time. Mr. Wateson having been declared a “Papist and Delinquent,” his property was seized, and the Bonds of the Barber-Surgeons, found in his strong chest, were taken to the Committee for Gloucester and Hereford, sitting at Grocers’ Hall. These worthies, in conjunction with the Committee for Sequestrations, came down upon the Company and demanded payment of the £1,200 for which they had given their bonds to their brother, Mr. Wateson. The Court deeming this a monstrous piece of injustice, hesitated to comply, whereupon the Committees threatened to seize the Company’s entire estate; and then the Court resolved to petition Parliament, but the House not sitting for some time the petition could not be prosecuted, and the Committee being urgent, the Company most reluctantly agreed to pay down £400 and to have the bonds cancelled. Although these shameful terms were definitely agreed upon, the Committees a few days later broke faith, demanding £400 cash and the Company’s bond for another £100, to which the Company, like the lamb with the wolf at its throat, nolens volens, consented. The iniquity of this business was made apparent to the Committees, who were well aware that the Company had incurred the debt to Mr. Wateson in order to meet the previous rapacity of themselves, and yet they hesitated not to compel the Company to submit to a further fine of £500 for having complied with their demands in the past, besides manifesting the dishonesty proposed by them in offering to cancel the debt due by the Company to Mr. Wateson.
29th April, 1645. By the power and authority to this Court given by severall Orders of a late Court of Assistants, this Court for and towards the raiseing of the 400{li} agreed to be paid in part of the composic͠on for Mr. Watson’s debt unto the the Comittee for the releife of Gloucester, &c., did pawne all the Companyes plate both guilt and white, weighing 1,120 oz. 1/3 or thereabouts, unto Mary Crosse of London Widdow for the Sum̃ of 280{li} by a Writeing of Bargaine and Sale this day sealed with this Companyes Com̃on Seale bearing date the 16{th} day of this Instant Aprill with a provisoe of Redempc͠on. And borrowed of Mr. George Dunn 100{li} more at Interest at vj{li} 10{s} pˀ annum pˀ centum for w{ch} he tooke the secureity of our Com̃on Seale.
A few years later on (14th September, 1648), Mr. Edward Arris presented to the Court a letter from Mr. Wateson, wherein was intimated that he expected the Company to repay him the money borrowed, the bonds for which had been seized by Cromwell’s party, and for which the Company had already compounded, whereupon we read “This Court doth declare theire acknowledgement of a great respect and esteeme they have and beare towards him and shalbe ready to doe him all the right they can without prejudicing the Company”; and again on 30th April, 1650, “Mr. Richard Wateson an ancient M{r} of this Company Doth this day desire to know the mind of this Court concerning the 1,200{li} by him lent to this Company and sequestred in this Company’s hands and compounded ffor 500{li} in full of principall and Interest, The matter being of great Consequence, this Court doth take time to consider of it and to give him an answer therein.”
What answer Mr. Wateson got, I do not know; he was held in great esteem by the Company, and doubtless some honourable compromise was arranged.
In their negotiations with the Committees, the Company seem to have been able to impress the Chairman favourably on certain occasions, though there is grave reason to apprehend that this official of the party of purity was open to a bribe, as the following minutes would seem to indicate.
27th October, 1645. The Company having been threatened with sequestration of their entire estate unless an assessment made upon them was paid on Friday following, a Committee of the Court was ordered to wait on Mr. Scawin, the Chairman of the Committee for the Army, to beg his favourable consideration of the Company’s poor estate; the result is seen in the next entry.
14th September, 1648. This Court takeing notice of the greate Love and ffavour of Mr. Scawin Chaireman to the Comittee ffor the Army expressed oftentimes upon severall occasions towards our Company Doth thinke fitt in gratitude and accordingly doth order That the present Governours doe present to him a guift of the value of vj{li} 13{s} 4{d} The quality and price of the guift is left to theire discretions.
1646. To relieve them of their great debts, the Company about this period raised considerable sums by granting annuities; the following are examples in point:--
24th March, 1646. This day M{r} Nicholas Heath payd the sum of 200{li} to the use of this Company and is the purchase money for an Annuity of 26{li} pˀ añn. for 10 yeares to himselfe and Grace his Wife Whereupon the Deed of Grant of the said Annuity was sealed with the Com̃on Seale and delivered to theire use.
Alsoe this day M{ris} Elizabeth ffreeman payd the sum of 200{li} the Purchase money for the like Annuity of 26{li} pˀ añn. for 10 yeares and the Deed for that purpose was sealed and delivered to her.
On the 30th January, 1649, the King’s troubles were ended by his murder, and very shortly afterwards we find this significant minute.
19th March, 1649. This Court doth order That the Oath conteyned in the Rules and Ordinances of this Company be administred unto every ffreeman upon his admission as before, The ffirst Words which doe concerne allegiance to the King and his Successors only to be left out.
The banners of the Company bearing the late King’s arms were destroyed, and any heraldic insignia at the Hall which contained the Royal Arms were ordered to be defaced. We may readily believe that this was most unwillingly done by the Court, who however, had no option in the matter.
1648-9. Fairfax had filled the City with troops, “billetting orders” being made upon the several Companies for the reception of the soldiers at their Halls. Herbert (Vol. I, p. 181) states that the Merchant Taylors were fortunate enough to procure an order of exemption which cost them £20 10_s._, and further that he believed their case to be unique, but it seems that the Carpenters by means of “Gratuities ‘to sevˀall men of qualitie,’” amounting to £13 2_s._ 6_d._, managed to get free of this imposition, whilst the Barber-Surgeons procured their immunity at a much cheaper rate, for we read in the Wardens’ accounts of the period,
Paid fforr the charges expended in procureing a Protecc͠on from the Lord General from quartering Souldiers in the hall 13{s} 3{d.}
These notices are clear indications that Cromwell and the “men of qualitie” about him, were accustomed to take bribes.
3rd February, 1654. The City entertained Cromwell at Grocers’ Hall, and our Company had to go out in procession to receive him, our “standing” being in St. Paul’s Churchyard.
1660. The Barber-Surgeons contributed £96 towards a present of £10,000 given by the City to Charles II at the Restoration. No money exacted under precept was more willingly paid than this, and indeed the Companies generally seemed to have cheerfully contributed, delighted to have escaped the gloom of the Commonwealth, and with a prospect of brighter times in store. On the 5th July, the King was nobly entertained at Guildhall, our Company taking part in the rejoicings (see Wardens’ Accounts of this date).
1666. Our Minute Books for this period having been lost or stolen, we unfortunately have no records of the Great Fire beyond those preserved in the “Wardens’ Accounts” (which see), and although these are somewhat meagre, they are highly interesting, especially those which relate to the fortunate preservation of the great Holbein picture. It has been stated (but without any other authority than that of gossiping Samuel Pepys, who had a special interest in disparaging the picture) that it was damaged in the fire, though no notice of such a mishap is known to me, and the Accounts (which are complete) are significantly silent as to anything having been spent on its restoration or cleansing, which, had it been injured, would have been necessary; it seems to have been taken away from the Hall by Major Brookes to a place of safety, and subsequently brought home again by six porters.
The Theatre, which was a detached building, as also the present Court Room, both the works of Inigo Jones, were saved, though the Hall was burned, entailing a great expense upon the Company in rebuilding (see Wardens’ Accounts).
The houses 33, 34 and 35, Monkwell Street (see plan, p. 135) were rebuilt 1671, when the gateway to the Hall Court Yard was formed and the grotesque coat-of-arms put up over the Lintol.
When the alterations were made under the superintendence of Charles J. Shoppee in 1869, the old lintol, corbels, tympanum, and door-head were very carefully taken down and refixed over the present entrance to the Hall in the Court Yard. This door-head is always an object of interest to visitors to Barbers’ Hall; long may it continue to be so!
25th August, 1681. A short set of By-Laws was this day enacted. It is on a single skin of parchment, and imposes penalties upon such persons, as, being elected, should refuse to serve as Masters or Stewards of Anatomy. It is signed by Heneage, Earl of Nottingham, Lord Chancellor, and Sir Francis Pemberton and Sir Francis North, the two Lords Chief Justices, all of whose seals are pendant to the document.
1684. This was indeed a troublous year for the Corporation and for the guilds of London. Charles having interfered with the privileges of the City by thrusting in his nominees for Sheriffs, had met with considerable opposition from the citizens, and being assured that this resistance would be continued and maintained by the City, he determined to strike a blow at the root of its franchise, by getting into his hands the Charter of the City, as also the Charters of the several Companies. It was not difficult to procure a venal tribunal which would be prepared to pronounce an iniquitous judgment upon any fictitious statement submitted to it by the King. Sir Rob{t.} Sawyer, the Attorney-General, thereupon undertook, on behalf of the Crown, to prove that the City Charters were forfeited, and contrived the celebrated quo warranto, upon which judgment was (as a matter of course) obtained against the City, on the 12th June, 1684.
The Companies seem to have unanimously anticipated this decision, and by so doing and by “surrendering” their Charters and liberties before the delivery of the judgment, hoped to ensure the favour of the King.
The original of the “surrender” of the Barber-Surgeons is very neatly engrossed on extra thick parchment, but the seal was of course removed when it was returned to the Company. The text is as follows:--
To all to whom these p{r}sents shall come. GOVERNO{RS} of y{e} MYSTERY and COĨALTIE of BARB{RS} & SURGEONS of LONDON send GREETING. KNOW yee y{t} wee considering how much it imports the Governm{t} of our company to have men of known Loyalty & approved integrity to bear offices of Magistracy & places of Trust. The s{d} Ma{rs} or Govern{rs} have granted surrendred and yielded up, and by these p{r}sents do grant surrend{r} and yield up unto his most gracious Majesty CHARLES ye second by the Grace of God King of England, &c., his Heires and Successo{rs.} All and singular y{e} Powers Franchises liberties priviledges and authorities whatsoever and howsoever granted to or to bee used or exercised by y{e} said Masters or Governo{rs} by vertue of any right Title or Interest vested in them by any Charters Letters Patents Custome or Prescripc͠on in force of or concerning the electing nominating constituting being or appointing of any person or persons into or for y{e} severall and respective offices of Mast{r} Wardens Assistants and Clerk of y{e} said Company. And y{e} said Masters or Governo{rs} do hereby humbly beseech his Ma{tie} to accept of this their surrend{r} and do with all submission to his Majesties good pleasure implore his grace and favo{r} to regrant to y{e} said Masters or Governo{rs} the nameing and Chusing of y{e} said Officers and the said libertie and ffranchises or so many of them and in such mann{r} as his Majesty in his great wisdome shall judge most conducing for y{e} governm{t} of y{e} said Company, And with and under such reservacc͠ons restricc͠ons and qualificac͠ons as his Majestie shall bee pleased to appoint. IN WITNES whereof the said MAST{RS} or GOVERNO{RS} have hereunto affixed their Com̃on seal the sixteenth day of Aprill in y{e} Thirty sixth year of y{e} reign of o{r} or sovˀaign LORD CHARLES y{e} second, &c., and in y{e} year of o{r} Lord Christ 1684.
Similar forms of surrender were adopted by other Companies. I am unable to say whether or no the King interfered with the franchises of the Barber-Surgeons, but think not, as no record of such meddling is to be found in our books, though, doubtless, the Court took care, remembering the rod in pickle, to govern in accordance with the wishes of the King.
Some time in this year (1684) certain unquiet spirits, Surgeons of our Company, got up a petition to the King, setting forth that the union of Surgeons with Barbers hindered rather than promoted the end for which the two bodies had been united, and praying the King to incorporate the Surgeons a distinct and separate body. Nothing came of this application beyond a reference (ordered by the King, 15th May, 1684) to the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, and the Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, who were directed to examine and report upon the petition, but whether they ever did so or not, I don’t know.
27th February, 1685. James II, in the first year of his reign, granted us a Charter, which is contained on seven skins of parchment, all of which have handsomely designed head-pieces and borders, the first one having a fine portrait of the King as well; only a fragment of the great seal remains, and the charter itself is considerably damaged, apparently by rats. It is in Latin, of great length, and, like others granted to other companies at the period, is an “unreal mockery.” The Charter recites the “Surrender,” and proceeds to grant another charter in which, inter alia, the appointment of any Master, Warden, Assistant, or Clerk should be subject to the approval of the King, that all members of the Company should take the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, be in the Communion of the Church of England and receive the Sacrament, and that no person who frequented a conventicle should be eligible for the Livery.
4th April, 1687. The King having published a declaration, allowing liberty of conscience to all his subjects, suspending and dispensing with the penal laws and tests, and even with the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance on admission into offices civil and military, numerous addresses of thanks for this liberty were presented to the King, among others the following one from our Company, which is preserved in the “London Gazette” of 20th October, 1687.
THE HUMBLE ADDRESS OF THE MASTERS GOVERNORS ASSISTANTS AND MEMBERS OF THE MYSTERY AND COMMONALTY OF BARBERS AND SURGEONS OF LONDON.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR MAJESTY
We having daily before our eyes the munificent Bounties of your Royal Brother of Blessed Memory, and other Your Ancestors, and also that of your Majesties Gracious Favour, in restoring to us our new Charter, we must be esteemed ever ungrateful and undutiful Subjects, if we did not with all humility acknowledge the same.
But we are in more especial manner bound to cast ourselves at Your Majesties Feet, and return our most humble and hearty Thanks for Your late Declaration; wherein You are Graciously pleased to give us Your Royal Word, whereby we are protected in the Profession and free Exercise of our Religion, and also in the Enjoyment of our Liberties and Properties in Peace and Safety; for which Your Gracious Condescension and Goodness (as God hath made it our Duty), Your Majesty hath made it our Interest duly to pray to the Divine Majesty for his Blessing upon your Royal Person, Family and Government. And that after the enjoyment of a long and prosperous reign here, over a Dutiful and Obedient People, You may receive an everlasting Crown in the World to come.
And that it may be so, it shall be as it becomes us, the constant and utmost endeavour, as well as the hearty Prayer of,
Dread Sir!
Your Majesties most humble, most Loyal, and most obliged Subjects.
1688. Matters were now rapidly approaching a crisis with James, who in vain, when too late, sought to conciliate the citizens whom he had wronged. One of his acts of propitiation was the redelivery to the Companies of the “surrenders” which they had made of their franchises and charters in 1684. We have no note of the date of the return of our surrender; but it was towards the end of November and within about a fortnight of the King’s flight when this tardy act of justice was done, and the Barber-Surgeons thus partly restored to their ancient rights and privileges. The Bill of Rights was shortly afterwards passed, the quo warranto declared illegal, and all charters granted by Charles II and James II since the judgment on the quo warranto, declared absolutely null and void, thus practically reinstating the Guilds in statu quo ante.
28 July, 1690. Ordered that in pursuance of an order of the Com̃on Counsell & Lord Mayor &c. that the Company advance towards the provideing one Rigiment of Horse & one of Dragoone the sum̃e of one hundred pounds.
1699. Jealousies arose in the Company in consequence of the more frequent election of Surgeons than Barbers, as Governors. The By-Laws required that every year there should be two Barbers and two Surgeons chosen (a Barber being defined to be any member who did not practise Surgery). The Surgeons disregarding the law and the old custom, seem to have been able to procure the election of an undue number of members of their own craft to the offices of Master and Wardens, whereupon certain of the Company filed an information in the King’s Bench against the Masters or Governors; the Barbers were successful, and having obtained a Mandamus, a fresh election took place. This altercation between the Barbers and Surgeons was never forgotten, and, indeed, helped to pave the way to further estrangement and the absolute separation in 1745.
The following Minutes relate to these proceedings:
14th December, 1699. Ordered Mr. S{r}geant Wright Mr. S{r}geant Darnell Mr. Com̃on S{r}geant & Mr. Dee bee advised with upon the Informac͠on ag{t} the Govern{rs.}
25th January, 1700. Ordered that the Cause ag{t} the Govern{rs} at the prosecuc͠on of the Barbers bee referred to S{r}geant Darnell & his opinion to bee taken & to pˀceed thereupon, Mr. Oades Mr. Pleahill & Mr. Barnard to meet tomorrow at the raine bow to attend him by five in the afternoone.
2nd May, 1700. Ordered Mr. Dee bee consulted concerning the Rule of Court of King’s Bench for a copy of the by laws &c. & to follow his advice &c. He advised to give Copyes if required & not to oppose it.
11th May, 1700. Ordered that Mr. S{r}geant Darnell have three guineys Mr. Com̃on S{r}geant & Mr. Dee have two a peece given them for the Tryall of the Informac͠on on Tuesday next & that all the Court of Assistants bee desired to bee there.
28th June, 1700. Ordered that nothing bee done in the Cause ag{t} the Company untill the Mandamus be served & then the Comittee to meete.
4th July, 1700. A pˀemtory Mandamus being served the last Court, Ordered that on Tuesday next by two of the Clock in the afternoon there bee an elecc͠on of two Wardens Expert in Barbery for the remainder of this yeare.
9th July, 1700. An election took place, with the result that Mr. John Pinke and Mr. Richard Marks, both being Barbers, were elected Wardens. Mr. Pinke was already a Warden, but the Mandamus required two Barbers to be elected, and he was simply re-elected. Mr. Marks took the place of Mr. Bartholomew King, Surgeon. The Master, Mr. Lichfield, and the second Warden, Mr. James Wall, were both Surgeons.
13th January, 1709. It was agreed that a new set of By-Laws which had been settled by the Common Serjeant and Sir Edward Northey should be presented to the Lord Chancellor, etc., for confirmation, it being considered that the existing By-Laws were defective in many parts, and that “good & wholesome Lawes were the life strength & support of this Company.”
6th April, 1709. A set of By-Laws of this date was confirmed. They are comprised on thirteen great skins of parchment, and, like previous ones, are far too voluminous, and indeed not of sufficient interest, to warrant transcribing, being practically the former set with sundry technical and minor alterations. There is a fine portrait of Queen Anne on the first skin, and the Document is signed by William Lord Cowper, Lord Chancellor, Sir John Holt and Sir John Trevor, Lords Chief Justices, whose seals are pendant. These By-Laws were brought into Court on 5th May, 1709.
13th January, 1709. The Court were informed that the Barbers of the Company were in treaty with the Peruke Makers “of the other end of the town,” about incorporating them into this Company, and that they were endeavouring to procure an Act of Parliament to that effect, whereupon the proposition was approved and leave given to the Barbers to petition Parliament in the name of the Court.
5th December, 1709. A petition was presented by sundry liverymen (Barbers) representing that Peruke making was an encroachment upon the art of Barbery, and praying the Court to obtain an Act of Parliament incorporating the Peruke Makers with the Barber-Surgeons; the petition was favourably received by the Court and a Committee appointed, who met the next day and recommended the proposed union, the Peruke Makers paying such fees as other members of the Company paid.
24th December, 1709. A petition for an Act was ordered to be drawn by the Clerk and submitted to several eminent counsel for their perusal.
9th January, 1710. Five hundred copies of the proposed Bill, and a similar number of the reasons for the suggested incorporation, were ordered to be printed; but in the result nothing came of this proposed union with the Peruke Makers.
25th August, 1714. The following precept relating to the Accession of George I was received:
TO THE MASTER AND WARDENS OF } BY THE MAYOR. THE COMPANY OF BARBER SURGEONS.}
WHEREAS it hath been resolved in Com̃on Councill y{t} if our most Gratious Lord King George upon his comeing into this Kingdome be pleased to pass through this his City of London, y{t} he shall be received by us & our fellow citizens with all the Demonstrationes of Joy & affection as are suitable to our duty and Loyalty.
These are therefore to require you to have your Rayle Cloaths Standings Banners Streamers Ensignes & other Ornaments of triumph belonging to your Company in a readiness to sett up imẽadiatly upon Notice y{t} shall be given you of the time & place by any further precept & y{t} yo{r} Cloaths Banners Streamers Ensignes & other ornaments be fresh & Good & y{t} you forthwith send to all the Liverymen of yo{r} Company that they be well & decently apparrelled in their best Cloaths & Gowns to attend in their Standings y{t} so your Company may be ready (when required) to receive his Maj{tie} to his satisfac͠on & the Honour of this City and thereof you are not to faile. Dated this 25{th} day of August, 1714.
GIBSON.
23rd December, 1717. The Company having had great difficulty in getting in some of their rents, and various of the houses being empty, determined to sell their property in Mowse Alley, East Smithfield, and in Butcher Row in St. Botolph’s, Aldgate, agreeing to convey the fee simple to Mr. Robert Finlay for £1,250.
And it is further ordered by this Court that till such time as the said sume of 1250{li} can be laid out in a convenient purchase of houses or lands with the approbac͠on of the Court of Assistants, The same shall be forthwith placed out at Interest by the Governors upon such Government or other Publick securitys as they shall think fitt, But that the said sume of 1250{li} or any part thereof shall never be expended on the Company’s common occac͠ons or be any way lessened or broke into on any account whatsoever.
17th April, 1718. The following record was ordered to be made of the “reasons” for disposing of this property:
The Estate in East Smithfield in eleven years time produced to the Company above all disbursements relating thereto[119] but £28 15_s._ in the whole, Whereas the annual interest of £1250 at 4 pˀ cent. is £50.
[119] But these disbursements had been very heavy in the nature of repairs.
Eleven years interest at £50 pˀ ann. for £1250 amounts to without computeing Interest upon Interest £550.
The Company have run behind hand for severall years by means of the great sumes laid out upon this Estate.
Whoever goes backward every year must in time be undone.
The Estate is still in such a condition as to require a great sum̃e of money to be expended upon it in Repairing and Rebuilding in order to make it tenantable.
The Company had not money to lay out upon it.
If they had, the Estate is so scituated that there is no room to hope, even in case the whole had been rebuilt (as it wants to be) that it would have answered the laying out so much money.
And if the Company had let it upon building Leases The pˀsent method of building is so as to last exactly the term for which the Lease is taken, wouˀd have put the Company in the same condic͠on as they are now, when the term expired, besides loss of Rent, & disputes with such Tenants in the mean time.
It was therefore thought better to dispose of the Estate.
Following are the details of negotiations with one or two parties other than Mr. Finlay, and some curious particulars of the Company’s title to part of the Estate, which seems to have been an equitable rather than a legal one, whereby the Court apprehended some difficulty in disposing of it to another party from whom a somewhat better price might have been obtained, and therein, under the circumstances, showed themselves good men of business by concluding with Mr. Finlay: we cannot however now, but regret that this most valuable property should have passed from us for so comparatively insignificant a sum. The purchase-money was laid out in thirteen East India Bonds of £100 each.
7th April, 1730. M{r} Serj{t} Dickins the Master of the Company informing the Court, That he having the honour to be acquainted with the Right Honourable The Earl of Burlington and with his Lordships most extraordinary genius and superior judgment in Architecture, had taken the liberty to address himself to the said noble Earl, and to make it his humble request to his Lordship that he would be pleased to favour the Company with his opinion, in what manner it would be safest and best to repair the anatomical Theatre built by the celebrated Inigo Jones about one hundred years ago.
That his Lordship had thereupon condescended to take a view of the Theatre and most obligingly directed the proper method of repairing a structure of so peculiar a frame, and afterwards out of his accustomed generosity, and in regard to the memory of that great Architect offered to defray the expence thereof.
IT IS THEREUPON RESOLVED NEMINE CONTRADICENTE by this Court, That the Master and Wardens of the Company together with the late Master William Cotesworth Esq{r} be, and they are hereby desired forthwith to wait on the Right Honb̃le The Earl of Burlington, and in the most gratefull manner to assure his Lordship in the name of the whole Company.
THAT they do receive this noble instance of his Lordships bounty and generosity as a most distinguishing & illustrious mark of honour shown by his Lordship to the Company & Profession.
And that this Court will take care so to record & transmitt the remembrance of this magnificent action of his Lordship to their successors That the gratitude of the Company to his Lordship’s person and memory may be for ever preserved among them.
13th August, 1730. A marble Bust of the Earl of Burlington was ordered to be set up in the Theatre.
27th April, 1739. “The Court taking into their considerac͠on that several of their By-Laws, which had been confirmed by the Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justices for the time being, were in want of alteration, by reason of the variation of the times and circumstances of the Company and their Members since such By-Laws were made, and several new By-Laws being also wanting for the better government of the Company in times to come,” It was ordered that a Committee of six should consult and draw up fresh By-Laws, to be submitted to a future Court of Assistants, but in the result no action was taken.
1744. The long slumbering animosity between the Surgeons and the Barbers had now reached a climax, and indeed it is a matter of surprise that an union which had become grotesque should have existed for as many years as it had. The Surgeons, many of whom had attained to great eminence, naturally chafed under a system which required their diplomas to be signed by Governors, two of whom were always Barbers, or members of some trade or profession other than that of a Surgeon, and with the rapid progress of science and of surgical skill and knowledge, they felt their alliance with the Barbers a restraint upon their advancement, as also that the exercise of their profession under Charters and By-Laws, antiquated in form, and more adapted to the times in which they were framed, a hindrance rather than an incitement to further proficiency.
There is little in the records as to this disagreement, it being tacitly agreed that neither side should place their arguments or grievances in the books, which were their joint property.
20th December, 1744. This day the gentlemen on the Surgeons side having made known at this Court their desire of being separated from the gentlemen on the Barbers and that each may be made a distinct and independent Body free from each other, and producing a Case intended to be offered to the Honourable House of Commons praying such separation, which being read at this Court It was agreed that the following gentlemen on the Barbers side viz{t.}--
M{r.} Warden Negus M{r.} Parker M{r.} Maurice M{r.} Truelove and M{r.} Haddon.
& on the Surgeons side viz{t.}--
M{r.} Serj{t} Dickins Will{m} Petty Esq{r} James Dansie Esq{re} M{r.} Freke and M{r.} Sainthill
be a Committe appointed to meet on Monday next at the Kings Arms Tavern in Saint Paul’s Church Yard at one of the Clock at noon to receive the proposals from the Gentlemen on the Surgeon’s side for such Separation, and that when they had so done that the Gentlemen on the Barber’s side members of this Court should lay the same before the Livery on their side, by a Meeting to be had for that purpose, and that a Court of Assistants should be held on the Tenth day of January next, at which time the Gentlemen on the Barber’s Side Members of this Court, should then report their opinion and assent or Dissent to such proposals made.
At the same time it was agreed that any Member of this Court should at any time have the free liberty of examining and inspecting into the several Books and writings belonging to this Company In case the same should be in the presence of the Master or one of the Wardens but not otherwise, but no such Books or writings be at any time removed from the Hall, on any account whatever unless by a special order of this Court first had and obtained for that purpose.
10th January, 1745. Pursuant to an Order of the last Court of Assistants the gentlemen on the Barbers side Members of this Court, did this day make their report on the proposals made by the gentlemen on the Surgeons side for a separation, by Dissenting in general to such proposals made.
By the Journals of the House of Commons, 18 George II, it appears that the Surgeons on 31st January, 1745, presented a petition to Parliament, in which among other things they recited the Act, 32 Henry VIII, and also that Charles I in the 5th year of his reign,
by Letters Patent under the great seal confirmed the Barber Surgeon’s Company in their possessions and privileges and gave the Company power to make by-laws and to constitute ten persons to be Examiners of Surgeons during their lives, and it was thereby further granted that no person whether freeman foreigner native of England or alien should practise Surgery in London or Westminster or within seven miles of the City of London unless previously examined allowed and admitted by the Company in manner therein mentioned; and that the Surgeons so examined might practise in any part of England; and that the Masters and Governors of the said Company might appoint and have a public lecture for the science of Surgery, for the better instruction and information in the principles and rudiments of the art and science of Surgery, and that no person exercising the art of Surgery within the limits therein mentioned should go out or send any apprentice or servant from the Port of London to serve in quality of a Surgeon for any ship without the approbation and allowance of the said Company, in such manner and under such penalties as are therein mentioned. That since the said Act for incorporating the two said Companies, those of the said Company practising Surgery have from their sole and constant study of, and application to the said science, rendered the profession and practice thereof of great and public benefit and utility to this Kingdom, and that the Barbers belonging to the said Corporation are now, and have been many years, employed in a business foreign to and independent of the practice of Surgery; and that the Surgeons belonging to the same Corporation, being now become a numerous and considerable body, and finding their union with the Barbers inconvenient in many respects and in no degree conducive to the progress or improvement of the art of Surgery, are therefore desirous that the Surgeons being freemen of the said Company, may be made a Corporation separate and distinct from and independent of the Barbers of, and belonging to the said Company; and therefore praying the House to give leave that a bill may be brought in dissolving and vacating the union and incorporation of the Barbers and Surgeons made by the said former act; and for making the Surgeons of the said Company a separate and distinct Corporation; and for making a partition and division of the real and personal estate and effects of and belonging to the said united Company, unto and for the separate benefit of the said two Companies so proposed to be separated, as to this House shall seem meet and reasonable.
Whereupon it was ordered--
That the said petition be referred to the consideration of a Committee and that they do examine the matter thereof, and report the same with their opinion thereupon to the House.
A Committee was at once appointed with power to send for persons, papers, and records.
On the 6th February the Barbers presented a Petition against the proposed separation, and asked to be heard by counsel; whereupon it was ordered--
That the said petition be referred to the consideration of the Committee to whom the petition of the Surgeons of London, whose names are thereunto subscribed, on behalf of themselves and other the Surgeons in the City and suburbs of London is referred: And that these petitioners the said Barbers, if they think fit be heard by their Counsel before the said Committee according to the prayer of the said petitioners.
This petition of the Barbers to the House of Commons was identical with a very scarce pamphlet “The Case of the Barbers,” a copy of which has been kindly given to me by Mr. D’Arcy Power, M.A. It is full of interest, and will be found in Appendix E.
27th February, 1745. The Committee brought up their report, which was read by the Clerk, and recited the various documents produced and the evidence tendered; among other matters it is stated that Mr. John Hayward, a Past Master, was examined and deposed, that the Master (who every other year was a Barber) and the Wardens present, sign the diplomas. That there are ten Examiners who have each half a guinea for their attendance, and the Master and Wardens have the like. That he did not know that the presence of Barbers at these examinations was any inconvenience, but he apprehended it would be more eligible if the Master were always a Surgeon. That the Barbers are generally present at the four public lectures of Anatomy, two of which are at the expense of the Company, the other two being at the expense of the Surgeons. That the Demonstrators of Anatomy and Osteology are chosen by the whole Court of Assistants (fifteen of whom are Barbers, and fifteen Surgeons). That he apprehends the present union is the reason why so many persons do not bind their sons apprentice at the Hall. He never knew of the Barbers interfering in or giving interruption to examinations, and he never heard any fact mentioned as a reason for the separation desired by the Surgeons, except that a great many foreign brothers (who are gentlemen that practise both in and out of town) refuse to come into the Company on account of the present expense.
Being examined as to the money generally given to the Poor’s Box by Sea Surgeons at the time of their receiving a Qualification, he said that it was always expected, but that if they are not in a capacity it is not insisted upon, and that he never heard of any person being denied a Qualification for refusing to pay it. That the Qualification is delivered to the party sealed up, to be carried to the Navy Office, and that the Master commonly signifies to him what fees are expected; that the said Box is examined every month, and about nine-tenths of the money distributed by the Master and Wardens, among the poor of the Barbers.
Being asked what proportion the Barbers pay to the Poor’s Box, he said that the greatest part of the income applied to that use arises from the examination of Sea Surgeons, but that the Apprentices of Barbers (who are as twenty to one) always pay when bound at the Hall, and at their admission to the freedom, as well as the Surgeons.
Mr. Hayward put before the Committee a statement of the fines received by the Company, which was as follows--
Surgeons. Barbers. £ s. d. £ s. d.
For Freedom by purchase 10 10 0 6 6 0
" Livery fine, and all Offices to the Parlor door 35 0 0 25 0 0
" Examination for great Diploma 6 6 0
" The fine for not serving the four several offices of Master and the three Wardens, which the Surgeons often pay, but the Barbers never do, sometimes 30 guineas but oftener 40 0 0 40 0 0
" The fine for Master and Stewards of Anatomy when called upon in turn (and if they serve, the expense is rather greater) 40 0 0 ------------ ----------- £131 16 0 £71 6 0 ============ ===========
The Clerk’s and Beadle’s fees are not included in the above.
Mr. Joseph Wheeler, the Clerk of the Company, was examined by the Committee, and generally confirmed Mr. Hayward’s evidence.
The next witness, Mr. Neil Stewart, was evidently called in the interest of the Surgeons, to show the inconvenience which had arisen (in his case at all events) by reason of the warrants being issued by the “Barbers and Surgeons.” He deposed that he was surgeon to H.M.S. The Looe, and, being taken prisoner by the French, was put in the common prison at Brest, where he petitioned to be removed to an open hospital at Dinan, and enclosed his warrant as a surgeon with his petition to the French authorities; some days after, he enquired of the “Linguist” as to the success of his petition, and was informed that “the Superintendent did not know by his warrant whether he (the witness) was a Barber or a Surgeon: that upon his desiring the linguist to read the warrant, by which it would appear he was a surgeon, the linguist replied that it might be so, but that if the witness had been taken on board one of the King of Great Britain’s ships it would have been out of doubt.” This witness further stated that he believed the unfavourable notice which was taken of his petition was because his warrant came from the Masters of the Barbers and Surgeons.
With reference to the gift of Edward Arris the Court minutes of 29th February, 1675-6 were produced which stated that “Mr. Edward Arris a very worthy member of this Company having formerly settled by Deed £30 a year for a dissection of a body yearly and Reading on the Muscles, desired that deed might be delivered up to him,” and he in return would pay the Company £510 to enable them to apply the interest to the same purposes, which was agreed to. Mr. Arris dying on the 28th May, 1676, the Company soon became involved in a Chancery suit with his son, Dr. Thomas Arris, and the Court minutes of 20th January, 1677-8 were produced and read to the Committee. These set forth the answer which the Company filed to the Bill of Complaint before the Master of the Rolls, and stated the circumstances referred to in the minutes of 29th February, 1675-6, and that Mr. Arris gave as his reason for this “That his only son and heir, the now Doctor, had and did then receive the profits of the said lands to his own use upon condition and under promise to pay the said £30 per annum for the said Dissection; but he found that he did never pay one penny of it, or ever would do, when he their benefactor was dead, without trouble or suit; with some severe and sharp expressions, which we will by no means mention, although they were the very words of the father spoken of the son.”
The answer goes on to express the hope that the Company will not be compelled to enter into any further covenant with Dr. Arris than they had done with his father their “pious benefactor,” for the carrying out of the trust, or be ordered to refund the £510 to Dr. Arris. It also prayed that he might be ordered to pay the costs of “this troublesome and unnecessary suit, which doth so much shew what they must expect from him hereafter, if they should part with the £510.” As the Company retained the £510 till the separation in 1745, there is no doubt but that Dr. Arris, as he deserved to do, lost his suit.
Various extracts from the Company’s books were read, on behalf of the Barbers, to show that the united Company had always assisted the Surgeons, and promoted the cause and interest of Surgery out of the common fund of the Barbers and Surgeons.
Part of the Will of Robert Ferbras, Citizen and Surgeon, dated 2nd December, 1470,[120] was read, whereby it appeared that several estates formerly belonging to the said Company, were given to the Barbers before their union with the Surgeons in Henry VIII’s time. And a declaration of Bryan Sandford, dated 8th March, 1490, was read, whereby it appeared that the site of the Hall was purchased by the Barbers before the said Union.
[120] But see p. 61 as to this Will. I cannot explain the discrepancy.
The Committee of the House of Commons reported that they had recommended the parties to settle the dispute as to the division of the property between them, and that thereupon the Surgeons had proposed that they should have given up to them Dr. Gale’s Annuity of £16 per annum and Alderman Arris’ gift of £510; also that for about three years until the Surgeons could provide themselves with suitable premises, they should have the use of the Hall, Theatre, &c., at a nominal rent of one guinea per annum.
The Barbers agreed to give up Gale’s and Arris’ gifts, but proposed that the Surgeons should take a lease for such days in the year as they commonly used the premises, at £80 per annum, and pay the Barbers £100 towards the expenses to which they had been put by this suit in the Parliament.
In the result the Committee reported:--(a) That the Surgeons had made good the allegations of their petition. (b) That the proposed separation was desirable. (c) That the propositions of the Surgeons touching the division of the property were reasonable.
Subsequently the Bill passed both Houses and received the Royal Assent, the quaint union being dissolved 25th June, 1745.
By this Act (18 Geo. II) the Surgeons were erected into a separate Corporation, and the Barbers were re-incorporated under the style of “The Master, Governors and Commonalty of the Mystery of Barbers of London.” So much of this Act as relates to the Barbers will be found in the Appendix F.
The first Court of Assistants of “~The Barbers’ Company~” was held on the 25th June, 1745, at 10 a.m., and there were present:--
Mr. JONATHAN MEDLEY Master. Mr. HUMPHRY NEGUS Second Governor.
Mr. WILLIAM PARKER. } { Mr. SAMUEL RUTTER. Mr. JOHN BARNWELL. } { Mr. ROBERT SCROOBY. Mr. JOHN TRUELOVE. } { Mr. RICHARD SWITHIN. Mr. WILLIAM HADDON. } Assistants. { Mr. EDWARD COLEBECK. Mr. JOHN NEGUS. } { Mr. TOGARMAH JONES. Mr. EDWARD BOXLEY. } { Mr. JOHN GURNEY.
The Act of Separation being read, and the Oaths as formerly required to be taken by Freemen, Master, Warden, Assistant, Clerk, and Beadle being also read and considered, the Court settled and formulated the various Oaths, and the same are entered in the Minutes.
The Election of nine fit and able persons to be Assistants was then proceeded with, and Mr. William Jackson, Mr. John Bearblock, Mr. Will{m.} Roberts, Mr. Thomas Cotton, Mr. John Whiting, Mr. Richard Lookes, James Theobald, Esqre., Peter Theobald, Esqre., and Mr. John Pepys, were unanimously elected.
Mr. Edward Boxley and Mr. Samuel Rutter were chosen third and fourth Governors or Wardens.
Thanks were voted to Mr. Jonathan Medley and Mr. Humphry Negus “for their great care in defending and preserving the Rights Priviledges and property of this Company on their Separation from the Surgeons.”
Thanks were also voted to Mr. John Paterson “for his great care and diligence in executing the orders and directions of the Master and Governor about the defence and preservation of the rights priviledges and property of the Company” and to further mark their sense of the same, the Court unanimously elected Mr. Paterson as Clerk.
The two Beadles, Henry Gretton and William Littlebury were re-elected.
It was ordered that all Charters, Books, Plate and goods belonging to the Company, then in the custody of Mr. Joseph Wheeler (the late Clerk) should be delivered to Mr. Paterson, who was to make and sign an Inventory of the same, and also to examine Mr. Wheeler’s accounts, and report thereon to the Court.
The Common Seal was directed to be altered by omitting the words ET CHIRURGORUM and by adding ANNO MDCCXLV.
A Committee was appointed to peruse the By-Laws of the late United Company, and to report as to which of them required amendment or were fit to be repealed or added to.
8th August, 1751. Mr. John Brooks attended and produced a Deed to which he requested the subscription of the Court; this deed recited that by an Act of Parliament passed in the 10th year of Queen Anne, it was enacted that a duty of 2_d._ per lb. should be laid upon all starch imported, and of 1_d._ per lb. upon all starch made in Great Britain, that no perfumer, barber, or seller of hair-powder should mix any powder of alabaster, plaster of Paris, whiting, lime, etc. (sweet scents excepted), with any starch to be made use of for making hair-powder, under pain of forfeiting the hair-powder and £50, and that any person who should expose the same for sale should forfeit it and £20. Also that by further Acts additional duties were laid upon starch. And by an Act passed in the 4th year of George II the penalties were somewhat mitigated. “And whereas the said laws with respect to hair-powder have by experience been found not to answer the end proposed by the Legislature, the sum arising by the said duties upon starch and hair-powder having gradually lessened, whilst the fair traders have been great sufferers by the practice of those who by the greatness of the duty have attempted to make vend or use the said prohibited articles. And whereas the trade or business of making vending or dressing of Perukes or other Ornaments of hair for the head and also of cutting and dressing the hair of the head being considered as distinct from the business of Barbers is under no regulation whatever,” etc., the parties whom Mr. Brooks represented (and whose names were signed to the deed) had, therefore, agreed to join in an application to Parliament for reducing the duties on hair-powder, as also for incorporating all persons carrying on the trade of Barbers and Peruke-makers within the Bills of Mortality, into one joint Corporation or Body politick, and for restraining persons from exercising those trades who had not served seven years’ apprenticeship.
It was stated that subscriptions towards defraying the costs of the proposed Bill had been paid to Messrs. Gosling & Bennett, Bankers in Fleet Street, that John Paterson, Esq., Clerk of the Company, was Solicitor for the Bill, and Mr. John Brooks was Secretary of the Petitioners.
The Court, having considered the application, decided to contribute Twenty Guineas, but the matter seems to have been in abeyance for eighteen months, as the petition to the House of Commons was not sealed by the Company until the 7th January, 1753.
13th January, 1753. The petition was this day presented and is recorded in the Journals of the House; it states, among other things, that the Company “are in danger of being unable to support themselves and that the petitioners who exercise the art of Peruke making in the liberties and neighbourhood of the said City are not a body corporate, nor under any order or regulation; for want whereof great frauds are practised in the said manufacture to the discouragement of the fair trader, and manifest injury of the consumer, And therefore praying the House that leave may be given for the bringing in a Bill for incorporating the Peruke makers as well within as without the liberties of the City of London, and within such distance thereof as the House shall think fit, with the said petitioners”--the Barbers’ Company. This petition was referred to a Committee, but no report of that Committee is entered in the Journals.
4th December, 1764. The Peruke makers turned up again in 1764, for we find in the Minutes that certain of them attended with the draft of a petition to the King, to which they asked the assent of the Court. This petition which strangely commenced “We the Company of Barbers and Peruke makers,” stated that the suppliants laid before his Majesty the distresses into which the Peruke makers had fallen by reason of the change of fashion, and thus appeals to the King, “Where can we look for relief but there only where it is to be found, for as the Fashion your Majesty approves will very justly be a pattern to your subjects, We most humbly hope not to be too bold in wishing Perukes may soon be as much in fashion as the wearing of hair is at present, which will increase the Revenue, give happiness to the indigent and distressed Peruke makers, and increase the many great unmerited Favours, We as a Company have received from Royal Hands!”
16th January, 1765. The Court took this ridiculous petition into consideration, and of course refused to adopt it, informing the suppliants that they were concerned to observe the decay in their trade, as it was connected by usage with that of Barbery, but as the Charters of the Company did not extend to Peruke making, the Court could not with propriety address his Majesty on the subject.
EXTRACTS FROM COURT MINUTES, ETC.,
MORE PARTICULARLY RELATING TO THE
INTERNAL HISTORY OF THE COMPANY.
29th August, 1550. ~Memorandum~ the xxix{th} day of Auguste in the house belonging to the sayd Company it was condescended and fully agreed by the aforesayed M{r} and Wardeins M{r} Geen Thomas Johnson Thomas Stocdall and Mathew Johnson w{t} thassent of thassistance being there present that is to say M{r} Kyrkeˀ (Kyrkeby)[121] M{r} Vycary[122] M{r} Bancks[123] M{r} Byrde[124] M{r} Yonge[125] M{r} Henderbe[126] Robert Postell[127] Willm Tyllˀ (Tylley)[128] Peter Dayseman[129] Robert Waterforde[130] Richard Bowll[131] Henry Pemberton[132] Robert Sprignell[133] Robert Brownell[134] John Smythe[135] Willm̄ Otherborne[136] and Austeyn Clarck.[137]
[121] Master 1526, 1533. [122] M. 1530, etc. [123] M. 1532. [124] M. 1542, 1545. [125] M. 1544. [126] M. 1547. [127] Warden 1544. [128] W. 1546. [129] W. 1547. [130] W. 1549. [131] M. 1553. [132] W. 1539. [133] M. 1554. [134] M. 1563. [135] W. 1547. [136] W. 1548. [137] W. 1554.
[Sidenote: An order taken concerninge Thomas Knot.]
THAT Thomas Knot shalbe dischardged and not called to no manner of office unto such tyme that it shall please the m{rs} to agree for Another order. And also that he shall not paie no maner of scott lot nor subsedye nor any other chardge concerning the saied Crafte but shalbe dischardged of and from the same Ecept onelie his quarterage and except that which he shall gyve & paye of his owne fre will and gentelnes.
[Sidenote: An order for the elecc̃on of the Maister.]
~Alsoo~ yt was ordered and agreed the sayd daye by the hole assistaunce that the maister shall put in iiij{or} into his bill for his electyon and so the same byll to goo through the house and every man to prycke as his mynde doth serve him w{th}out any telling and when every man hathe pricked about the house then the byll to be brought to the M{r} And he that hath the moste pricks to have the roome of M{r} the yeare ensuynge. The names of the ellecyon for the M{r} was M{r} Geen Richard Ferres Robert Postell and Willm̄ Tylle.
[Sidenote: An order for the eleccyon of the upper wardein.]
ALSOO for the elleccyon of the upper wardein he shall put iiij{or} names into his Byll and so to goo through the house like as the M{r} Byll hath dooen. The names for the elleccyon for upper wardein was Thomas Johnson, Richard (The remainder of this line is torn away in original).
[Sidenote: An order for the Elecc̃on of the Second Wardein.]
ALSOO for the Elleccyon of the Seconde Wardein he shall put in iiij{or} names in his byll and so to goo through the house like as is before mencyoned. The names for the Elleccyon was Thomas Stocdall, John Atkinson, John Smyth and Thomas Knot.
[Sidenote: For the Eleccyon of the youngest Wardein.]
ALSOO for the Elleccyon of the youngest wardein he shall put iiij{or} into his Byll and so to goo through the house like as before. The names for the Elleccyon are Mathew Johnson, John Tholmoode, Richard Elliot and John Shryffe.
10th Sept., 1551. It was ordered that--
[Sidenote: An order that the Seconde Wardein shall receyve all fynes quartrage and other casualtyes.]
The second Wardein shall receyve all maner of Receite as fynes quartrag for prentises, for fremen and all other casualtyes whatsoev{r} yt be. And he to paye also all maner of wage, And the Bedyll to have a booke of all suche receitte and dischardge as the seconde wardein hathe for his dischardge.
Also yt ys agreed that the younger wardein shall receyve nothing but onely the Rents of the Londes, and to see reparac͠ons dooen where as nede shall requyer and that he shall take Appulton[138] w{th} him when he goeth to receyve the rentes of the Londes so that bothe there books may agree.
[138] The Beadle.
4th Nov., 1551. It was agreed--
That there shalbe allowed in goyng and searching of their Londes vj{s} viij{d.}
Ordered--
That John West shall bring in his fyne which ys vj{s} viij{d} for speking opprobryous wordes against John Androwson in the presence of the M{rs.}
17th Nov., 1551. It was ordered--
That the Kings maiestyes Barbor or Barbors to his highness parson And also his mat{s} Surgeon or Surgeons shall sytt next to the Last M{r} upon the benche where as the M{rs} nowe usually doo sytt and alsoo shall goo next to the M{rs} in all goyngs and syttings.
It was ordered that no Barber should take a “foreigner” as journeyman and set him to work, before presenting him to the Master and Wardens, under a penalty of 3_s._ 4_d._ per week.
This order was made because many foreigners (i.e., non-freemen) who were inexpert had lately come into the City, and the Court directed that each foreigner should give proof of his skill, and then that he should remain for one year only and in one service, and no Barber was to pay a foreigner higher wages than the Masters should from time to time “sess” or determine under a penalty of 13_s._ 4_d._ for “every weke so offending.” The Beadle was directed to keep a register book of all foreigners for the year, and when the year was expired, the Barber who kept a foreigner and was minded to keep him longer was to come to the Hall within fourteen days to have him re-registered under a penalty of 3_s._ 4_d._ per week. And no Barber was to “entyce or envegyll any mans servant from him upon peyne of forfeyting for a fyne xiij{s.} iiij{d.}”
The Court fixed the wages of these men as follows--
The best jorneyman that is a forrein shall have for a weke xij{d.} the second x{d.} and the thurde as the sayd M{rs.} shall thinke meate & convenyente.
17th November, 1551. It was ordered that the youngest Warden should be chosen out of the Livery and that he should be--
in especcyall one that hathe byn stewarde so that he be a man that hath usyed himself in that behalf honestleye and discretly.
It was also ordered that all freemen should come every quarter day to the Hall to pay quarterage, hear the rules read, and to hear the book set forth by the Corporation of London concerning Orphans, and no man was to sit out of his appointed place, under a penalty.
17th July, 1553. It was ordered that Mr. John Enderby (Master 1547)--
shall have the benevolense of the crafte fower marks a yere.
20th September, 1553. The Masters agreed with Richard Drewe--
For a barge when the Mayer goeth to Westmˀ for Twentie sixe shillings and eighte pence.
12th August, 1554. Being Election day it was agreed that at the choosing of the Masters--
There shalbe a solempe masse[139] or other dyvyne servyce sayd and songe that the M{rs.} be choessen and the hole lyverye to be therat in their best clothing and to meete at the hall at or before the hower of ix of the clocke and he that fayleth his hower to paye xij{d} for his fyne w{t}out any redempcyon or gayne sayeing. The sayed masse[140] to be at the chardgs of the Companye.
[139] The word “masse” has been subsequently erased. [140] “Masse” has been subsequently erased, and “s’rvice” substituted.
1st Oct., 1555. The following Articles were agreed upon by the Court--
I. There shall no man ffreeman fforyner or straunger of the Clothinge or w{t}out the clothing shave wasshe a Bearde or tryme any man w{th} any Instrumēt as to make cleane teathe upon the Sondayes within the Cytie of London or withoute in his owne house or in any mans house or chamber or in any place els he shall forfayete at every tyme beinge duely proved for a fyne to the hall the some of xl{s.} And further that no fforyner being no ffreman shall carry out any Bason or clothe or Instrumēt to make cleane teathe to shave poll or wasshe a bearde or to trym̄e any man but w{t}in the Lybertye where he dwellethe But w{t}in the Cytie of London he shall not trym̃e any man at no dayes w{t}in anye of their howses or in any place els w{t}in the Cytie upon payne to lose at every tyme beinge duely proved for a fyne to the hall xl{s.}
II. That Apulton the Beadle of the Clothing was to be the Clerk, and that the Beadle of the Yeomanry was to help the Clerk at
coronac͠on tyme or at other greate tryumphes when any other greate man cometh in or when the kinge or quene comen through the Cytie.
III. That whenever the Shreif be chosein or the Mayor or the burgesses of the parlyamẽt or upon the kings or queenes comĩg into the Cytie or any other greate man comyth in or upon any other greate truymphe whereapon comaundement ys geven by the Mayor of London to the sayed Company of the Clothinge of Barbors and Surgeons to geve their attendaunce Then the hole Company of the Clothinge to meete at our owne hall of Barbors and Surgeons in our owne lyverye all to gether fyrste, and afterwards to gooe out of the hall two and two together as of olde tyme yt hathe been used, and when the Mayor goeth to poules[141] then the M{r} and governors to gooe throughe out Wood streate to poules w{th} the rest of the Company of the Clothinge. And that M{r} and governors that dothe not this shall forfaycte for a ffyne to the hall vj{li} xiij{s} iiij{d} And they of the Clothing that dothe not come to the hall firste but will meete us at the place where we shalbe appointed to stande and to remayn and dothe not kepe his hower shall loose for a ffyne in the hall at every tyme so offending iij{s} iiij{d} Provyded alwayes yf the Mayor gooe not to poules at the Mayors ffeaste Alhollande daye xp̃emas daye twelves daye and Candlemas daye In what streets we doo gooe throughe yt be not throughe Wood streate yt shall not be prejudycyall to the master and governors of the Company for the tyme being.
[141] St. Paul s.
IV. It was ordered that Apprentices, before being presented, should pay 2_s._ 6_d._ fine, also 8_d._ to the Clerk for drawing the Indentures.
8th October, 1555. Further ordinances were framed, viz{t}:--
I. That at all sittings of the Court when any business was discussed the Members should speak to the subject in order of seniority, and any one interrupting or speaking out of turn was to pay 12_d._ fine. The Beadle also was to stand without the door, in the Hall, and there to give his attendance whenever the Master should knock for him.
II. That there should be an Armourer with a yearly fee of 10_s._, and--
for the same he shalbe bounde to make cleane our harneys w{th} daggers gunnes armyng swords and bills and with all other things that doethe appertayne to an Armorer for to doo in mending of buckells lethers or any other thinge which dothe appertayne to that whiche we nowe have.
III. When the Master and Governors should go to view their lands and tenements to see the state of repair, the Bricklayer was to go with them to advise and to have a fee of “ij{s} and his dynnar.”
IV. This relates to the Clerk (see Clerk).
V. That a Minute book be kept to record all the orders made at any Court, and that such orders be read at the next Court and signed.
VI. That no freeman shall serve a foreigner under a penalty of 13_s._ 4_d._ for every time so offending, and any foreigner taking a freeman to serve with him should be fined 26_s._ 8_d._
19th November, 1555. John Demynge, “Cowper[142] & ffre denysen,” was granted a lease of a house belonging to the Company at St. Katherine’s, Tower Hill, at £2 per annum for thirty years, with a fine of £4 on sealing the lease and a “barrell of doble beare.”
[142] Cooper.
26th November, 1555. Thomas Glynton, Goldsmith, was to have a lease of the house in Tower Street, where he then dwelt, for 30 years from Christmas, 1555, no rent stated, but a fine of £10 to be paid on sealing the lease.
5th March, 1556. Several further Ordinances and awards were made by the Court, among which were the following:--
I. That the Masters and Governors should not let the Hall to anyone to--
daunce or use anye other kynde of games els whereby the sealinge or other things being broken in the hall or kitchen shall redowne to the losse of the Company Yf therefore the sayed M{r} and governors for the tyme being doo let out the hall to any bodye to thentent aforesayde w{t}out the consent of the hole howse to be called for the same they should forfeit and pay etc.
IV. The ffourthe Artycle is that if any of the Lyverye or of the yomanrye come to sesse any man being a jornye man to serve him as the order is that he taketh 1{d} for a yere or ij{d} for ij yere That his M{r} shall not put him awaye at his pleasure as many now a dayes do, but he shall complayne to the M{r} and Governors for the tyme of the demeaner usuage and evell behaveor of the sayed Journyman for noen kepinge of his M{rs} howse all the weke daye by reason wherof he dothe lose his customˀs or that he goeth out at his pleasure and come in at his will againe w{t}out asking of any leave of his M{r} or mysteris w{ch} pertayneth not to a servaunte for to doo for theyse consyderac͠ons and other the m{r} maye complayne. The Jornyman lykewise may complayne of his M{r} yf that he doo not paye him his wages and to have his meate and dryncke as Jornymen shoulde have according to the agremẽt of bothe the partyes as the M{r} and the Jornyman shalbe at a pointe when he cometh to sesse any Jornymen because that if the Jornyman doo not his dewtye that he may be punysshed and put in prison to thentent that Jornymen may be kept in good order otherwise then they be nowe. And that the M{r} and govˀnors for the tyme being shall declare to the Jornyman what is his dewty to his M{r} when he dothe come to be seste to thentent that he shall knowe his dewtye to his M{r} and if he doo not the same then he knoweth the pryce. And agayne to declare to the Jornyman what his M{r} shall doo to him, as to paye his wages mete and dryncke and other things that a Jornyman oughte to have. Yf any of the Clothinge or of the yomanrye put awaye his Jornyman before his yere or yeres come out and not declaring the matter to the M{r} and governors [he] shall forfaycte at every tyme so doinge for a ffyne to the hall vj{s} viiij{d.} And that all ffremen being Journymen may be preferred and taken, being a workman before any fforyner duynge his dewty to his M{r} as is aforesayed because we are bounde to preferre the ffremen w{ch} beare scot and lot to the Cytye and company w{ch} the Jornymen doo not being forryners but come out of the contrye to learne there scyence here and so after warde goo away agayne w{ch} is not to the welth of the Companye.
VII. No Liveryman was to presume to come into the parlour, whilst the Court was sitting, without being sent for.
VIII. Freemen were not to put away apprentices to make room for others by whom they might get money.
IX. Two Stewards for the Anatomy were to be chosen every year.
X. The Clerk having claimed to provide the napery and vessells, and to appoint the Cook for the Anatomy dinners, alleging an old custom to that effect, it was ordered that he should not again do so as he had aforetime for a “lytle lucer of moneye,” but that the Stewards of the Anatomy should make their own provision and “dresse there meate clenly and honestlye because of worshipfull men comyng thereunto,” and if the Clerk again offended he was to “paye to the hall for a fyne his half yeres wages w{ch} is x{s.}”
XII. THE TWELVE Article is that if Olyver Wilson dothe hereafter speake evill of the M{r} and governors and thassistaunce of the clothinge or of any of the yomanrye as heretofore he hathe dooen w{ch} by profe hathe been tryed and therfore hathe been punnished in pryson, yf ever hereafter he dothe the like he to be expelled.
NOTE.--In all cases penalties or punishments were specified for breach of the foregoing ordinances.
5th March, 1556. William Goodwin, Merchant Taylor, leased to the Company for 99 years “all the houses next the hall w{th} the house of the prevy w{t}in the hall for vj{li} vj{s} viij{d}” per annum, the Company to keep the premises in repair.
27th June, 1556. Arnold Tymes, “beare brewer,” had a lease of a “gardein lying in easte Smithefelde” for 40 years, paying 12_d._ for an earnest penny, and to pay at the sealing of the lease £4, and at the Audit day other £4.
9th July, 1556. John More, Cordwainer, and Richard Wiston, had leases of houses in St. John’s, Walbrook, for 30 years from Midsummer, and about this period there are several other notices of leases for 30 years having been granted of property in East Smithfield, Holborn Bridge, and Mugwell Street.
22nd July, 1556. An order was made:--
That there shalbe a painter belonge to the hall, and he to have a penc͠on yerely of vj{s} viij{d} by the yere to be payed at fower tymes of the yere and for the same he shall make cleane all the paintinge w{t}in the hall bothe above and benethe as the Tables in the hall and other things and in the gardein every qr̃ter of a yere if it so neede: and to amend faults where there ys anye at his owne proper costs and chardgs as is afore declared.
26th August, 1557. It was ordered that Mrs. Dawson, the Widow of one Bryckett--
a Toothe drawer shall paye no quartryge to the hawle nor hange oute any signe or clothe w{th} teethe as she hearetofore hath don.
12th October, 1557. John West was discharged out of this howse bycawse he wold not abyde y{e} order of y{e} M{r} & govˀnors and one Asheton had lycence to arest hym.
Various entries occur about this period of freemen being brought before the Court and punished for using “obrobrious wordes.”
9th November, 1557. It was ordered that Robert Postell (Warden 1544) should have a “yerely anewitie oute of thys howse” of 40{s.}
A freeman before “setting up shop” was required to procure the testimony of one or more citizens that he was worth 10 marks, and to obtain a licence from the Court; there are numerous examples in point, e.g.:--
16th November, 1557. Heare was before the M{r} and Govˀnors Rychard Lynley and he had Lycẽce to sett up hys shoppe and one Johan Coale of the Cytie of London Cytizen and Clothwoorcker Deposed that the sayd Rychard ys worthe and valued of hys proper owne vj{li} xiij{s} iiij{d.}
23rd November, 1557. Licence was granted to William Thomlyn--
To drawe teethe and to make cleane teethe and no more and he ys so admytted a brother into thys howse but not yet sworne and he hathe payde x{s} and rest other ten shyllings he wyll brynge in as sowne as he can.
11th January, 1558. The same daye Tyndall y{e} Armorer is dysmyst & shall have no more his fee oute of this howse bycawse he gave none attendañce whan o{r} soldyers wer sett oute to calyce[143] & John gamlyn is admytted armorer & he to have y{e} same fee y{t} tyndall had y{t} is to saye by the yere x{s.}
[143] Calais.
19th April, 1558. My lady Aylyff gave a fyne table cloth of damaske worcke to srv̈e for the uppermost table in the hawle the w{ch} of her jentyllness she gave frely unto this hawle.
22nd November, 1558. An order was made against John John that he should pay 6_s._ to William Bourne for “ij Barbores potts” which he had lost.
1566. The second volume of Court Minutes contains a long list of “Lawes Actes and Ordenances” enacted by the Court in 1566, but as many of these are not of sufficient interest to warrant transcribing, the headings of such will only be given here
1. An order to avoied grudg or displeasure for the elecc͠on.
This was that no one was to “fynd fault” with the election of Master or Governors if the persons so elected should at any time be chosen out of their turn.
2. An order that solempne service be saied one the day of Elecc͠on.
Also yt is ordayned that the M{r} and govˀnoures of the saied mystery for the tyme beinge yerelye uppon the daye of elecc͠on of the newe M{r} and governoures shall cause Devine service solempnely to be kepte at the churche therefore to be appoynted. And that the whole company of the Clothinge or Lyverye of the said ffellowshippe shall pˀsonallye be present at the same yf there be no Lawfull and reasonable cause of Absence to be allowed of by the M{r} and goveno{rs} of the sayed mysterye uppon payne that whosoevˀ absenteth hym self shall for evˀy suche default paye xij{d.} The said service to be at the charges of the common Boxe.
3. An order ffor the allowance of the Dynner one the daye of Elecc͠on.
This directed that £13 6_s._ 8_d._ should be allowed yearly towards the Election Dinner out of the common box.
4. An order that y{e} Clothing shall bring home the M{r} & govˀnors in their Lyvˀyes.
Also yt is also ordayned y{t} uppon the day of the Elecc͠on of the newe M{r} and governoures of the saied mysterye After that they shall be chosen and that suche of them as be present have taken their othe that then they and every off them shalbe had home unto their howses with the Lyvery or Clothinge and their hoodds uppon their shoulders accordinge unto an ould custome heretofore used.
5. An order howe evˀy man shall behave hym self in the Court tyme.
This relates to the order in which the members of the Court shall speak upon any debated point; the Master to speak first, the Upper Governor next, and so on down to the Junior Assistant, and, in the event of the Court being equally divided, the Master to have the casting vote.
6. An order that evˀye one of thassistaunce shall come to all courts of Assist{s.}
7. An ordre against the Lettinge out of the Hall.
The Hall was not to be used or let out for “weddings sportes or games therein or playes or dauncinge or for any other like entente,” but by permission of the Court.
8. An ordre that y{e} M{r} and upper governor shall quarterlye take accompte of the youngre govˀno{r.}
9. An order that y{e} younger govˀn{r} shall quartˀly make an accompte to the M{r} & upp{r} govˀnor.
10. An order concernynge the younger govˀnor his receipts & payments and to see all repac͠ons[144] done.
[144] Reparations (of the Company’s houses).
11. An order concerninge the Secound govˀnors receiptes and payments.
12. An ordre concernynge y{e} examynac͠on of such as shall be admytted Surgeons.
No one was to be examined for admission to practise Surgery but in the Common Hall, and in the presence of at least three Examiners and one or more of the Masters or Governors.
13. An order that everie man of the said company shall abide the ordre and award made by the M{r} and governors.
14. An order that no pacient be brought unto the hall one y{e} Court dayes.
15. An order for chosenge M{rs} and Stewards of thannothomye.
There shall be chosen yerelye for ever two Masters and twoe Stewardes for the Anathomyes and that those twoe whiche were Stewardes the one yere shalbe Masters of The Anathomies the nexte yere ensewinge To thende that thereby yt maybe bettˀ knowne howe to wourke and make the same.
16. An order concerninge the Anathomyes.
This provided that all anatomies, whether public or private should be made at the Hall and “that all private Anathomyes shall reverently from hensforth be buryed as publick Anathomyes ar for the worshippe of the said mysterye, any skelliton to be made onelye excepted.”
17. An order that none supplant or take anothers cure from him one paine of v{li.}
18. An order that none take any apprˀntice for Surgerie but that he can write & reade.
19. An order how many sˀvnts evˀy man may kepe.
No liveryman was to keep more than four apprentices or servants working in his art, and no freeman more than three.
20. An order that none use eny mann{r} of Barbory on Sundayes.
Yt is ordayned that none of the said mysterye usinge any manˀ of Barberye . . . . . . shall uppon any sondaye shave wasshe poule or trymme any manne or w{th} any Instrum{t} to make cleane teeth either w{th}in his howsse or in any other place elles where privelye or appartlye uppon payne of forfeture of xl{s.}
21. An order that none doe make any shewe of Barborye one Sonndais or other holy days.
This provides that Barbers shall not “hange upp set or put out any bason or basons pott or potts uppon his poule Racke shoppe windowes or otherwise” on Sundays or holy days, and is the earliest mention of the “Barbers’ pole” in our Books.
22. An order that assistaunts maye be made nevˀ beinge any Governor.
23. An order that none being out of thassistants com̃ into the pˀlor except he be called.
24. An order that no courte of Assistaunce be houlden one the tuesdayes.
Tuesdays were set apart for Lectures and for the ordinary or Monthly Courts; no reason is given why Courts of Assistants should not be held on the Tuesdays.
25. An order for the pˀsentac͠on of apprentices before they be bounde.
Every apprentice was to be presented to the Court that they might “uppon the sight of him allowe hymme to be cleane in pˀson and Lymme and meete for the excersycinge of the same mysterye.”
26. An order that none put away his appˀntice before the cause be knowne before y{e} M{r} & govˀnors.
27. An order that none lett any bloud stand to the annoyaunce of the people.
“Barbours excercyseinge fleabothomye or bloud lettinge” were not to show blood in vessels in their windows.
28. An order that all pˀsentac͠ons in Surgery shalbe pˀsented to the M{r} w{th} his governoures for the tyme beinge.
This order provided that any Surgeon having a patient in peril of “mayme” or death, was to “present” or make known the case to the Governors within three days, and the Court would then appoint certain expert Surgeons to see the patient and assist in the cure. There are scores of entries in the books of Surgeons being fined for not “presenting” patients.
29. An order that none take any pˀsentac͠ons but y{e} M{r} & govˀnoures for the tyme beinge.
30. An order that the M{r} and governoures and their deputies shall goe to the poore as well as to the rich.
Any Master or Governor being sent for to see a sick or hurt person and refusing to go without payment, was to forfeit 20{s.}
31. An order for puttinge the rules in execuc͠on.
32. An order for multipliinge speche in the corte tyme.
This was an early form of closure directed against such members of the Court as were given to an over-indulgence in oratory.
33. A rule for order in goinge.
Every member of the Company was to take his place according to precedence, at burials, anniversaries, Courts, etc.:--
And if anie of them of any scrypulosytie frowardnes follye or pusyllanimity refuse to take his owne romme or place accordinge to the order in good obedyent manner he was to be fined 12{d.}
34. An order for the view.
This relates to the yearly inspection of the Company’s property.
4th March, 1566. In Thys Courte Willm̄ Gyllam was discharged and released oute of warde and hath p̃d his arerages and he hathe confessied y{t} Richard Bromehed doth shave the vycar of Stepney in his howse every sondaye.
4th July, 1566. It was ordained that if any of the Court hereafter might “happen to lyght or fall into povertie or dekaye” that he should have a pension out of the Common box. One who had served as Master was to have per ann. £4; an Upper Governor £3; Second Governor £2; Younger Governor £1; and an Assistant 13_s._ 4_d._
It was also ordained that Thomas Hall should have an exhibition of 40_s._ per annum--
towardes hys studye in the unyvercytie for Surgery anexynge physycke thereunto, and thereby hereafter to pˀphet his other brethren beynge of this sayde mystery and comynaltie usynge and ocupyenge the sayde syence & arte w{th}in the cytie of London by Readynge lectures unto them in y{e} Comon Hall and other wyse by his councell conynge and knowlege in the same science & arte of Surgery.
It was also ordained that whenever the Lord Mayor should invite the Masters and Governors to dine with him, that--
then and there after the same dynner ys don The M{r} or govˀnors shall make his oracyon or request in the behalf of the sayde Company as to hys wysdome yt shall seme best in most descrytest maner and shall then geve and delyver unto the sayde Lorde maior of lawful mony in golde l{s} and in orther corrant mony iij{s} iiij{d} that is foure marks by waye as a good wyll of the same Company.
ALSO IT YS ORDAYNED That god callyng oute or frome this Trancytory vale or worlde any of this saide Company decessed and beynge w{th}in the clothing or lyvery of the same, his best hood shalbe layed upon the hearse and unto the churche and y{r} upon yt shall so remayne untyll the takynge of[145] of the said herce clothe w{ch} is used at the goynge forth of the M{r} govˀnors & company of the clothinge oute of the churche & the corps goynge to be buryed. And then and y{r} the clarke of the saide Company shall take the same hood and [it] shalbe his pˀper owne of dewtie. (In default the widow or executor was to pay 6s. 8d.)
[145] Off.
The Beadle was directed to look after, and to help in removing back to the Hall, the standings, banners, carpets, etc., after they had been used on any public occasion, and a small yearly fee was to be allowed him for this service.
3rd November, 1566. Edward Parke, referred to in the next minute, was constantly getting into trouble, and sometimes into the Compter:--
Here was Thomas Lambkyn & John Merryt wytnesses against Edward Parke for y{t} he saide he wolde not com̃e to the Courte beynge warned & y{t} yf the M{r} com̃ytted hym to warde he wolde brynge the M{r} before the lorde cheefe Justice And yt is ordered y{t} the saide Parke shall [be] & is upon his humble submyssion remytted.
16th Jan., 1567. The old vellum book of ordinances, etc., containing portions of the four Gospels in Latin, and still in our possession is probably the book referred to in the minute of this date, which states that Willm̄ Grene had “taken an othe upon the blacke booke that serveth in this howse for the same purpose.”
13th Nov., 1567. Yt ys ordayned that Wyllyam Bull Chrystofor Swalldell William Crowe Wyllyam Grene Henry Rankyn and Leonard Coxe is elected to be of the clothyng and Lyvery and that theyre hoods shalbe by the M{r} for the tyme beyng put upon theyre shoulders w{th}in the pˀlor one Chrystmas day next ensuyng before the company go to pawles to weyghte on the lorde mayor, unto the olde usuage in that behalf provyded accordyngly.
27th Jan., 1568. In this court Rich Hughes is graunted to have the hall to kepe a maryage in upon Sonday c͠o[146] a sevenighte.
[146] Come.
Again this year a licence for a similar purpose was granted to Francis Partridge, and there are other instances.
18th May, 1568. In this Courte here was Phillip Jorden for trymynge on the Sondayes & for now he is forgeven beynge the fyrst tyme.
13th Oct., 1568. Here was W{m} fferrat for Trymyng upon the Sonday but he wyll do yt no more here after.
About this period there were numerous cases of Sunday trading before the Court, and in many instances the offenders were fined or imprisoned.
9th Nov., 1568. In thys Courte here was Rich Roberts and he is comanded that he shall agree w{th} this mystery as a brother or ells he to shutte up his shoppe and ocupye no more but as a servant upon the penallties of the statute.
10th March, 1569. It was ordered:--
That Richard Wysto for his mysdemeanor and unquyet behaveor and beyng a troublesom pˀson, so that the courte of assystents canne neyther thincke well or good on hym, therupon and therfore he the saide Richard Wysto is relynquyshed depryved and dysmyst of his office and yong{r} govˀnorshyp and also fourth of assystents of the saide mystery.
Wysto appears from time to time to have given the Court trouble, his offence on this particular occasion being that he had ordered his apprentice to let a man blood in the Compter contrary to the order of the Aldermen. Wysto was contumacious for a long period, but seems on 17th July, 1572, to have made humble submission and apology, whereupon an order was made “That none do stirre upp any talke consr̃ninge the deprivac͠on or submyssion of Ric. Wistowe”; he was subsequently re-admitted on to the Court and served Master 1586, but the animus against him revived, and on 7th November, 1587, certain parties were before the Court for reviling him on the old score, and were duly threatened and admonished as to their future behaviour.
22nd November, 1569. Here was Phillip Jordan for trymming upon the sabboth daye and he once agayne is warned upon the penalltie of the acte that he do y{t} hence forwardes no more (see 18th May, 1568).
10th October, 1570. Margaret y{t} was M{r} Vaughan[147] his mayde is graunted to kepe one Sonday her wedyng in the hall & no more.
[147] George Vaughan, Master 1569.
1568 to 1570. There are several entries in the books of members of the Court being removed for misbehaviour.
27th January, 1571. It was ordered that--
a newe Bayle be made to thentent them of the clothing of this mysterie maie decentlie stand to attend all soch tymes as it shall please the Queenes ma{tie} to come through the citie of London.
The Bayle was a movable stand or platform; there are various notices as to the one previously in use, having been out of repair. It was taken out on all great days of processions or triumphs and on Christmas day when the “lorde maior went to Poules,” and numerous references are also made to the Company’s banners which accompanied it.
19th January, 1573. Here was Willm̄ Carrington for havinge iiij servaunts one Christmas even and ordre was taken that he should laye downe his ffyne.
15th March, 1573. Here was a question moved concerninge takynge in certeyne into the Assystaunce But the howsse would not consent to the takinge in of any more for that there were alredye xxviij pˀsones.
Here was a question moved concernynge the takinge in of certayne pˀsons into the clothinge but the house did not think good to take in anye for that the nomber is alredy fyftye.
26th May, 1573. Here was John Johnsonne and brought in his fyne for kepinge a foryner uncest xx{d.}
There are frequent entries of freemen being fined for not “cessing” foreigners and journeymen, and for teaching foreigners their “science.”
It would seem from the following precise minute that commitments to prison were made by the Court direct, and not always upon Warrants obtained from the Lord Mayor or a Justice.
15th March, 1575. Here was one Mˀkes [Markes] servñte w{th} M{r} Tholmwood sometyme, sent to the Compter by Willm̄ Eden Clark to this misterye for not pˀforming an Awarde made betwene the saide M{r} Tholmwood and the saide Mˀkes and divers others stubborne and lewde behavio{rs.} The comitte{mt} made by the saide M{r} and Wardens.
22nd March, 1575. Here was John Clark sessed w{th} Edward Park for two yeres to begin at the ffeast of Thannuncˀ of o{r} Ladye next viz{t.} the first yeare xxij{s} and a payre of hose, the seconde yere xxvj{s} viij{d} a payre of hose and a Capp.
15th May, 1575. Here was a pˀsept sent by my Lo{r}de maior straitly charging and commandinge the companye in her Majesties name that they take immediate order that theyr sˀvaunts and app̃ntices nor any of them in any wyse or sorte do mysuse annye s̃vyng man page or lackey or anye other pˀson that shal goo throwe the streets of this Cittee, nor shall attempt anything to the breach of her Ma{ties} peace either in wordes acts countenaunce or otherwise at their uttmost pˀyll, whereupon all the whole Companye were sent for and had that Comaundement.
1577. Thomas Hall (see 4th July, 1566) was appointed an Examiner in Surgery and to dissect the anatomies for ten years.
There are several instances of exhibitions to sons of freemen (generally 40_s._ a year), to enable them to study at Oxford and Cambridge, and these entries extend over a great many years.
22nd Oct., 1577. Here was M{r} Skarlet the Quenes Bargeman and he pˀmised the Companie that they shoulde have a barge called the Greyhounde belonging to the maydes of honor for lij{s} iiij{d} yf my Lorde maior do go unto westmˀ.
This sum would not of course include the Bargemaster’s or his men’s fees for their services, or the providing banners, accessories or attendants, all of which were paid for by the Company in addition.
23rd July, 1582. At this Coˀte John Yates Thomas Lamkin and Edward Parke were dismist from their places and owte of thassistance for revelinge of secrets contrarie to a rule in that case pˀvided.
6th March, 1583. Yt was agreed that whereas a demaunde was made by the L. Maio{r} and Co{r}te of Aldermẽ unto o{r} Companie for a contribution of certein monie for certeine Landes we hold as the saide Corte gave in Certificate of John Johnsons guifte for thuse of an obit. The answere was made by the consent of the said Masters that this house will joyne w{th} other Companies in the charge accordinge to their porc͠ons.
21st Nov., 1583. Mr. Banester, a liveryman, being indebted to the Company £5, gave a “watche or clock” and it was ordered that his debt should be cancelled in consideration of this gift.
The following minute refers to the obit for John Johnson (vide 6th March, 1583) the property having been declared to be held for superstitious uses, the Company purchased their right to retain its possession for £13 6_s._ 8_d._
5th July, 1585. At this Co{r}te yt was agreed That whereas a Teñte in Tower streate belonginge to this house ys founde [to] be concealled Landes. That the pattenist should have for agreament to have o{r} Teñte surelie the som̃e of xx{tie} markes.
The next is a curious instance of an ancient tenure.
29th Sept., 1586. A lease for 21 years of a house in East Smithfield was granted to Humphry Rowland at £6 per annum, and the said Humphry was to--
deliv{r} and geve unto the saide masters and to suche as shall come w{th} them to viewe the said Teñte yerely the nombre of xviij shoing hornes franck and ffree.
14th Aug., 1587. It was also condiscended and agreed That the newe masters or governo{rs} of this o{r} Company shall eṽy yeare on the daie of o{r} Ellecc͠on of them be brought home to their howses with the Levery or some p̃te of them as heretofore hathe ben accustomed eṽy one wearinge his hood in decent order.
6th July, 1592. Certein newe silver booles are to be bought for those pˀcell gilt booles w{ch} were the guifte of M{r} Vaughan.
9th February, 1596. It was agreed for “the taking in of the water w{ch} cometh from the Themes by pipes into this howse.” Heretofore the water had been supplied from a well, and later on by a leaden “pomp.”
1596. In this year a curious episode occurred, which showed that the Court were not unwilling to shield their freemen when offending, if the party taking action against the offender did not belong to the Company. Four freemen (one being an Assistant) had been “put into” the Court of Exchequer by “one Holmes an Informer for using both Barbery and Chirurgery against the Statute,” and the Court, without troubling to enquire if the offence had been committed or not, ordered that £10 should be lent the parties to assist them in defending the suit. At the next Court the matter was much debated as to whether the Barber-Surgeons should go on with their defence or make terms with the informer, and the parties themselves were consulted, whereupon it was finally decided “among themselves to agree w{th} the said Informer w{ch} they related to the whole Corte, whereupon the Corte rose and the said pˀties made their owne agreement privately w{th} the saied Informer to their best likinge.”
10th December, 1596. Mr. Storer came to the Court and agreed with the Company, by indenture, in consideration of £5 per annum for seven years, to relieve the Company from all charges in respect of the provision of grain for serving the market during that period.
9th June, 1597. This daie one septer or mace and twoe pictures latelye and verye loveingelye given to this Companye by William Martyn[148] of the Clothinge in token of his love to this house was presented to this Courte and verye gratefullye accepted.
[148] Master 1606.
This daie one cupp made of an Ostridge Egge or shell and sett in silver and guilte given by the laste will and testamente of M{r} Thomas Bankes divers tymes M{r} of this Companye was likewise presented to this Courte and verye gratefullye accepted.
15th Jany., 1598. This daie William Clare one of the Lorde Maiors serjeantes at mace is chosen officer of this house and where his fee to fore was but vj{s} viij{d} per Anñ it is nowe by this Courte uppon good consideration augmented to x{s} pˀ Anñ and John Smith in his absence is appointed deputye.
The duty of this officer was to attend the Courts of Assistants and to arrest and convey to the Compter such persons as were committed.
30th Jan., 1598. Nicholas Kellaway, in consideration of his years, was excused serving the offices of Steward and Master of the Anatomy and “freelye gave one standinge cup double guilte w{ch} was kindely accepted.”
14th Aug., 1598. There is under this date an interesting account of the Election of Master and Wardens; twelve Electors from among the Livery were appointed:--
Which electors after they had their chardge given them by the Maisters or Governors of this Companye and their severall billes for the elecc͠on delivered unto them after longe and deliberate considerac͠on had, did electe for the Maister John Leycocke and for the upper Governor John Burgis and for the seconde Governor John Pecke and for the yongeste Governor Roberte Johnson Which saide John Leycocke beinge not then presente the garlande accordinge to the manner and custome of this house was by the Maister for the yeare paste placed uppon the heade of Mr. Docter Browne as deputye for the saide John Leycocke, after which another garlande was likewise placed uppon the heede of the saide John Burgis by the upper governor And a like garlande tendered to the saide John Pecke which he utterlye refused and for the same was fined at ffortye shillinges which fine he paid accordinglye likewise a nother garlande was placed by the yongeste Governor uppon the heade of the said Roberte Johnson and by him gratefullye accepted And the saide Maister Burgis and M{r.} Johnson were sworne standinge for the due execuc͠on of their offices.
1598. In the Minute Book commencing 1598 there are scores of cases of Barbers being fined for working on Sundays; the informant was generally the Beadle, and it is amusing to note how frequently a delinquent, after purging himself by a fine, voluntarily took to the office of Informer against his brother Barbers.
Many Barbers and Surgeons were fined for presuming to “sett up shoppe” without licence, here is an instance:--
28th November, 1598. This daye George Collimer appeared before the M{rs} of this Companye and had daye till the next court to bringe in his fine for openinge his shop w{th}out licence.
11th December, 1598. This daye Thomas Powell appeared before the M{rs} for workinge on the saboth daye and puteth him self uppon his tryall, wherefore he is comaunded to attend here the next Court And in the meane tyme for his unrevˀent behaviour towards the M{r} is comitted to the Compt{r.}
15th January, 1599. Where divers grudges and manye greate inconveniencies have happened amongest suche as have benne familiar frendes and brothers of this Societye by the unadvised rashnes of some of the Assistance of this Companie whoe have disclosed and revealed suche secretes as have bene advisedlye and discretlye for the benefit of the said Companye spoken in the courte tyme Contrarye to the solempne othes of suche assistanˀ to the greate dishoner of god and scandall to the said Companye, ffor reformac͠on whereof it is ordered by consente of a full Courte of Assistance That if at any tyme hereafter any of the Assistance of this ffelowship shall utter or reveale to any other pˀson beinge not Assistante any secretes uttered and spoken at any courte which oughte not to be uttered or revealed And also if any Elector of the M{r} or Governors for the tyme beinge shall at any tyme hereafter utter or reveale any speches concerninge the election to any person which oughte not to knowe the same suche person soe offendinge and due proffe thereof made, beinge of the Assistance shalbe dismissed oute of his place and livery, and beinge onlye of the livery shalbe dismissed oute of the liverye.
Where this house hath a barrel of Gunpowder It is ordered that the same be soulde to the beste benifitt of this house.
30th January, 1599. This daie Edward Downes was comitted to the Compter for calleinge villayne before the maisters of the Companye.
6th February, 1599. It is ordered that John Mullines shalbe comitted to the Compter for his disobedience in not payeinge his debte to this house.
17th April, 1599. This daie Michaell Bullocke complayneth of William Webbe forren brother for workeinge with Henrye Needeham beinge not ceassed with him and for grindeinge of rasares[149] And Needeham is to be warned to the nexte Courte.
[149] Razors.
8th May, 1599. Marmaduke Jefferson hath till the nexte Courte to bring in his fine for hangeinge oute his basones on maye daie.
5th July, 1599. Richard Sprignall, to be excused serving the office of Master, presented a--
drinckeinge cupp made of a nutte and garnished with silver and guilte which was thankfullye accepted.
17th July, 1599. This daie William Lacye is Comitted to the Compter for his contemptious behaviour towardes the Maisters of the Companye and for workinge in the trade of barberie beinge noe freeman.
24th July, 1599. This daie Richard Samborne complayned of one Phillip Winter for settinge upp a shoppe in paules church yarde beinge not free. It is ordered that the saide Winter shalbe comitted to prison untill he be free, or bounde before my lorde Maior to departe the Citye.
This daie Gabriell Hunte appeared before the Maisters and was comitted to prison for workeinge on the sabouth daies.
30th July, 1599. This daie Thomas Hobbes hath lycence of the Maisters to sue Thomas Watson at the Comon lawe for not accomptinge with him for iij{li.} due in the tyme of his apprentishipp.
13th August, 1599. It was further ordered that because this tyme is troblesom and to avoyde the evill speches of men, that there shoulde go home with the Maister but eighte of the liverye and with the rest of the Governors sixe a peece and that withoute their hoodes.
29th May, 1600. It was ordered that two streamers and two banners should be purchased to garnish the Company’s barge.
3rd July, 1600. This daye Anthony Millington Esquier Executor to the laste Will and Testament of Elizabeth Scoloker deceased payd unto the M{rs} viz., M{r} Wood M{r} Dardes & M{r} Martin a legacy of tenne poundes by the sayd Elizabeth bequeathed to this Company whereuppon it is ordered that there be a Cup made w{th} the same money And that her name be ingraven uppon it as a thinge geven by her.
11th Aug., 1600. Whereas Thomas Cole a verye disobedient and pervers brother of this Companye did verye disobedientlie and perversely behave himselfe towardes the Maisters or Governors in the presents of the Assistants and liverye there assembled And alsoe for that hee refused to paie the musicions iiij{d} according to order It is ordered by the consent of a full Courte of Assistants and of the reste of the assemblie that he be dismissed oute of the liverye of this Companye And not to be warned to any assemblies or meetinges in other sorte then one[150] of the yeomanrie till it shall please a Courte of Assistants at the like tyme to restore him to his former place, yet he is to paye his quarterage dulye.
[150] Than as one.
Thomas Cole reformed his ways, and was subsequently re-admitted to the Livery.
4th Nov., 1600. This daye it is ordered that Wheelis dwellinge in Longe Lane take downe his basons and make no shewe towardes the streete uppon payne to be comitted to the Compter.
22nd Apl., 1601. This daye where this howse alloweth but v{s} to the parson of St. Olaves for his sermon on the Election daye It is ordered by this Court that the same be augmented to x{s.}
5th May, 1601. This daie Henry Eaton uppon warninge appeared before the maisters or Governors for keepinge a forren Jorneyman whereuppon it was ordered that the said Eaton shoulde put a waie the said fforren before the next courte daye.
30th June, 1601. Noah Bayley, a Surgeon, who for two or three years past had continually been complained of for various offences, and disagreements with patients and apprentices, came at last to grief, for having--
not onely abused M{r} Warden Thorney w{th} reprochefull & slanderous speeches but also M{r} Mapes and M{r} ffenton twoe of the assistants of this Company making mowes[151] and mockinge them as they sate in the Courte in contempt of the said Court it was ordered that hee therefore shalbe comitted to the Compter uppon the Lo: Maiors commaundement for example of oth{rs.}
[151] Mouths.
22nd September, 1601. This daye Richard Higgins was committed to the Compter by the M{rs} uppon the Lo: Maiors commaundm{t} for refuseinge to paye his fine for his absence from the hall at the daye of gen{r}all Rules.
This day Thomas Allen[152] was fined for his absence from the said rules.
[152] First Master of Dulwich College.
6th October, 1601. This daye it was ordered that Will{m} Braye for certayne speeches & for his misbehaviour towards M{r} Warden Atmer should be pˀsently comitted to the Compter, of w{ch} imprisonm{t} at his humble suite and uppon his submission to the said M{r} Atm{r} hee was dischardged of his said imprisonm{t.}
10th October, 1601. This daye Will{m} Deepeinge Owin Jones and Edward Waterhowse were appoynted for three of the wiflers for the yere ensuinge.
A committee was ordered to meet at “Mˀcers Chappell by sixe of the Clock in the morninge to viewe the repac͠ons of the howses belonginge to this Company.” How many members of the Court would now attend at 6 a.m. in chill October?
27th October, 1601. This daye it is ordered that the M{rs} of this Company & also M{r} Bird M{r} Wood M{r} John Izard Thomas Thorney William Martin & John Gerrard[153] be warned to meete on ffrydaye next by sixe of the clock in the morninge to goe on serch accordinge to custome.
[153] The celebrated herbalist.
23rd February, 1602. This daye it is ordered that Richard Jackson a brother of this Company shall be committed to the Compt{r} for not appearinge before the M{rs} uppon warninge to answer the complaint of Edward Bird his apprentice.
22nd March, 1602. This daye it is ordered that John Rea Strang{r} shall be committed to the Compter for settinge out his billes[154] uppon the gates & oth{r} places in the Cytie contrary to his tollerac͠on.
[154] Probably quack doctor’s advertisements.
30th March, 1602. This daye it is ordered that M{r} Warden ffrederick M{r} Thorney M{r} Will{m} Martin M{r} John Peck M{r} Gerrard[153] & M{r} ffenton shall meate on ffrydaye next by eyghte of the clock in the morninge at Lyon Key to goe from thence to my Lord Admirall[155] to complayne against Robert Derham for his contempt in refusinge her Mat{s} imprest.
[155] The Earl of Nottingham, at Greenwich.
13th April, 1602. This daye Robert Durham (Derham) appeared before the M{rs} of this Company of his owne voluntary And it was by this Courte ordered that for his sevˀall contempts of this Company aswel in their serch as in their prest hee should bee committed to the Compt{r} uppon the Lord Maiors Commaundem{t} whereuppon hee was sent to the Compter But at the speciall instance and request of one M{r} Meredith and M{r} Morgan twoe of the said Derhams ffrendes hee was sent for back agayne and uppon his humble submission & intreaty hee was dischardged of his imprisonment And thereuppon did promise to be obedient to this Company at all tymes hereaft{r.}
24th November, 1602. This daye it is ordered by the M{rs} or Governors of this Company that Robert Redhead one of the Lord Maiors officers shalbe officer to this Company as aft{r} the decease of Will{m} Clare And to have such fee for the same as the said Willm̄ Clare held the same And also hee is to be confirmed in the same place by the next court of Assistance.
20th March, 1604. This daye it is ordered that on thursdaye next the M{rs} of this Company shall attend the Lord Maior to knowe his pleasure concerninge their places of standinges.
The Masters on this occasion procured an order of the Court of Aldermen ranking the Company as sixteenth in order of precedence, and this is set forth in the Minute Book as follows:--
17th April, 1604. ~A Copie~ of an order of Courte set downe the daye and yere hereaft{r} expressed concerninge the place of this Company in all assemblies of the Companyes of this Cytie.
* * * * *
~Martis~ decimo septimo die Aprilis 1604 Annoqʒ regni Dñi nr̃i Jacobi Regis Anglie &c sc̃do.
BENNET } Soane Garrard Lee Hollydaye Wattes Rowe Craven Anderson MAIOR } Swynerton Hayes ac Romney uñ vĩc &c.
~Where~ it appeareth to this Court aswell by the humble supplicac͠on of the Maisters or Govˀnors of the Mistery & Coiãltye of Barbors and Chirurgeons of this Cytie as by an ord{r} taken by the same Courte the fowerth daye of ffebruary in the tyme of the Maioraltie of S{r} Stephen Peacock knighte and in the fower and twenteth yere of the reigne of the Late Kinge of famous memory Kinge Henry the eight That the M{rs} or Governors of the said mistery & Coiãlty of Barbors & Chirurgeons & their pˀdecessors in the order of their goinges standinges rydinges sittinges & oth{r} assemblies of the livˀyes of the sevˀall Companyes of this ho: Cytie have bene alwayes tyme oute of mynde reputed taken & placed as the seaventeneth Company amongest oth{rs} the sevˀall Companyes of this Cytie next & imediatly from & aft{r} the Company of Mercers Grocers Drapˀs ffishemongers Goldsmythes Skinners Marchaunttaylors Haberdashers Salters Iremongers Vinteners Stockfishmongers Clothworkers Brewers Lethersellers and Pewterers And forasmuch as it doth likewise appeare to this Co{r}te that sythens the makeinge and establisheinge of the said order the said M{rs} or Governo{rs} of the said Mistery and Coiãltie of Barbors and Surgeons have enjoyed the Benifit of the said order and borne all chardges taxes and contribuc͠ons whatsoevˀ imposed on them from tyme to tyme w{th} credytt to the good likinge of the Magistrats and Governors of this Cyttie as well as other Companies of like sorte and State have done And yett notw{th}standing of late at the Royall passages of the Kinge and Queenes most exelent Ma{ties} and the prince of wales attended by the Nobilitie and gentry of the land through this Cyttie on the fifteenth daie of March last when through ignorance theie were misplaced by the Comittie appoynted by this Cyttie for the mannaginge of those affaires. It is therefore this daie upon due considerac͠on had of the pˀmisses, and for that the said Company of Stockfyshmongers have bene since the tyme of the said order wholelie dissolved and abrogated and noe Company or Corporac͠on remayninge w{th}in this Cyttie of that name, ordered and decreed that the said M{rs} or Governors of the said Misterie and Coiãltie of Barbors and Surgeons shalbe from henceforth reputed taken and placed as the syxeteenth Companie w{th}in this Cyttie in all theire goeings rydinges sytteinges standeinges and assemblies whatsoever, any misplaceinge of them on the said fifteeẽth daie of March last to the contrary notw{th}standinge.
SEBRIGHT.
22nd May, 1604. This daie it is ordered that from henceforth the Clark of this Companie shall against evˀy Courte daie bestowe iiij{d} in hearbes and flowers.
12th June, 1604. This daye Will{m} Wrighte a very disobedyent Broth{r} of this Company was accordinge to the Rules of this howse fined at vj{s} viij{d} for callinge the officers of this howse knaves and for other his lewde & disobedient behaviour and is to bringe it into this Court on tewsedaye next.
8th November, 1604. Mr. Thomas Goodall and Mr. Kellaway were each fined 10_s._ “for not riedinge w{th} the M{rs} when the kinge came through the city” (probably in March last).
5th February, 1605. This daye Marcus Davie appeared before the M{rs} and was rebuked for shewinge the Copie of õr Chr̃e[156] to a Scrivener.
[156] Charter.
28th February, 1605. This daye it is ordered that the numb{r} of 16 pˀsons of the Assistance of this Company shalbe accompted a full Court of Assistance.
It was also ordered that a “fayre parchem{t} booke” be bought for engrossing therein the Charters of the Company; this book is still in our possession.
28th February, 1605. This daye M{r} Warden ffrederick made request to have a Deputie to supplie his place and office of upper warden and to sit in his place till his retorne from Spayne whith{r} the saide M{r} ffrederick is bounde And alsoe to kepe his keyes whereuppon it was ordered that he should make choyce of any sufficient man of the Assistantꝭ to keepe his keyes in his absens if hee pleased. But it was denyed that any should sit in his place as deputy.
Christopher Frederick was Serjeant-Surgeon to the King, and father of Sir John Frederick, Lord Mayor in 1661. He was of alien birth and did not work harmoniously with the Court of Assistants. In Repertory xxvii. fo. 117 (at Guildhall), is an order of the Court of Aldermen that Sir Thomas Garrard and four other Aldermen were to call the Master and Wardens and Mr. Frederick before them and to end their controversies (which, however, they did not succeed in doing).
21st March, 1605. Mr. Frederick brought a letter to the Court from the Earl of Nottingham, saying it was the King’s pleasure that Mr. Frederick should appoint a deputy to act as Warden in his place, whilst he was away with the King in Spain, but the Court adhered to its decision of 28th February.
This daye M{r} Warden ffrederick pˀsented to this Court a letter wrytten to the M{rs} or Governors & Assistants of this Company the contents thereof hereafter ensueth, viz{t.}:
Aft{r} my very hearty commendac͠ons I have thoughte good to signifie unto you his Ma{ties} pleasure That I should have to attend me in this my ambassage into Spayne Mr. Xpõfer ffrederick one of the nowe Governors of yo{r} Company w{ch} by reason of the place hee bereth amongest you can hardely be spared nevertheles because the necessytie of the service urgeth the same It is thought fit by his Ma{tie} that hee shall noĩat and appoynt such a sufficient man to execute his place in his absens as formˀly hath borne that office, wherefore I doubt not but you will admitt and allowe of such a one as for that purpose hee shall noĩat to sit in his absens as his deputy who shalbe answerable for all matt{s} as if M{r} ffrederick were there himself So to continue eyth{r} untill the tyme of the yere that you make choyce of some other pˀsone fit for the same or M{r} ffrederickꝭ retorne oute of Spayne w{ch} shall first happen, of whose ready care to satisfie the Kinges expectac͠on and my desyre I dowbte not And evenso I bid you righte hartely farewell. ffrom Arnedell howse the ix{th} of March 1604.[157]
[157] 160-4/5.
Yo{r} very lovinge frend
Notingham[158]
I do praye you that Will{m} Martin be excepted[159] in his place till M{r} ffrederickꝭ retorne Notingham
[158] Lord High Admiral. [159] Accepted.
26th March, 1605. This daye M{r} James Hodson one of the tenaunts of this Company accordinge to an order of a Court of Assisstance payd to the M{rs} his fyne of L{li} for his lease And had lycence graunted unto him to demyse the tenement w{ch} hee holdeth of this Company or any pt̃e thereof And did pˀmise to geve unto this howse one hogshead of clarret wyne when it should for the use of this howse be called for & demaunded.
9th April, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Humfrey Gorston bringe in his fyne at the next Courte for teachinge of a forren his Art.
16th April, 1605. This daye Stephen Abraham was commaunded [to] geve over his keepinge a barbors shop in Phillip Lane untill hee shalbe made free of this Company uppon payne of imprisonment.
23rd April, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Stephen Abraham be committed to the Compter for contempt of the M{rs} order heretofore set downe.
Abraham must have instantly obeyed the order, and shut up his shop in Phillip Lane, and directly afterwards have opened another in Finch Lane, for we read:--
30th April, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Stephen Abraham shall take downe his basons and geve over his shop in ffynch Lane and shall continue w{th} his mr̃is mr̃is Smyth orels to be committed to prison.
24th May, 1605. fforasmuch as Mathew Peele a broth{r} of this Company hath delt underhand w{th} the tenante in possession of the howse where in one Edward Sares lately dwelt at Dowgate, makinge the tenant to beleeve that hee the sayd Mathew Peele had a lease graunted unto him from this howse of the same and pˀffered to sell the same to the said tenaunt where there is no such thinge to him graunted. It is therefore ordered that an order made the xviij{th} of March whereby it was determyned that the sayd Mathew Peele should have the first pˀffer of the next tenem{t} that should fall voyde of this Company better cheape by x{li} then any oth{r} pˀson shalbe voyde & of none effect to all intents & constructions.
11th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Willm̄ Wrighte shalbe committed to the Compter for abuseinge the late M{rs} of this Company.
25th June, 1605. This daye John Crispe dwellinge in St. Martins Barbor is dischardged from kepeinge a shop.
12th September, 1605. This day it was agreed that the pˀnte M{rs} shall pˀceed to build againe the wall latelie taken downe betwixt o{r} yard and the Bulwark w{th} Brick only And the same to be correspondent to the reste of the bricke wall of the said yard In which wall they are to cause to be made and placed such and so many convenient wyndowes w{th} lettice and casementꝭ as they shall thincke fitt. And it is further agreed by the consent of the Court that they shall proceed w{th} the worcke now in hand for the erectinge of a steyre and steyrecase to be made to passe through the pˀlor into the said Bullwarke or garden plott And the same to be finished and done in such mannˀ and forme as the said M{rs} shall thincke fitt And also shall repaire and amend the defectꝭ of the wainscott in the said pˀlor where need shall require. And that such chardges shalbe borne by this house as shalbe in that behalf disburssed.
26th September, 1605. This day M{r} Nicholas Collins is chosen to be of Councell w{th} this Company and is to have a fee of xl{s} pˀ añn. and is to continue in the same place so longe as it shall please the Assistantꝭ of the same Company.
1st October, 1605. This day William Gravenor was fined for hanginge out of his basons on Bartholomew day And also Humphry Gorston.
This day there was redd to this Court a lrẽ directed from Doctor Browne to the said court importinge that Christopher ffredricke was as forward in his advice as in his Assistaunce in the cuttinge of S{r} Anthony Cooke as M{r} ffenton was.
About the year 1605 the Court were at law with Mr. Frederick as appears by the Wardens’ accounts, though there is no reference to the subject of the dispute in the Minutes, beyond the above reference to a surgical operation performed on Sir A. Cooke, and the controversy about the Deputy Warden when Mr. Frederick went to Spain. Mr. Frederick was alien born, and the following order, without doubt, had a reference to this circumstance:--
10th October, 1605. This day it is ordered that from henceforth no Alien or stranger borne out of his Matꝭ dominions shall hereafter be capable or eligible to beare or take upon him any place or places or office of a M{r} or Governour of this Company And that an ordinaunce shalbe pˀntlie drawne to such purpose if by o{r} Councell wee shalbe advised so to doe.
The above order was rescinded 21st July, 1608.
8th October, 1605. This day Thomas Emerie William ffarris John Heydon John Burrowes Roger Brecknocke John Hullins Wyddow Turner widdow Eaton John Phillipps and Robert Samme were fined for workinge upon last Saboth.
10th October, 1605. This day it is ordered by this Courte that the reparac͠ons of the Citties wall next to the Bullwark shalbe accomplished and done according as the pˀnte M{rs} or Governo{rs} of this Company shall thincke fitt And all charges therein disburssed shalbe borne by this house.
7th November, 1605. It is also ordered that the pˀnte M{rs} or Governors of this Company shall if they cann bargaine w{th} the Ladie Windsor for the glasse in the wyndowes of the Bulwark And for such other thingꝭ as are by her Ladishipp to be sold and to give such Composition for the same as they in their discretions shall thincke fitt.
This day it is ordered that the youngest Governo{r} Rento{r} doe cause all needful and necessarie repˀac͠ons to be done upon such tenemtꝭ as ought to be repaired by this Company And also shall cause the privit hedge in the garden next the Bullwark to be taken up and the ground to be leveled and another hedge to be planted and sett all alonge from the further end of o{r} new bricke wall to the furthest corner of that garden.
19th November, 1605. This day it is ordered that the M{rs} of this Company togeather w{th} M{r} Bird M{r} Wood M{r} John Martin and M{r} Mapes are to goe in search on satterday and upon munday next And they are to meete in Powles.[160]
[160] St. Paul s.
28th Nov., 1605. This day it is ordeyned that o{r} M{r} shall compound with some Baker to pˀvide for this Company 50 quarte{rs} of good wheate at such yearelie rate and for such tyme as they can agree And he to be Baker to the house so longe as he behave himself well.
One Will{m.} Clifton was on 17th December following appointed Baker, and agreed to find 50 quarters of wheat for £5 per annum.
28th January, 1606. This day John ffoxe a forren Barbor appeared before the M{rs} and was by them forbidden to keepe shopp in London any more for Barbinge or Surgery, And he pˀmissed that he would not.
16th June, 1606. In the controvˀsie betwixt Thomas Orton & ffrauncꝭ Holland It is ordered that the said Orton proceed not in suite of law against the said Holland otherwise then by takeinge the peace of him till the next Court Att w{ch} tyme the said Holland is comaunded by this Court to bringe in his fine of xl{s} for strikinge of him the said Orton. And the said Orton is to geve his attendaunce at that Courte.
14th July, 1606. This day uppon the suite of the pˀson and pˀishione{rs} of St. Olaves in Silver Street It was ordered by this Court that at such tyme as the now church of the said pĩsh shal begin to be reedified beinge now in great decay and fallen into ruyn That then the M{rs} or governou{rs} of this Company for the tyme beinge shall of the stocke of the said Company pay to the then church wardens of the said pĩsh the somme of x{li} towardꝭ the reedifiẽg of the said Church w{th}out makinge further suite for the same.
Several liverymen were complained of for not having attended in their liveries of late, and among other notes is the following:--
14th July, 1606. This day Henry Bradley one fferris and Henry Bracey are dismissed out of the Clothinge and Assistaunce of this Company for they have not given their attendaunce in their liveryes uppon summons.
8th September, 1606. This daie Mr. Peck did lend voluntary to this howse L gratis for a yeare next ensueinge.
This daie M{r} ffenton did lend C{li} gratis to this Company for a yeare next ensueinge Also he did lend to this Company L{li} more for a yere at x{li} pˀ cent.
23rd September, 1606. This day it is ordered that Percivall Jackson shalbe comitted to the Compter for his severall Contemptꝭ to this howse.
30th September, 1606. This daie Percivall Jackson was dischardged out of prison upon his mothers intreatie. And is to bring in his debt to Burrowes at the next Court.
7th October, 1606. This daie John Hedlow paid to the M{rs} vj{s} viij{d} w{ch} by them was tofore paid to officers w{ch} attended to committ the said Hedlow for his severall contemptꝭ to this howse.
13th October, 1606. Percivall Jackson was again committed to the Compter for his “severall contemptꝭ.”
4th November, 1606. This daie John Kerrell Richard Cade & Richard Houlden were fyned for being absent from the funerall of M{r} ffyneinge.
10th March, 1607. This daie Thomas Grig was fyned at xii{d} for not wearinge his Cap on Candlemas daie last.
19th September, 1607. The Clerk’s child having died of the plague, and being carried through the gate of the Hall, an order came from the Lord Mayor commanding the Court not to sit for 28 days, and it was thereupon ordered that the Courts should sit at Mr. Fenton’s house in Bartholomew’s Court during that period.
This daye it is ordered that Carehills wyef be warned to the hall against the next Court for keepinge of twoe shoppes of Barbinge w{th}out Bisshoppesgate.
8th October, 1607. This daye it is ordered by this Courte uppon due considerac͠on had That from henceforth the M{rs} or Governors of this Company every yere yerely shall geve to the Recorder of this Cytie a yerely fee of money oute of the stock of this Company at their pleasures so that it exceede not the somme of iiij{li.}
It was ordered that no liveryman should henceforth--
attend in his lyvery and w{th}out a ruffe band uppon payne of xij{d} for evˀy offence.
3rd November, 1607. This daye uppon the humble suite of one wydowe Burrows shee is admitted to keepe her Barbors shop where shee now dothe for 2 yeres next ensuinge not w{th}standinge that w{th}in the said tyme shee mary an husbond of any oth{r} trade.
1st December, 1607. This daye Thomas Allen[161] and James Mullins were fined for wearinge of falleinge bands w{th} their livˀy gownes.
[161] The first Master of Dulwich College.
21st January, 1608. This daye it is ordered that . . . . Braye [be appointed] Informer to pˀsecute suites by informac͠on against such pˀsons as the pˀnt Masters shall noĩat for one yere next ensuinge at the chardgꝭ of this howse And hee is to have tenne poundes for his paynes therein.
27th January, 1608. Five of the Company were fined for not being at the funeral of Mistress Izard in their liveries.
5th April, 1608. This daye lycence is geeven to Will{m} Buckley to arrest John Dodd breakeinge his wyndowes.
21st July, 1608. This daye it was thought fit that the pˀnt Assistantꝭ showld sit in Court w{th}out their Gownes for that the weath{r} is hot.
It is ordered that the laste quarters penc͠on due to John a Lee lately deceased shalbe paid to the poore woman w{ch} kept him in his sicknes.
At almost every Court, charities in sums varying from 2{s} to 40{s} were given to poor members for their relief, or to the widows of former members, and in many cases yearly annuities were granted out of the stock of the house, independent of the Trust charities distributed by the Court.
14th February, 1609. This daye John Stubbes one of my lord maiors officers is appoynted a Serjeant to this Company.
27th June, 1609. This daye it is ordered that George Dugdale shall before Michaelmas next paye to Thomas Shephard v{s} w{ch} hee oweth him ORELS to be Committed to the Compter.
6th July, 1609. This daye Roger Rayney Marchaunt tayler is elected & chosen Butler to this howse so longe as hee shall well & honestly behave himself therein And is to have all such fees and allowances as to his said place or office are incedent or belongeinge Provided hee enter into bond to the M{rs} of this Company w{th} sufficient surety w{th} Condic͠on to make good to this howse all such plate linen & oth{r} thingꝭ as shalbe committed to his chardge by the M{rs} of this Company the Stewardꝭ of the Maiors feast The Maisters or Stewardꝭ of the Anathomy or Wardens of the Yomanry.
This daye uppon the due examinac͠on of sevˀall abuses & misbehaviours comitted by Thomas Goodale on of the Assistantꝭ of this Company towardꝭ Mr. Edward Rodes maister of this Company wrongefully chardgeinge him w{th} injustice before the wholl Courte And for oth{r} his misdemeanures hee is by the wholl Consent of this Court dismissed oute of the Assistance of this Company.
26th July, 1609. Whereas heretofore it hath byn observed for a rule and customary order that the M{rs} of the Company to whom the Electo{rs} on the Election day before dyñn should deliver the names of such pˀsons who were at such tyme elected M{rs} of the Company for the yeare insuinge, should not give any notice to any new M{r} so elected before the garland should be put upon his head, it was now thought fit that that rule should be put on one side, and that those chosen should be at once informed of their Election that they may make pˀvision for the entertaynement of the livery, etc.
10th August, 1609. This day Richard Browne was admitted Armorer to the Company and to have p̃. anñ. xiij{s} iiij{d} and he to have a speciall care to keepe the Armour in repac͠ons and to be therefore paid by the Rentor warden for the tyme beinge.
This day Mr. John Leacocke[162] contemptuoslie depˀted out of the Courte w{th}out licence of the M{rs} or of any of them And albeit he was required by the Clarke by the comand of the M{rs} to come into the Courte beinge depˀted out of the hall, he answered that he would not come againe Therefore it is ordred by this Courte that he shall pay his fine of iij{s} iiij{d} for depˀtinge the Court without the M{rs} licence And if he refused to pay the said iij{s} iiij{d} then the som̃e of xl{s} is by this Courte ordred to be assessed and ymposed upon him w{ch} if he shall likewise refuse to pay then he is by this Court dismissed out of the Assistaunce ipso facto.
[162] Master in 1604.
Mr. Leacocke submitted and paid his fine 26th September, 1609.
21st August, 1609. In answer to a precept from the Lord Mayor, a certificate was sent to his Lordship that there were remaining of the 50 quarters of wheat wherewith the Company was charged, 20 quarters, and that the remainder had been sold in the Markets according to former precepts.
19th October, 1609. It was ordered that:--
no M{r} or govˀno{r} of this Company shall from henceforth have power or authority in them or any of them to sell morgage or ympawne the fower pieces of Tapistry hangingꝭ or any of them w{ch} were bought for the use and creditt of this house.
9th January, 1610. Att this Courte Henry Jones paid vj{d} to the pore’s box for hanginge out his basons one Twelveth day last.
6th March, 1610. Att this Courte it is ordered that Thomas Burgis shall at the next Tusedayes Courte pay unto the widdow Burrowes his late M{ris} iiij{s} for that he hath broken her Combes and Sise{rs.}
21st March, 1610. Att this Court it is ordered that the wyddow Saunde{rs} shall no longer reteyne in her service one Allexander ffarrington uppon payne that if shee doe her basons shalbe taken downe & she comitted to the Compter.
8th May, 1610. At this Court it is ordered that Pyramus Porter shall be pnˀtely discharged out of Prison being layd in by Richard Gessell for that Porter was layd in w{th}out the M{rs} Consentꝭ.
Porter was Gessell’s apprentice, and their disagreements had been before the Court on a previous occasion.
20th August, 1610. Mr. William Gale (who had been Master, 1595) was elected Master; he was an eminent Surgeon but, dying on 19th November, 1610, was succeeded in his office by Mr. John Peck (who had been Master in 1605). Mr. Gale was buried at Monken Hadley, in the chancel of which church may still be seen in the floor on the North side of the Altar, a brass with an inscription to his memory, and two brasses with the effigies of his sons and daughters. There were formerly brasses of the effigies of William Gale and his two wives, but they have unfortunately been removed.
The arms of Gale (as appearing on his son’s brass in Monken Hadley Church) Az. on a fesse betw. three saltires ar. as many lyons’ heads era. of the field langued gules.[163]
[163] The tinctures are from Burke’s Armory.
20th September, 1610. Att this Court a motion being proposed by the present M{rs} to thentent to bringe the howse out of debt, w{ch} cannot be soddenly effected except the Assistauntꝭ of this board shall of their owne free willꝭ by their pˀticuler free guiftꝭ or other wise by the voluntary free loane of money to this howse for a certayne tyme, be assistinge And thereupon M{r} Warden ffenton declared that o{r} M{r} was contented towardꝭ soe good an acc͠on to gyve freely xx{li} and M{r} Warden ffenton vj{li} xiij{s} iiij{d} M{r} Warden Veare iij{li} vj{s} viij{d} M{r} Warden Hassald xl{s} And demaundinge of the residue of the bord what they would gyve, M{r} Wood he would gyve x{li} if the howse will renewe his lease, M{r} Sˀjaunt Goodorus would thinck of itt, M{r} Leycock M{r} Thorney M{r} Gerard M{r} Rodes & M{r} ffrederick would doe the lick M{r} Thomas Martyn would gyve xx{s} M{r} Isard vj{s} viij{d} M{r} Mapes would gyve xl{s} M{r} Johnson M{r} ffoster M{r} Ingolsby & M{r} Coghill they would doe as others in their Ranck would doe. M{r} Cook would gyve xxxiij{s} iiij{d.}
16th October, 1610. Att this Court It is agreed that one Henry Pullyard a Drummer shalbe admitted to be the Drummer to this howse And he is to have for evˀy dayes service that he shall serve as a Drummer to this Company on the lord Mayors daie the some of xiij{s} iiij{d.}
20th November, 1610. Att this Court ytt is ordered that William Jones shall bringe in the next Tuesdaye Cort xx{s} for a ffyne for keeping two shoppes.
22nd November, 1610. Roger Joanes, a Waterman, was appointed Bargeman with a yearly fee of 20_s._, and was in consideration thereof to find a Barge with “all thingꝭ therein and therewith fittinge” whenever the Company should require the same for £3 on each occasion.
11th June, 1611. Itt is likewise ordered that the Clothworker w{ch} practizeth Barberye about Thames Street if he be found workinge, that then he shalbe comitted to the Compter.
18th July, 1611. At this Court upon the humble suite of Edward Handsome it was thought fitt & decreed that he should first agree w{th} the Informer, w{ch} being done come & make his suite to this house at some Court of Assistantꝭ and then he shoulde knowne & fynd howe kyndlye they would deale w{th} him.
8th October, 1611. At this Court John Scott was ffyned at vj{s} viij{d} for refuseinge to holde the place of a whiffler.
4th May, 1613. At this Court Henry Clawes came before the M{rs} and by them is pˀhibited and forbidden to keepe a Barbo{rs} shopp or deale any more in surgery for that he is noe denizen.
22nd August, 1614. It was ordered that in future, any liveryman being called to the Court should pay a fine of five marks. It does not appear that before this time a fine had been taken on like occasions.
By an entry about this date, it seems that when a “foreigner” was admitted to the livery he paid £5 for yeomanry and £5 for livery fines in one payment.
30th March, 1615. At this Court it is further ordered that the new Ryver water shalbe taken into this howse so as it maie be had for 30{s} fyne & 30{s} pˀ anñ in rent.
6th July, 1615. The hall, which was in “great decay,” was ordered to be viewed by a Committee of the Court, as to its restoration.
11th November, 1615. At this Court our M{r} acquayntinge them how unfortunatlie it hath happened that the Hall on Tewsdaie night last beinge 7 November was broken open & what losse the howse susteyned thereby. Whereupon it was then presentlie considered and then ordered that a present course be taken for the spedie repaieringe of the howse & tresory howse and that the same shalbe forthwith stronglie borded & made up at the charges of the howse. And for this purpose this Court did noĩate the p’nte M{r} together with M{r} Peck M{r} ffenton M{r} Martyn & M{r} ffoster for to be Comittees for the well orderinge & appoyntinge of the workmen to doe & finish this worke as in their discretions shalbe thought mete. And what the Comittees or anie three or two of them shall thinke fittinge to be done this howse will rate for & allow of as also of the charge to be borne by this howse.
Note That the xj{th} daie of November Thomas Lyne confessed how he was the plotter for the Robbinge of o{r} Hall and how o{r} plate was Carried to Westmˀ & our monie was devided amongst the theves who were these Thomas Jones Nicholas Sames & Walter ffoster wc̃h did break open the Hall, whereupon the Clarke haveinge order from o{r} M{r} went to Westmˀ & upon search there made found our plate locked up in a trunke in the howse of one ... a shoemaker xj{li} xviij{s} of the monie M{r} Warden Coopˀ found the same daie in the howse of one ffulses in Fleete Street. About the xvj{th} of Nov. then followinge Thomas Jones was taken who beinge brought to Newgate in December followinge Jones & Lyne were both executed for this fact.
In January followinge Sames was taken & executed. In April 1616 ffoster was taken & executed. Now letts pray God to blesse this howse ever from any more of these damigees. Amen.
13th December, 1615. At this Court was gyven unto the officers in regard of their paynes taken in apprehendinge the theves & obteyninge our plate 5{li} that is to the Clarke 40{s} & 30{s} a peice to the beadell & Porter.
30th June, 1617. At this Court is gyven unto the weif of John Davis a fre brother who lieth in prison x{s.}
27th January, 1618. Upon the humble petic͠on unto this Companie preferred by Thomas Shaw a pore brother of this Companie & now lyeinge in Ludgate thereby sueing for some releife to discharge him out of prison. It is therefore ordered by this Court that if the some of 30{s} will discharge him out of prison it shalbe disbursed out of the stock of this howse.
20th September, 1622. At this Court is gyven to Susan the Clarkꝭ mayde towardꝭ her marriage 40{s} in gratuity.
At this Court it is ordered that Jones the Waterman shall have for the hier of our barge against the lord Maio{rs} day fower poundꝭ So as it is a large barge will hold the hole lyvery And to worke w{th} 7 or 8 oweis.[164]
[164] Oars.
31st January, 1625. It is straightly ordered by this Courte that the pˀnte M{rs} or Governo{rs} and their successors shall take speciall care to comence and prosecute any suite by lawe against any ignorant imposters or other pˀsons exerciseing the arte of Chirurgery aboute this Cittie not free of this Companye & alsoe such as shall keepe shoppes for barbery within this Cittye being free of other Companies & not of ours.
19th January, 1626. This daye John Mills and George Roades are chosen to be of our Assistants for Barbars and Henry Blackley and Peter Thorney for Surgions.
Item this Courte takeing into their considerac͠ons the fewnes of our Livery many of them being lately dead by reason of the late greate visitac͠on doe elect and choose John Pinder Edward Charley Edward ffleete Robert Clarke Samuell Dye and Lewis Gossidge to be of the Clothing of our Companye.
15th February, 1626. At this Courte it is ordered that William Kellett do bring in his fine of vj{s} viij{d} at the next Courte for his unseemely carriage and vile language to Walter Preist being contrary to the ordinance and good goverment of this house, which fine the said William Kellett here in Courte refused and said he would not paye it.
At the same Court Priest was ordered to pay Kellett £3 which he owed him.
8th June, 1626. Kellett, not having paid his fine, was ordered to be dismissed out of the livery.
26th October, 1626. But becoming repentant, he made humble suit to the Court to be reinstated, “protesting here in Courte that as he hopeth to be saved he did not speak those wordꝭ and if he did he is very sorroy for it,” upon which submission and payment of his fine, he was readmitted to the livery.
23rd February, 1626. This daye upon the petic͠on of Thomas Borne and a certificate under the hand of Docto{r} Allott that the said Borne was a Scholler of the house in St. Johns Colledge in Cambridge it is ordered by the Court that for one yeare ensueing he shall have iij{li} to be paid him by M{r} Warᵭ Molins.
1st February, 1627. Item It is ordered by this Courte that there shalbe given unto M{r} Docto{r} Gwyn and his sonne for his preferm{t} in takeing degree of Batchelo{r} of Arte in the universitie of Oxenford xij{li} as the free gift of this Court.
9th November, 1628. This daye Richard Roades a Barbar & Surgion hath leave to open his shopp according to the ordinances of this house.
Roades was probably a man who had practised both as a Barber and a Surgeon outside the Company’s jurisdiction (the common usage of those days), but now being admitted a brother he had licence to practise “according to the ordinances,” that is, either as a Barber or a Surgeon, but not as both.
5th February, 1629. Upon the humble petic͠on made unto this Courte by John ffranck a professor of Surgery the sonne of John ffrancke late of the clothing of the livery of this Companie for that the said ffranck is nowe taken prisoner in Turkey and his ransome is assessed to 600 Crownes. In comiserac͠on of whose distressed estate in a deede of charitye of soe greate consequence this courte doth order that upon the said John ffranckꝭ being safe delivered into England here alive he shall have viij{li} paid unto such pˀtie as the ransome doth belong unto.
24th July, 1629. This daye in the complaint made unto this Court by Henry Edwardꝭ against John Cox for arresting of him without the consent of the Maisters they both being here present in Court It is ordered that Edwardꝭ shall paye Cox the xx{s} which he received of him uppon the wager that was wagered betweene them, and that M{r} Cox shall withdraw his acc͠on and proceede noe further in lawe and It is further ordered that M{r} Cox shall paye his fine of a marke on the next Tuesdaie for not askeing leave of the Maisters to arrest him.
1629. The fine for not serving Steward of the Mayor’s feast was £13 6_s._ 8_d._, and this had been the usual fine for many years.
16th September, 1630. A reference is made to a brick building which a tenant of the Company was erecting at Holborn Bridge, under the direction of Inigo Jones.
28th January, 1631. This Court doth give to Marshall Petoe[165] for his elegies on M{r} Banckꝭ his funˀall v{s.}
[165] A City Poet.
15th March, 1631. It is ordered by this Courte that the 12 Electors shalbe chosen and drawne by a ballotting box in this manner, twoe out of the auncient M{rs} one barbar one Surgion, 6 out of those of the whole Assistantꝭ 3 Barbars 3 surgions, 4 out of the livery 2 barbars 2 surgions as shalbe present on the Election daie.
10th April, 1632. Nicholas Moseley made complaint against goody Smith of her unruly and disorderly liefe amongst the Tenementꝭ in the alley at Holborne Bridge and thereupon this Court doth give him leave to expulse her from dwelling [there] any longer.
2nd July, 1632. This daye upon the humble and pittifull petic͠on made unto this Court by Richard Hayeward in the behalfe of Ric: Heyward his son whoe is now captivated and inthrawled under the slaverye of the Turke and his Ransome being to the som̃e of one C{i.} w{ch} the said Heyward is not able to raise, This Court therefore compassionateing the said Richard Heywards distressed estate, whoe being a Christian is in bondage to those Turkish & heathen Infidelles dothe order that there shalbe x{li.} paid out of the stock of this house for and towards the ransomeing and redeemeing the Captive at such tyme as the said Richard Heyward the son shalbe delivered alive here in England and not otherwise.
6th February, 1633. Anthony Mondeys wĩdd pˀnted to this Court a Booke called The Surveigh of London beinge in folio and newlie printed.
This would be Munday’s edition of Stow presented by his widow, and for which she, in return, had a present from the Court.
29th November, 1633. It is ordered that for the stock of Corne to be provided yearely by this house every one of the Assistantꝭ of the Liverye shall lend xl{s.} presently and every one of the liverye shall lend xx{s.} o{r} M{r} giveing a noate under his hand that the house shall repaie it within a moneth after each mans death to his executo{rs} if it be demaunded And soe hereafter every pˀson that cometh into the Assistantꝭ to lend xl{s.} or that cometh into the liverye to lend xx{s.}
4th March, 1634. 52 quarters of corn only being in the granary, it was ordered that 8 quarters more should be purchased to make up the complement of 60, which the Company were required by the City to keep in stock.
14th January, 1634. The question of “Ship money” being considered by the Court, it was thought that the Surgeons of the Company were free from the same by Charter, and a Committee of the Court was appointed to take counsel’s opinion thereon.
20th April, 1635. £10 was ordered to be given towards the restoration of the Church of St. Alban, Wood Street.
2nd June, 1635. Hugh Ward, for his absence from lectures, was summoned before the Court, when he used “approbrious language,” and defied the Masters,
Whereupon this Court did in the Lord Maiors name comitt the said Hugh to the Compter in Woodstreete & charged the said Ward to staye but he struggled to gett forth of y{e} parlor soe the M{rs} comaunded the dores to be shutt till an officer had taken him in charge, but after the officer had him in charge and they were gone forth into the streete (as the officer reported to this Court) Ward stepped from him and drew his knife & swoare hee would sheath it in his guttes if he came after him and soe he made an escape from the officer.
13th August, 1635. Ward made his submission and paid a fine of 40_s._
1st December, 1635. John Robinson a forreyne bar̃b was questioned here in Court for setting up a barbars shopp in Blackfriers before he had made knowne to this Court that he had served 7 yeares appnˀticeship with a barbar by trade, and had a licence to sett upp shopp, said he was bound appˀntice to Rich. Davyes of Hereford barbar x{th} of Januar xxj{th} of King James for 8 yeares but could not bring testimony he had served that time This Court doth charge him to take in his barbars pole & basons & to forbeare keepeing that shopp any longer.
8th March, 1637. Whereas there was an intenc͠on to make an open Gallery The Court is now resolved & doe order that it shalbe made a convenient faire Parlour over the walke leading into the Theater at the costꝭ of y{s} house.
30th March, 1637. It is ordered that the Gallery or Parlour leading to the Theater from the Bullwarke shalbe built and the Hall Cupboard that cants into the stone yarde shalbe taken downe and the leade thereof shalbe imployed to leade the Tarris that passeth from that plo{r} into the Theater.
19th May, 1637. £10 was ordered to be paid towards the ransom of Thomas Wright, a Surgeon, who had been captured by the Turks.
10th June, 1637. It is ordered that the 3 stone Columbꝭ allready wrought shalbe sett up and the walk next the hall side to be leaded over and railes & turned ballasters to be sett up Alsoe that there shalbe Iron barrs for all the windowes Alsoe a portland stone for the mantle tree Alsoe a tablett of stone shalbe sett up in the front and the M{r} & Wardeins names to be insculpted thereon and a sunn diall to be in a convenient place.
24th July, 1637. It is ordered that the Concave seeleing of the Theater shalbe painted with the Constellac͠ons of the Heavens and the 7 planetts over the 12 signes in every peere and sceletons to be wrought and sett up on every one of the 12 signes or Corbells.
Alsoe that this mottoe shalbe sett in the tablett of stone in the front of the greate pˀlor. This Parlour was built in y{e} yeare of o{r} Lord 1637 M{r} Richard Powell being M{r} M{r} John Heydon M{r} W{m} Huckle M{r} Law: Cotton Wardeins.
13th August, 1637. The painting the ceiling of the Theatre was ordered to be deferred until next year, and the scaffolding to be taken down forthwith.
20th September, 1637. It is ordered that the seeleing of the greate pˀlo{r} shalbe boarded shott & planed over with hole deales.
20th September, 1637. It is ordered that there shalbe given xl{s} to St Edmunds berey for reliefe of the poore people visited with the plague.
20th November, 1637. It is ordered that the yeomanryes hearse cloth shalbe altered and the imbrothered scutchions & figures to be decently sett by an Imbrotherer to be alwayes used at the publique discections in the Theater.
28th December, 1637. This daye complaint was made ag{t} Thomas Trevilion now Rento{r} Wardein both for his obstinacy and ill words and exacting money from yonge freemen and throughing up his keyes of the Threasurye & sayeing he would come no more to keepe Courtꝭ at the Hall and desireing to be put out of his place, for w{ch} his misdemeano{rs} and other evill behavio{r} being made apparent to this Court and his acknowledgem{t} of them upon due considerac͠on of all w{ch} It is ordered by this Court y{t} the said Thomas Trevilion doe stand and shalbe from henceforth absolutely removed and dismissed from his office & place of ffowerth M{r} or Governo{r.}
Mr. William Lingham was subsequently chosen in Trevilion’s place.
The Court sometimes acted in the capacity of private trustees of the estates of deceased members, and among the archives there remains a deed of acknowledgment signed by the Master and Wardens in 1637, wherein it is recited that Richard Mapes, a former Master of the Mystery, deceased, had left legacies to his four children, then being infants, and had appointed his wife Faith, executrix and trustee, with the proviso that in the event of her marrying again the Court of this Company were to be the trustees for the said children, and that the widow, having remarried, had paid over the children’s portions to the Masters or Governors. Attached is the seal of the Barber Surgeons, unfortunately not perfect, though a good specimen.
8th February, 1638. It is ordered that the Seaven liberall Sciences shalbe provided for the Theater by the M{r} and Wardens at the house charge soe it exceede not x{li.} x{s.} the carveing of them.
29th March, 1638. The whole of the Assistants and Livery were called together to know what they would give to the building fund, when the following sums were promised.
M{r} Serj Clowes x{li.} Morrice Griffith v{li.} M{r} Rich Wateson x{li.} W{m} Bennett iij{li.} M{r} Michaell Andrews x{li.} Robert Terrill ij{li.} M{r} Hen Blackley x{li.} Edward Arris v{li.} M{r} Warden Burgen v{li.} Humfrey Painter iij{li.} M{r} Warden Cotton v{li.} Thomas Allen ij{li.} x{s.} M{r} Warden Lingham v{li.} Lawrence Loe v{li.} M{r} John Heydon v{li.} Robert Bulluck iij{li.} M{r} Nicholas Heath v{li.} Thomas Bowden iij{li.} M{r} William Huckle iij{li.} John Dorrell iiij{li.} M{r} Martine Browne x{li.} James Clarke iiij{li.} M{r} W{m} Kinge v{li.} Hugh Warde ij{li.} M{r} John Pinder v{li.} William Watson iij{li.} Edward Charley v{li.} Nicholas Brothers iij{li.} Edward ffleete v{li.} John Meredith iij{li.} Henry Eaton v{li.} Thomas Biggs iiij{li.} Henry Boone v{li.} Phillip Gill v{li.} Samuell Sambrooke iij{li.} Charles Stamford iij{li.} Hugh Napkin ij{li.} James Walsall iij{li.}
3rd July, 1638. This daye was made knowne to this Court y{t} Jo{n} Pemberton formerly chosen an Assistant hath given his answeare that he will not hold that place nor come to the Hall unlesse he were drawne with wild horses thither, whereupon this Court doth fine him at x{li.} & that he shalbe prosecuted for the same at Lawe.
16th August, 1638. A stormy election of Master and Wardens was holden this day, and a very precise minute of the proceedings is entered, from which it appears that the Court and Livery being assembled, the Master declared--
The occasion of this solempne meeteing & the necessarye succession of the Governors & governem{t} of this Corporac͠on. And thereupon a ballatting box being sett on the table and the names of the auncient M{rs} & Assistants and livery being severally put into the twoe Sells of y{t} box, o{r} M{r} according to order did first drawe forth the names of theis twelve pˀsons following for Electors viz{t} for the Six Surgians M{r} Rich Wateson M{r} Martine Browne M{r} Jo{n} Pinder Tho. Tomlinson Edward Arris & Henry Eaton. And for the other six M{r} Richard Powell M{r} William Huckle M{r} Jo{n} Davyes M{r} Samuell Die Hen. Hodgkinson & Evan Owen. And thereupon the said Electors haveing w{th}drawne themselves from the publique Assemblye & taken their oathes upon the holye evangelists for the election of fower Masters or Governo{rs} for the yeare ensueing, The M{rs} and the rest of the Assembly made their repaire to the Church and after Sermon upon their returne to the Hall the Masters being called to those 12 Electors they were informed that the Election could not proceede and be made,
by reason that certain of the Electors being of divers trades were unable to agree upon two persons expert in Barbery, and these Electors refusing to choose two Masters Barbers, a Court was at once held and the six Barber Electors were discharged, six more Electors being chosen and called; two of these, however, being contaminated by those already dismissed, refused to serve, and eventually a fresh set of Electors was chosen, who retired, and elected Mr. William Clowes, Serjeant-Surgeon to the King, as Master, and three others Wardens, “and after dinner ended and the Seremonye pˀformed by the Masters or Governo{rs} of chooseing the new M{rs} or Governo{rs} with silver Garlands in the publique Hall,” the new Master and Wardens were sworn in.
8th November, 1638. A great feud having arisen between the Court and Richard Morrice, an Assistant, a suit was prosecuted against Morrice in the Earl Marshal’s Court, when the sentence pronounced against him was that he should attend the Court at the Hall, and there bareheaded rehearse in an audible voice an abject apology, the exact words of which are set out. This Morrice did, and the Master and Wardens having testified the same, he was again called into Court, when it would seem that his apology had been made under fear of the Earl Marshal and not of his free will, for the Court calling upon him to make answer “for his contentious carriage & foule & bitter languages & invective speeches by him given from Court to Court ag{t} divers Assistantꝭ to the generall disturbance of their Courtꝭ he refused to cleare himselfe or to give answeare,” whereupon the Court dismissed him from his place as an Assistant.
13th September, 1640. This Court is willing that there shalbe a distribuc͠on of M{r} Mapes Legacy on Cosmas and Damianus day being the 27{th} of this Instant September to 12 poore people 12 Angells according to the directions of M{ris} Joy they haveing red crosses on theire brests.
MEMORAND. on the 27{th} September being Cosmus and Damianus day 6{li} 13{s} 4{d} was distributed according to M{r} Richard Mapes Will. viz{t} These 12 poore persons free of our Company came into our Hall with red Crosses each of them on theire right Brests and the Governours gave to each of them 10{s} which amounted to 6{li} and the 13{s} 4{d} was to themselves for a repast for their paynes.
{ Widdow Wright. { Widdow Chapman. { Widdow James. { Widdow Tyler. The poores { Widdow Colley. { Widdow Pebworth. names were { Old Holmewood. { Old Kelham. { Widdow Bullock. { John Mulis. { Blind Reynolds. { Widdow Wadlowe.
20th November, 1640. A dispute between Edward Molins and one Coppinger was heard by the Court, when the decision was against Molins, and he was fined for using bad language.
12th January, 1641. Edward Molins came into the Court and stood in the face of the Court with his Hatt on his head and his Armes on his side and told the Court he would doe noe obedience to the co{te} and swore Gods wounds he would submitt to noe man liveing.
15th January, 1641. Molins was fined 40{s} for this contempt.
18th January, 1641. Richard Tompkins & Symon Crouch Surgeons by profession yet useing Barbery, This Court doth give them Order by our Lady day next to leave barbeing it being against y{e} Statute to practise both.
29th July, 1641. Mr. George Dunn hath given 5{li} to buy Bookes for the Library which is by this Court ordered to be performed accordingly.
There having been many quarrels in the Court, and various members expelled, a general shaking of hands appears to have taken place, for we read:--
30th July, 1644. This Court doth thinke fitt and soe order That a Sermon be made on the next Election day of thankes giveing to Almighty God for peace and amity which is now begun to be restored among the members of the Company And that M{r} Sharpe be desired to performe the same.
9th March, 1645. This day M{r} Callice Barber being complayned of for teaching to trimm to other then his Apprentices contrary to the Ordinance of this House did absolutely deny the same upon the Oathe that he tooke upon his admission into the ffreedome.
17th March, 1645. Mr. William Kings this day freely gave for the Ornament of this House a great Tortershell Whereon at his owne charge he hath given order for the Companyes Armes to be painted.
This shell is preserved at the Hall.
7th January, 1646. M{r} Michaell Markeland appeareing to this Court at the request of our M{r} he was here complayned of to have embalmed severall humane Bodyes within this City against the Ordinance of this Company in that behalf being an Apothecary and not a Surgeon approved according to Law Nor a ffreeman of this Company which M{r} Markeland acknowledged But alleadged It was through his ignorance Not knowing that the right thereof was in approved Surgeons and ffreemen of this Company only and none other And being now well satisfyed thereof haveing heard the said Ordinance read unto him promised not to doe the like againe.
2nd June, 1646. This daye Mr. Lawrence Loe Chirurgeon a Member of this Company through his good affection thereunto Did for the worship thereof freely offer to give for the beautifying of the Hall soe many stones of black and white Marble as shalbe sufficient for the Pavement thereof.
These marbles were laid to form the floor at the upper end of the Hall, and when the Hall was pulled down they were preserved and now form the pavement in the Entrance to the Hall from Monkwell Street.
There is a Memorandum that Mr. John Bancks by his will left--
To the Company of Barber Chirurgions London so long as they shall performe the uses hereafter limitted (or els not) To be paid them betwixt the first and seaventh day of May next after the decease of the said John Banckes and so yearely for ever the sum̃e of Twenty shillings w{ch} Twenty shillings shalbe by the said Company distributed in forme following viz{t} To Twelve poore householders or widowes of the same Company To each of them ffower poundꝭ weight of good beefe Two penny loaves of good sweet bread Two pence a peece in mony and each of them one Woodden platter.
14th December, 1646. This Court doth at the humble suite of the Ordinary of the Goale of Newgate freely give unto him 10{s} for his releife in his present want.
7th July, 1647. This Court doth give to John ffranck Chirurgeon who hath bin for a long time in Captivity in Turkey iiij{li} towards the setting him forth to sea and doth order that he be admitted into the ffreedome gratis when he shall desire it.
See the Minute 5th February, 1629. John Franck (the son of a Liveryman) was doubtless a “foreign brother,” and entitled to his freedom by patrimony upon payment of the fine, which the Court now ordered to be dispensed with if he wished to take up his freedom. Being a Sea Surgeon only, it was not necessary that he should be free of the Company. He had probably been in slavery 18 years!
Several entries similar to the following are to be found in the books.
9th August, 1647. Upon the humble suite of Thomas Tomlinson an ancient Member of this Company and of the Livery now fallen into greate Poverty and Want for some charitable releife from this Company. This Court being moved in Compassion to his deplorable Condic͠on and calling to mind his former good service to this Company Doth freely give him 10{li.} out of the Stock of this House.
14th September, 1648. Samuell Needler an examined Chirurgeon complayned to this Court that he was required to beare Armes notwithstanding his exempc͠on therefrom and therefore craved this Courts Assistance in his defence therein which was granted.
27th October, 1648. M{r} Warden Madocks and certaine others of the Assistants here present desireing to peruse our Charter for theire informac͠on the better to enable them for the Governement of this Company had a sight thereof and were well satisfyed in every particuler.
13th August, 1655. Mr. John Gale of Bushey (son of William Gale, M. 1595) a Surgeon of this Company, by his Will of this date left to the Barber-Surgeons £16 per annum, payable out of certain houses on Snow hill, in the parish of Saint Sepulchre, for the founding of an Anatomy lecture in the name of Gale’s Anatomy. This trust was transferred to the Surgeons’ Company in 1745.
Our Minute Books from the year 1651 to 1689 are unhappily lost; they are known to have been at the Hall as recently as 1832. Should any reader ever light upon them, he is particularly entreated to communicate with the Clerk of the Company or with the author.
1689. The practice was now adopted of entering all admissions to the freedom, etc., in the Court Minute Books (as well as in the Register) the forms being as follows:--
3rd September, 1689. For an apprentice:
Johẽs Rawson app̃r Caroli Peters admĩs est ex Rẽl Magr̃i & Jur̃.
for a freeman by patrimony:
Ptrũs Hartley Stac͠oner filˀ Thome Hartley Civis & Barbitonsorˀ & Chirurgˀ London admĩs est pˀ patrimõn ex Rẽl Isaacii Boddington Weaver & Wil̃l̃i Bletsoe Grocer, Wil̃l̃i Bateman Barbitonsorˀ & Chirurgorˀ London & Jur̃.
for a freeman by redemption:
Henr̃ Chamberlane admĩs est pˀ redemc͠on vˀtute orᵭem Curˀ Majorˀ & Alᵭrn Dat xviij{o} die Augusti 1689 & Jur̃.
17th January, 1690. This day an order was sealed to presse 40 Surgeons mates for the Kings service in Ireland.
At this period all freemen on their admission “took the oathes menc͠oned in a late Act of Parliament & subscribed the Declarac͠on therein named”: these were the oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy as required by the “Bill of Rights” (passed December, 1689).
2nd July, 1690. Ordered that the Clarke keep an accompt of all pˀsons faleing at a Court of Assistants and that every one faileing for every such time soe doeing shall forfeit v{s} & shall not be admitted to binde or make ffree untill he or they have made payment of the same of which they are to have notice except S{r} John Letheullier S{r} Humfry Edwin & M{r} Thomas Canham.
29th April, 1693. Ordered that the 2 Chirurgeons Governo{rs} & whome they shall thincke fitting to call to them Attend the Archbishopp of Canterbury conserning his Barber practiceing Chirurgery.
20th July, 1693. Ord{d} that a lease bee taken of the Archbishopp for one & twenty yeare from the 19{th} day of July 1693 for the Barge house[166] & that as the Governo{rs} have agreed a ffine of the same they pay to his Grace the sume of one hundred pounds besides ffees.
[166] At Lambeth.
3rd October, 1693. Ordered that the Bargeman have a new coate & britches &c.
19th July, 1694. Ordered that M{r} George Minikin bee warned before the Lord Major to shew cause why he doe not attend the Court of Assistants as he hath been chosen one of them.
18th June, 1696. A new sun dial was ordered to be put up.
About this period there seems to have been a general disinclination to serve as an Assistant, many of the Livery being fined £10 for refusing to serve the office, while some who had sat as Assistants were dismissed the Court for non-attendance.
25th October, 1697. Ordered that the Barge house bee mended & M{r} Warden Pinke take care to see it done.
18th August, 1698. Ordered that the Govern{rs} dispose of the Barge & let the Barge house from yeare to yeare.
12th October, 1698. Ordered That there may be papers made for a subscriptõn for a Barge.
21st October, 1700. Ordered that the ill manadgement of the late Master M{r} Tho: Lichfeild as to his office of Master and his other offices of Warden bee pˀsented to the next Court of Assistants in order to bee expelˀd the sˀd Court it being the opinion of this Comittee that he deserves soe to bee as alsoe for being any longer an examin{r} he haveing acted contrary to the establish{mt} of the Corporac͠on in the s{d} offices.
8th November, 1700. A Committee of the Court having waited upon the Commissioners of the Navy and reported that Mr. Lichfeild had committed irregularities in certifying men as qualified Surgeons for sea service, such men not being duly qualified, the Court adjudged him to be dismissed from his office of an Examiner in Surgery, and out of the Court of Assistants.
10th March, 1707. The new Clerk, Mr. Chas. Bernard, seems to have been industrious in searching out practising Barbers not free of the Company, as also others who had committed abuses; several were fined and compelled to take up their freedom and this day the following entries occur:--
Clyett being sum̃oned for Shaveing on Sunday last appeared before the Comittee and the fact being plainly proved against him the Comittee fined him ten shillings for his said offence.
Newland being sum̃oned for the like offence appeared also before the Comittee but there being no possitive proofe against him he was dismissed.
John Gould a Dutchman being sum̃oned for keeping a Shopp and exercising the trade of a Barber not being free of this Company And the matter being plainly proved against him the Comittee ordered him to be prosecuted on the statutes of the 32nd of Hen 8{th} and the 5{th} of Queen Elizabeth.
Ordered that a Second Sum̃ons be sent to all such Defaulters as have not appeared with intimation that theire ffines will be levied on them by distresse.
Ordered that Thomas Latham be sum̃oned to take upp his ffreedome & that all other persons exerciseing Barbery not being ffree of this Company be sum̃oned.
17th March, 1707. Nineteen delinquents who had been summoned appeared, and their cases were heard; a few examples will suffice--One Darby was “seen to comb a persons haire on Sunday morning last but alleadging that it was his ffather,” he was let off with 5_s._ fine.
Lewis Roger made answer that it “was onely his Apprentice combing a persons haire without his knowledge and that it was his first offence,” he likewise escaped with a 5_s._ fine.
James Good was more fortunate, for proving that his offence “was onely the Combing of a Lodgers Wigg,” he escaped.
Willm. Haslegrove appears to have filled up the measure of his iniquity, for being detected in “actually shaveing a person on Sunday morning,” he was fined 10_s._
Samuel Beaumont, charged with keeping two Barbers’ shops, had a month given him to part with one of them, and John Shoard who, not being free of the Company, kept a Barber’s shop in Cloth Fair, was ordered to quit the same within two months.
31st March, 1707. Elizabeth Presbury being sumoned appeared & alleadged that she was very poore & that her husband was an Idle man and promised to reforme her method whereupon the Comittee excused her.
The number of Barbers fined for working on Sundays, or for keeping shop not being free, was enormous, and it becomes wearying to travel through the records of their offences and fines.
17th June, 1708. Ordered that the Company’s Barge house and the Dwelling house thereunto belonging be forthwith repaired.
13th January, 1709. Sir Edward Northey was appointed standing counsel to the Company with a yearly retainer of two guineas.
15th April, 1709. Upon complaint made against one Henry Drudge for exerciseing Barbery & Surgery w{th}in the City not being ffree he attended and alleadged that he haveing been a Soldier in the late Warr thought himself intituled to keep his Shoppe without takeing up his ffreedome, by Virtue of the Act of Parliament made upon the disbanding the Army which gives liberty to disbanded soldiers to exercise any trade within the Corporations or places where they were borne, althoˀ they had not served seven years to it But the Court believing that act did not extend to Drudge by reason he was not borne in London, ordered that in case he did not shut up his Shop in a month’s time he should be prosecuted.
21st July, 1709. In consequence of the great expense to which the Company had been put in the repairs to the Hall, the Court determined to call thirty-one freemen into the Livery, and the fine being £10 each on admission or £20 on refusal, a considerable sum was realized.
It having been suggested to the Court that the yeomanry objected to pay 20_s._ for “corn money” when called to the Livery, the Clerk was directed to enquire into the origin of that tax, and finding that it had been originally levied on each member taking his livery, to satisfy the precepts made in 1633, and afterwards for providing a stock of corn for the City; and for that at the present time the Company had no Granary or stock of corn to provide, and “being out of debt,” it was ordered that in future this fine should be discontinued.
18th August, 1709. At the Election, ten of the Livery who had attended without their gowns, were severally fined and paid 1_s._ each, and there are other references to Assistants being fined for not appearing in their gowns.
4th October, 1709. A complaint being made against Richard Stockwell for being copartner with a fforreigner & the fact being made appeare pritty plain against him the Court fined him five pounds being the penalty imposed by the By Law, But upon his promise to discharge his said partner the Court were pleased to remitt his ffine.
18th April, 1710. M{r} John Booth a Surgeon at Warrington in Lancashire applying to this Court to be admitted a fforeign brother & he being examined in Surgery & approved It was ordered that upon his payment of ten Guineas he should be admitted a fforeign brother of this Company, But the said M{r} Booth refusing to take that part of the fforeign brothers oath whereby he was sworne to be true to the Queen he was not for that reason admitted.
1st June, 1710. It is ordered that the Members present at this Court shall be excused from wearing their gowns in regard to the heat of the weather.
20th October, 1710. It is ordered for the accomodation of the Members of this Court of the Barbers side for the seeing & being heard at Courts of Assistants That for the future at all Courts of Assistants the Governo{rs} on the Surgeons side shall set even with the Ma{r} next on his right hand & the Governo{rs} on the Barbers side next on his left. But that at all other Courts all the Governo{rs} shall according to their seniority sett along the side of the Parlour Table on the left hand of the Master in such maner as has been accustomed.
11th January, 1711. The Clerk’s and Beadle’s houses were ordered to be insured against fire, for £600 in the “Amicable Society.”
20th February, 1711. Mr. Willm. Smith, an Assistant, complained that Mr. Joseph Cosins, also an Assistant, and his junior in the freedom, had always taken precedence of him at the Courts, whereupon the matter was considered and the following order made:--
Forasmuch as it appeared that M{r} Cosins was first chosen into the Court of Assistants & that it is in the power of this Court to chuse whom they shall think fitt to be an Assistant out of the whole Livery without respect to Seniority & for that M{r} Cosins continued for many years in his present station as Assistant The Court were of opinion & did so declare themselves to be That the s{d} M{r} Cosins shou’d continue to take place of the said M{r} Smith as he formerly had done.
9th July, 1711. The Common Seal of the Company being worn out a new one was ordered to be cut in steel, together with an “Ingine,” wherewith to make the impressions.
6th May, 1712. Ordered that the Porter who shaves att the Custome house be sum̃oned.
27th May, 1712. Walter Browne being “one of the people called Quakers,” was admitted into the freedom and took a “solemn affirmation.”
7th April, 1713. Valentine Day Tallow Chandler was admitted into the freedom of this Company by Redempc͠on and at the same time was admitted to ffine for all offices to the Parlour door for both which he paid a ffine Clock worth 30{li.}
5th October, 1714. It is ordered that the Musitioners shall have five pounds for attending on the day of the Kings Entrance. (George I.)
5th June, 1716. Nathanael Charles owned that he has several times let blood for One shilling & sixpence upon which the Company ordered him to be prosecuted as also his Mast{r} Joseph Roe; twas observed that Roe could not write his name having sett his mark only to the Inᵭre.[167]
[167] Indenture.
15th August, 1717. M{r} William Highmore Jun{r} haveing marryed the Vintners widow who kept the Bell Taverne in Nicholas Lane applying to this Court and acquainting them that he had quitted the Barbers Trade and had undertook the trade of a Vintner, and was for that reason under a necessity of becomeing a freeman of the Vintners Company or of takeing a License from the Crown to retail wine and praying of this Court to translate him from this Company to the Company of Vintners, This Court after hearing the By-Law in that behalf read and due considerac͠on had thereof doth order that the said M{r} William Highmore shall be translated from this Company into the Company of Vintners upon payment of £20 to the use of this Company and upon Condic͠on that he shall not from henceforward exercise the trade of a Barber or Perriwig maker.
1st October, 1717. Robert Rainsford, the Company’s Barge Master, was ordered to have a new livery provided for him.
24th June, 1718. The Theatre was ordered to be repaired and beautified.
21st April, 1720. Mr. Berney, Mr. Burroughs and Mr. Fitzhugh, Liverymen Barbers, applied to the Court, giving their reasons and praying that the Court would petition the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council to suspend the act of Common Council restraining them from employing foreigners as journeymen, whereupon the matter was considered and the Court thought it would be contrary to their oaths to join in any such petition, because it was a standing By-Law of the Company, as well as of the City, that no Barber should employ any foreigner as a journeyman; it was also considered that such a liberty would prove a great discouragement to apprentices and that the present inconvenience complained of would soon be cured if Masters would sufficiently instruct their apprentices so as to make them useful during their servitude and competent as journeymen afterwards. The Court further decided to oppose, by every means in its power, the movement set on foot by Mr. Berney and his friends.
24th June, 1722. The lease of the Barge-house at Lambeth expiring in April, 1723, and the Archbishop having offered to renew the same for 21 years at £10 per annum and £100 fine, it was resolved not to renew it, in consequence of its being an unprofitable property, and the Company not then having a barge. The Barber-Surgeons let off part of their Barge-house to the Drapers and Ironmongers, and the Clerk was instructed to give those Companies notice that it was not the intention of this Company to renew the lease from the Archbishop.
2nd December, 1729. In consequence (as was alleged) of the difficulty in sometimes procuring a full Court, it was ordered that in future each Assistant who attended within one hour of the time mentioned in his summons and remained till the rising of the Court, should receive a fee of 2_s._ 6_d._
1st February, 1731. It is ordered that all the Liverymen shall attend on Election day and Lord Mayors day in their Gowns and at publick anatomys in their Capps upon Forfieture of Three shillings and Fourpence for every offence.
8th July, 1731. A precept coming from the Lord Mayor recommending the Company to contribute “towards the relief of the poor sufferers by the late fires at Blanford Tiverton & Ramsey being read The Court upon considerac͠on had thereof and from a just sense of the calamity and distress of their fellow subjects the late inhabitants of the said towns,” ordered £20 to be paid into the Chamber of London.
1732. The following fines were in force at this date, viz.:--
£6 6_s._ 0_d._ for a Barber admitted to the freedom by redemption.
£10 for a free Barber admitted to the Livery.
£30 for a Barber’s or Surgeon’s apprentice, made free by servitude, admitted to the Livery, and for all offices to the parlour door.
£7 7_s._ 0_d._ for examination, admission and diploma of a foreign brother.
£3 3_s._ 0_d._ for the same, if the applicant had been bound to a foreign brother at the Hall.
5th March, 1733. It is hereby referred to the Master & Wardens M{r} Serj{t} Dickins M{r} Serj{t} Amyand M{r} Petty M{r} Shott M{r} Parker & M{r} Maurice to receive proposalls for Building a Cupola in the Hall parlor and report the same to the next Court of Assistants.
19th July, 1733. Several of the livery attending upon a complaint against a Jew in Duke’s place for exercising the trade of a Barber without being free of the Company or having served seven years apprenticeship It is ordered that the Clerk of the Company shall sue the said Jew in such manner as he shall think fitt or be advised at the Company’s expence.
4th May, 1736. At this Court Abraham Diaz Delgadoa Jew was admitted into the freedom of the Company by Redemption for Ten pounds Ten shillings which he paid down and was sworn upon the Old Testament being a Jew.
3rd August, 1738. The Company contributed five guineas towards the Organ recently set up in the Church of Saint Alban, Wood Street.
3rd April, 1739. M{r} John Owen a Freeman of the Company & who lives at Islington was chosen Musicianer to the Company in the room of M{r} Brown dec̃ed.
11th November, 1740. It is ordered (in regard this Company have no Barge) That the Waterman shall forthwith deliver up his Livery coat and Badge belonging to the Company to the Beadles and that he no longer be annually intitled from this Company to a new Coat nor make use of nor wear the old one but that when he shall be employed in the Companies service. And also that for the future on every Lord Mayor’s day that this Company shall walk in procession in order to attend the L{d} Mayor a Stand or proper building shall be provided at the Companies expence for the better accomodation of the Livery belonging to this Company and in such manner and fform as several other Companies of this City are usually provided with on that day.
1745. The Surgeons are now separated from the Barbers.
8th August, 1745. The Clerk reporting that many of the Company, as well as Surgeons lately free of the Barber-Surgeons’ Company, were greatly in arrear in their quarterage, he was ordered to acquaint them that unless the said arrears were paid up forthwith, they would be sued.
17th September, 1745. The Company of Surgeons sent to the Company of Barbers two documents under their Common Seal, the one authorising Mr. Joseph Cruttenden to peruse and copy any Charters or documents in the possession of the Barbers, and the other empowering him to take possession of any books, papers or writings relating to Surgeons or Surgery only, on behalf of the Company of Surgeons; whereupon the Court acceded to the request, and gave instructions as to the same.
4th December, 1745. Mr. Cruttenden applied on behalf of the Surgeons’ Company for £510 (the Arrisian endowment) which had been directed to be paid by the Act of Parliament, whereupon the Master told him that by reason of the late fall in the Public Stocks, the Company could not without great loss, raise the money, but were ready to give the Surgeons a proper bond for the same, with Interest.
19th February, 1746. Forty-one freemen were reported as being fit and able persons to take the Livery, and were ordered to be summoned for the same with the intimation that if any refused he or they would be sued for the penalty of £20 each upon such refusal.
Of these, seven appeared at the next Court, took the livery and paid the fine of £10; six others begged to be excused. The remaining twenty-eight did not appear till later Courts, when some were excused, and others ordered to be sued; subsequently a large proportion of those nominated, accepted and paid their fines.
17th July, 1746. The Surgeons’ Company having pressed for payment of the £510 and Interest, and our Company having in Cash but £300, Mr. Luke Maurice (Master 1732, a Wine Merchant in Lime Street) lent the Company £200 at 4-1/2 per cent., and the Clerk advanced the balance, whereupon the principal, with £15 17_s._ 0_d._ interest, was paid to the Surgeons.
18th May, 1747. The Master acquainting the Court that he had employed M{r} Whiston the Bookseller to putt the Company’s Library in order and to make a Catalogue and valuation thereof And that M{r} Whiston had appraised the same at Twenty Guineas And the Clerk acquainting the Court that a learned Physican had offered twenty-five Guineas for the Library together with the Skeleton and other curiosities formerly kept in the Library It was ordered that the Clerk should acquaint the Master of the Worshipfull Company of Surgeons with the said offer made to this Company And that this Court being desirous to manifest their esteem for and preserve the ffriendship of the Surgeons did give them the refusal of the said Library Skeleton and Curiosities at the said price of Twenty ffive Guineas And that in case of their acceptance thereof the rich and ancient Pall belonging to this Company should be at their service as a free gift.
16th July, 1747. The Clerk reported that he had made the above offer to the Surgeons who replied that they considered themselves entitled to the Library under the Act of 1745, but that to avoid controversy with the Barbers they would be willing to refer the matter to Counsel, whereupon it was resolved that the matter should be submitted to the opinion of Counsel.
5th July, 1749. Ordered that the Library of Books formerly belonging to the late united Company be forthwith sold for the most money that can be gotten for the same.
2nd June, 1749. Ordered that the Companys Arms be cast in lead and affixed upon the several houses belonging to this Company.
Various specimens of these castings are extant about the Hall, and in possession of Mr. Charles John Shoppee (Master 1878) and of the author.
2nd May, 1750. Ordered that M{r} Paterson do wait upon the Earl of Burlington to know his Lordship’s intention about repairing the Company’s Theatre.
6th June, 1750. Ordered that the Clerk do write to the Right Honorable the Earl of Burlington to aquaint him of the ruinous condition of the Theatre and Company’s inability to repair the same and to know whether his Lordship will be pleased to order the said Repairs agreable to his own generous proposal in the Mastership of M{r} Rutter.
Nothing came of this application.
1st August, 1750. Ordered that the Clerk do cause a Catalogue to be made of the Books in the Library, and that he deliver a copy thereof to M{r} Samuel Rutter.
9th August, 1750. Mr. Gheys, Sculptor, was ordered to have the Skeleton, in exchange for the Bust of Inigo Jones, still preserved at the Hall.
3rd September, 1751. Resolved also that the old Pall be given to the Beadle.
This, alas! was the “rich and ancient pall.”
The Clerk was again directed to endeavour to sell the Library and it was disposed of to Mr. Whiston the Bookseller for £13!!
29th October, 1751. Resolved that the Doctors Gown and Hood be given to the Beadle.
13th August, 1752. Ordered that it be referred to the Master and Wardens to treat with M{r} Thomas Reynolds about erecting a Cupola over the great Parlor agreable to the Draft now produced to this Court and about repairing the Roof And also repairing whitewashing and painting the said Parlor so as the Contract for that purpose do not exceed the sum of One hundred and seventeen pounds.
19th August, 1752. The Agreement between the Company and Mr. Reynolds was entered into at £116 15_s._, and the Specification of his work is recorded in the Minute Book, from which I extract the following:--
The Cupola compleat and properly secured glazed and ornamented with Stucco and the Roof covered with Milled lead seven pounds to the ffoot with good brass pulley in the middle fit for a Branch or Lustre. A new white veined marble Chimney piece and Slabb with a carved wooden ovalo round it and Slabb of the same Marble The Chimney piece of the same dimensions as the present and the Slabb six foot nine inches by two foot four inches with a new fire stone hearth.
The ceiling and ornaments thereof to be secured mended cleaned and whitewashed.
9th August, 1753. The Great Hall, Kitchen and Lobby were ordered to be repaired by Mr. Reynolds in accordance with his Estimate of £101 17_s._ 6_d._
8th August, 1754. Ordered that the thanks of this Court be given to James Theobald Esq{r} one of the Ancient Masters of the Company for the magnificent Lustre by him lately presented and at his Expense fixed up in their great parlor assuring him This Court doth most gratefully accept the same as a monument of his regard for the honor and prosperity of the Company.
This handsome lustre still adorns the Court Room.
12th September, 1754. The Court having considered the state of the Theatre, which was out of repair, and for which the Company had no use, ordered advertisements to be inserted twice in three daily papers, asking for tenders for the materials of the same, and for pulling down and clearing it away. The “N.B.” to the advertisement states that “The Doors, Benches and Railes of the said Theatre are of Cedar.”
1st October, 1754. Three tenders for the materials of the Theatre were received, £21 10_s._ 0_d._, £32 and £35 respectively, and the decision thereon postponed.
4th February, 1755. William Shakespear (Barber) the apprentice of Richard Hulett, was admitted to the freedom.
5th June, 1764. The Clerk informed the Court of the death of Mrs. Elizabeth I’Ans, widow of Mr. Michael I’Ans, and that the Master and Wardens had, on the 23rd May, received of the Executors of Mr. I’Ans £2,200--3-1/2 per cent. Bank Annuities, and £75 in accordance with Mr. I’Ans’ will.
1764 and 1765. Mr. James Clowes who had been summoned to take up the Livery, refused to do so, whereupon he was sued for the fine of £20 and judgment obtained against him with costs.
14th August, 1766. A Committee having been appointed to examine and report upon the Theatre, and having done so, were now authorised to apply to the Court of Common Council for permission to pull down the same, and to treat with that Court for the purchase of the ground, for which the Company paid the City £3 per annum under an old lease.
3rd November, 1767. The City Comptroller having requested the Company to make an offer for the site of the Theatre, it was resolved that 30 years’ purchase (£90) be offered for the same.
7th February, 1769. A plan of the ground leased by the City to the Company and on which the Theatre stood, having been prepared by Mr. George Dance, Clerk of the Works to the City, it was laid before the Court, and the City sold the fee simple to the Company for £90. Would that one could buy City freeholds at the same rate now!
2nd September, 1783. Mr. Sylvanus Hall, of Paternoster Row, Carpenter, proposed to take a lease of the ground on which the Theatre stood, to take down the whole building, and to erect two dwelling houses on the site similar to those he had already built in Monkwell Street. The lease to commence at Christmas, 1784, and to be for 61 years at £10 ground rent. He also proposed to pay the Company £20 for the old materials of the Theatre and to clear the same away. To all these propositions the Court agreed, and Mr. Hall paid a guinea as earnest money.
1st February, 1785. Mr. Hall having pulled down the Theatre, the Clerk was instructed to write to him for the £20 for the old materials which he had removed.
4th October, 1791. There being a sufficient number of Members present to form a Court of Assistants, thoˀ no such Court was called, the Master took the sense of the Members present, as an adjournment from the last Court of Assistants, whether the Company should go out in the usual procession the ensuing Lord Mayor’s day, when on the question being put, the same was resolved in the negative.
4th November, 1794. M{r} Thomas Holehouse who was on the 1{st} July last elected on the Livery of this Company, but had refused to take upon him the same, without shewing any cause to the Contrary, and against whom an Action had been commenced for the recovery of Twenty Pounds the penalty incurred by such his refusal, this day attended and paid the said sum of Twenty pounds together with the costs of the said Action.
9th November, 1795. The following Circular was distributed amongst the Livery at the dinner this day:--
The Court of Assistants of the Worshipful Company of Barbers having received information that many persons residing within the City of London carry on the Trade of a Barber and Hair dresser without being free of this Company to the great prejudice of the Members and the rights of the Company Do hereby give notice that they have come to a resolution to prosecute all persons carrying on the trade of a Barber or Hair dresser within the said City not being free of this Company and they request the assistance of their Members for that purpose for the benefit of the Company and Trade at large; any information to their Clerk at the Hall will be duly attended to.
By order of Court,
EDW{D} GROSE SMITH,
Clerk.
9th November, 1796. The By-Laws of the Company having been found, on the opinion of Mr. Serjeant Adair, insufficient to enforce the payment of fines for the refusal to serve various offices, a new set was drawn up by the Clerk, and submitted to and approved by the Court, who ordered the Clerk to get the same confirmed and allowed by the Lord Chancellor and two Chief Justices, but this was never done.
5th September, 1797. The Mahogany table now in the Court Room was made about this time. There is a tradition that the bulb-shaped end of it was a portion of the old dissecting table used by the Surgeons. If so, its latter days are more cheerful than its first.
1796 to 1799. Several Barbers were prosecuted for exercising their Trade within the limits of the Company’s Charters and brought to terms, generally they became freemen, and then were compelled to come on to the livery; in other cases the barbers removed out the jurisdiction, and paid the costs.
18th May, 1802. The Commissioners for the Public Lottery having advertised for a place in which to hold the lotteries, the Court decided to send in proposals offering the use of the Hall (under certain restrictions) for the next three lotteries for Six hundred guineas, but the offer was not accepted.
1st August, 1809. A case was submitted to the Attorney General (Sir R. Gibbs) who gave an opinion that the freemen of the Company were exempt from serving on Juries, but not from serving as Constables.
4th February, 1812. A memorial signed by four freemen of the Company was presented to the Court, the purport of which was that the memorialists having been summoned to act as Ward Constables had refused to serve, and that thereupon actions had been brought against them, which, being tried before Lord Ellenborough, the verdicts were against them and they were ordered to pay the costs (£333 9_s._ 0_d._). The memorialists alleging that they defended the actions for the benefit of the Company and really to uphold its privileges, prayed that they might be reimbursed the costs, which, however, the Court declined to accede to, but ordered that £12, which had been paid to the Company for copies of the Charters, should be refunded.
1814. The Churchwardens of St. Olave, Silver Street, having assessed the Hall at £172, they were requested to attend the next Court which they did, and the following delightful method of settling these matters is recommended to the Authorities nowadays.
1st November, 1814. The parish officers of Saint Olave Silver Street attended & stated to the Court that the Vestry of that Parish had taken the subject of the Poor rate into consideration, and considering the great increase of the rate they left it to the Company to say what they were agreeable to be rated at; the Court proposed to say £100 per annum; the gentlemen (having withdrawn) were then called in and informed of such proposal, with which they cordially acquiesced.
2nd April, 1816. Alexander Rowland the younger [of Macassar oil fame] of Kirby Street Hatton Garden, Barber was admitted to the Livery.
3rd May, 1825. The Livery stand, being in a decayed and useless condition, was ordered to be sold.
2nd May, 1826. But as a purchaser could not be found, the Master offered to give £5 for it, which was accepted, and this, together with an additional £5, was ordered to be given to the Committee for the Relief of Distressed Manufacturers.
5th February, 1861. Mr. John Atkinson gave £100 consols for the purpose of distributing the dividends thereof in the purchase of Bibles and Prayer Books for the poor members of the Company.
7th February, 1862. Mr. John Atkinson’s Will reciting a munificent bequest to the Company is set out in the minutes of this date.
3rd February, 1863. A Statement of the property left by Mr. John Atkinson is recorded in a letter from the Solicitors to his Trustees directed to the Court, and entered in the minutes of this date.
PRECEDENCE.
The Barbers’ Company is ranked the seventeenth in order of the City Companies, and is the fifth after the “Twelve great Companies,” the thirteenth being the Dyers, fourteenth Brewers, fifteenth Leathersellers, sixteenth Pewterers, seventeenth Barbers, eighteenth Cutlers, etc.
The question of precedency in former times gave rise to many contentions between the City Guilds, and the Barber-Surgeons seem to have had some experience in these quarrels: the City pageants, processions, and public attendances at church, were numerous in the days of the Tudors and Stuarts, and at most of these the Livery Companies attended, each guild jealously striving to keep its place, and no doubt to advance its position whenever opportunity arose.
There are extant, lists of the Companies in the City books, in which our Company takes various positions; and Stow, having incorporated one of these lists in his Survey, has given it an authority as a table of precedence which it was never intended to possess; he furnishes a list of the Companies attending the Lord Mayor’s feast, 23rd Henry VIII (1531), and places the Barbers as the thirty-second, whereas at that time they were undoubtedly the twenty-eighth.
1516. The first authentic reference to our Company’s standing is found in Letter-Book N. leaf 5 (January, 1516), where it is ordained that the Barbers, although they claimed of their ancient right to be the seventeenth Company, yet were adjudged to take the twenty-eighth place, following the Cordwainers, and preceding the Paynter-Stainers.
1532. This order was probably in force until February, 1532, when the Barbers got back their old position (Repertory 8, leaf 272) and an officer was directed to wait on the Pewterers to “shewe theym that the seyd Company of Barbours Surgeons be Restored ageyn to their olde Rowme.” Three months later (May, 1532), the Barbers were “taken down one,” and directed to occupy the eighteenth place.
1533. In February, 1533 (Letter-Book O. fo. 213), is a record which is somewhat puzzling, as, altogether ignoring the orders of February and May, 1532, it is stated that the Barber-Surgeons had petitioned to be restored to their old place of seventeenth Company, from which it is said they were dispossessed about sixteen years back (evidently alluding to the order of January, 1516), “so that they be nowe the xxix or xxx{th} Companye yn thordre of such goynges,” etc.
Perhaps the orders of February and May, 1532, had been disregarded by the other guilds, and our Company forcibly ousted from their rightful position, so that this is in effect an application for a confirmatory order, which was granted, and thus they were again fixed as the seventeenth Company.
1534. The Barbers must have given some offence to the Civic authorities in 1534, for in October of that year (Repertory 9, leaf 79) the last-named order was repealed, and they were put back again to the twenty-eighth place, and further the Company were ordered that they “shall no more goo yn pˀcessyons, standyngꝭ, Rydyngꝭ, goyngꝭ, and other assembles from hensfurth, tyll it be otherwyse ordered by thys coˀrte.”
1535. This vacillation on the part of the Court of Aldermen in settling our position, was not yet at an end, for in March, 1535, we were again placed seventeenth, to come before the Cutlers and after the Pewterers, and this order was confirmed no less than four times in 1535, and twice in 1536.
1604. At a Royal Procession on the 15th March, 1604, our Company got misplaced by some of the Marshals, and this led to another application to the Court of Aldermen, whereupon a peremptory order was made that the Barber-Surgeons should stand sixteenth in precedence. This order is set out in full elsewhere (see page 195); the sixteenth place was then accorded to us in consequence of the Stockfishmongers, who formerly held the twelfth place, having been dissolved, whereby the Barber-Surgeons went up one: the Clothworkers who, at that time were the thirteenth Company, then became the twelfth.
Some short time afterwards, the Dyers, who had been the eighteenth Company, got the thirteenth place, and we reverted to our old position of seventeenth Company in which we still continue.
1606. An attempt to misplace us was made in July, 1606, but this was successfully resisted. (See p. 116.)
COURT OF ASSISTANTS.
The constitution of the governing body of the Company has grown up in the course of time from one Prime Master or Ruler to a Master with three Wardens and twenty Assistants, forming a Court of twenty-four members.
We gather from the earliest records, that the business of the Company was then transacted by the meeting together in Common Hall, of the whole fraternity (which probably included both freemen and liverymen), under the presidency of a single Master, who, as in the case of Richard le Barber in 1308, was invested with the supervision of the craft, and power to make search and scrutiny, and to punish offenders.
In 1376 two Masters were appointed to rule the craft, while in 1388 we find that two Masters and two “Surveyors” formed the governing body.
In 1416 is recorded the admission of five Masters, three of whom are described as “Barbitonsores” (i.e., Barbers proper) and two as “Masters of the Barbers exercising the faculty of Surgery.” In 1428 there were four Masters, two of each class, and this number was the governing body at the time of Edward IV’s Charter of Incorporation, in 1462.
As has been elsewhere remarked, this Charter provides for the appointment of two Masters only, and they to be skilled in Surgery, to be chosen by twelve Electors taken from the Commonalty; but as our records preserve the names of four Masters elected in that year, and so on ever since in unbroken succession, there cannot be any doubt but that (the Charter dealing almost entirely with the regulation of matters surgical) the two Masters of the “Barbers side” were left to be elected in accordance with old custom, or under the By-laws which the Company were, by their Charter, empowered to make.
At what period a Court of Assistants was created in our Company is unknown, but I am inclined to think the date is about 1480 to 1500. The four “Masters or Governors” (answering to our “Master and three Wardens”) were chosen out of the Commonalty by twelve electors yearly, and do not, as seems by the lists preserved, appear to have gone up annually by seniority as now they do, i.e., from third Warden to second, and so on. Those who had served as second, third, or fourth Governors, if not chosen to higher office the next year, as a general rule took their places again as simple liverymen; whilst those who had served as Prime or Chief Governor were, at the expiry of their term of office, designated “Ancient Masters,” and these, with some past Wardens, having become qualified by experience in the affairs of the Company would naturally be consulted by the ruling Governors who sought their “assistance” and advice, and thus grow up into a Court of Assistants[168] (nearly always in early time spelt “Assistance”) and be recognised to a great extent as a power in the direction of the Company’s business.
[168] This theory is confirmed by the Ordinances made in 1566, whereby it was enacted that a liveryman might be chosen an Assistant without having ever served the office of Governor.
The earliest mention of Assistants is in the By-laws settled by Sir Thomas More in 1530, though throughout these By-laws the actual ruling power was evidently in the four Masters or Governors. The Assistants are here twice referred to, in one case where it is enacted that the Masters shall not admit a “fforen” to the freedom without the assent of the “xxiiij{ti} assistentes,” and in another place they are to have, with the Masters, the election of the Livery.
The Act 32 Henry VIII is silent as to Assistants, vesting all power in the Masters or Governors. In 1557 at one of the Courts twenty-one Assistants and four Masters attended, and at a Court held 19th July, 1595, the names of twenty-five Assistants are recorded. The number seems to have varied with the times, the full Court, however, never exceeding four Masters and thirty-two Assistants. The Assistants have always been elected by the Court, and the custom became in time to choose the senior liveryman whenever a vacancy occurred, though there does not appear to have been at any time a by-law to that effect, and indeed this practice has been departed from on very many occasions.
The Election of Masters prior to the year 1633 was on the Monday next before the feast of St. Bartholomew the Apostle (Aug. 24); from 1633 to 1745 it was held on the third Thursday in August, and since 1745 it has been held on the second Thursday in August.
The ancient practice was for the whole body of the livery to be summoned to the Hall in their livery gowns, hoods and caps on the Monday at 8 o’clock in the morning “at the furthest” to whom the Masters, sitting in Court, declared the cause of their assembling; this done, the Masters retired, and the livery, sitting there, chose twelve of their number to be “Electors,” of whom six were to be “expert Surgeons,” and four at least must never have served the office of Master or Governor. The Clerk then called the twelve Electors out (the rest of the livery remaining in the Hall). The Masters then delivered to the Electors the “Bills of Election,” each Master nominating two Barbers and two Surgeons, so that sixteen in all were nominated, and, after administering to them the oath prescribed, the Electors retired to a private room apart to make their choice. Should the Electors deem that one or more of themselves ought to have been put in nomination, they were to send for the Masters who were bound to withdraw such person or persons, and choose others in their place. The Bills were to be made out in accordance with seniority, but the Electors were not bound to choose by seniority. Having made their choice, the Electors sent for the Masters and delivered to them a Bill with the names of the four persons selected, and these names were (under a heavy penalty) to be kept secret until after the “dener.”
The whole Company then proceeded in state to the Church of St. Olave, Silver Street (after the Great Fire to St. Alban, Wood Street), maids strewing the way with flowers. At Church there was a “goodly masse” celebrated, and in later times a “devyne sˀrvice,” which, being ended, the parson and some of the church officials had customary fees and returned with the Company to the Hall to celebrate the Election dinner. The feast over, the outgoing Masters, according to “auncient order,” walked about the table, each bearing a garland and placing it on the head of the member who had been chosen to fill his place in the year ensuing. If anyone elected happened to be absent, his garland was placed on the head of one of the Ancient Masters as proxy, and the newly-elected Masters were sworn on the Holy Evangelists to the due execution of their offices, absentees being sworn at the next Court.
The Election dinners were held at any early hour in the afternoon (1 or 2 p.m.) and were generally followed by a play or a dance, sometimes both; the wives of the livery and Assistants were present at the dinner, and the latter had their apprentices in attendance waiting at table.
In 1633 the mode of choosing the Electors was varied as follows: a “fair ballating box” with two cells therein, one labelled “Surgeons” and the other “Barbers” was placed upon the table,
Into each cell the Master put the names of two Ancient Masters, and drew one out of each 2
The second and third Governors put into each cell the names of six Assistants, and the Master drew three out of each 6
The fourth Governor put into each cell the names of four liverymen and the Master drew two out of each 4 -- 12 ==
The twelve so drawn constituted the Electors, and the proceedings were then much the same as has been before described.
The new Masters or Governors commenced their duties immediately upon being sworn.
From the earliest period the custom has been to hold the monthly and ordinary Courts on Tuesdays, but the meetings do not seem to have taken place on any definite or fixed days, numerous Courts being held at irregular intervals and frequently on Mondays. “Courts of Assistants,” as distinguished from Monthly and special Courts, were, in early times, for some reason or other, particularly prohibited from being held on Tuesdays, there being several orders and by-laws to this effect, but why, I do not know.
In the year 1557 twenty Courts were held. In 1572 forty-one Courts, the average attendance at which was twelve. In 1599 forty-six Courts assembled. At the intermediate Courts a great deal of important as well as minor business was transacted, including the admissions and presentations of freemen and apprentices, the examination of Surgeons and Sea Surgeons, and a great variety of business connected with the medical service of the army and navy.
Previous to the separation in 1745, the office of Master was supposed to be, and generally was, held by a Barber and a Surgeon alternately, the Wardens being chosen in like manner, any member not practising as a Surgeon being accounted a Barber, whatever his trade or occupation might be.
Great importance has at all times been attached to the question of precedence in sitting at table and in speaking in Court, and many have been the rules enacted, and the disputes and jealousies which have arisen between members of the Court on this question.
Some of the powers executed by the Masters of old and by the Court of Assistants in later times have been those which now are peculiar to Courts of Law, e.g., the settlement of disputes upon every conceivable question, the imposition of fines, and their recovery by distress levied by the Beadle, the summary committal of offenders to gaol, and the issuing of orders for their release, the prohibition of actions and suits at common law (if commenced by a freeman without leave of the Court), the inhibition of members from practising their profession, and the infliction of corporal punishment upon unruly freemen and apprentices.
The Court as now existing, consists of four Masters or Governors and twenty Assistants, appointed under the provisions of the Act 18 George II, cap. xv. By this Act the election of the Masters or Governors is in the Court and takes place on the second Thursday in August, but alas! without the ancient ceremonies of attending Church, crowning with garlands, and--may I add?--the Election dinner for the Livery.
As will be seen elsewhere, there have been frequent disturbances at the Courts, and there are numerous entries of Assistants, Wardens, and Past Masters having been expelled the Court and sometimes dismissed from the Livery as well, for their misconduct or quarrelsome behaviour. Instances of impertinence and abuse by freemen and liverymen before the Court, are also by no means rare, and in these cases condign punishment by imprisonment or fine was invariably meted out.
9th March, 1624. This daye Mr. Warden Thornebury made knowne to this Court y{t} one Tanner, a brother of this Companie, hath abused him in words. Whereupon it is ordered by this Court that John Bayard the officer belonging to this Companie shall laye the Lord Maio{rs} comaund on the said Tanner and comitte him to one of the Compters of this Cittye And that imediately upon the said comittm{t} shall acquaint the M{rs} therewith That thereupon the M{rs} maye acquaint the lo: Maio{r} with the reson of his comittem{t.}
19th January, 1626. This daye the letter directed to the Maister Wards and Assistants of the Companie of Barbor Surgions of London from M{r} William Clowes Sarjeant Chirurgion to his Ma{tie} was here in Courte reade in hec verba viz{t} Right worthie Maister and Governors and assistants of the companie of Barbers and Surgions in my true love I wish all health and florishinge goverment of yo{r} Company to the glory of God the honor of the Kinge and the good of Gods people Amen. Now whereas I have bin not only by many Brothers advertised but also of yo{r} Officer legally by letter and otherwise given to understand that you had chosen me Renter warden of the company from the w{ch} Election I desired by M{r} Cooper and M{r} Thomas Allen I might be freed yett could not, I then knewe well that in duty I owed you an aunswer which might well be seeme my reverent respect to yo{r} Authoritye; and my tender regard of the kinge my M{rs} honor which in yo{r} Chusinge and my acceptinge maye be considered, which as much as in me is I desired to doe, And nowe, not once questoninge the troblesomnes of the place, nor other hinderances w{ch} god Almighty did then send I thus aunswer (because I wilbe free of Ambition or pride) that if you can make that appeere upon yo{r} Records that any of my predecessors did beare the office of Wardein after he was sworne Serjeant Surgion to any of the Kˀs or Queenes of England I shall humbly serve it, if not, I Crave yo{r} pˀdon for I might not soe poorely value the Kinge my M{r} as thinke him less mighty, less absolute a Prince then any Kinge whatsoever hath raigned before him, and so as his Servaunt I expect from the Company as good respect as any Sergeant Surgion heretofore hath had, for my M{rs} honor I will not give to any other, And further because I am many tymes summoned to yo{r} Courts and other meetings, w{ch} service I am very willinge to performe, when I shall knowe my place in the Company, which I must leave to yo{r} grave considerac͠on, only if you please to take notice how the Colledge of Phisitions and the Company of Apothecaryes of London have rancked the Kingꝭ Phisitions and Apothecaryes, you may thereby guess what place I expect, but howsoever if by the occasion of back freinds wee may not so well agree as I desire, so as I may personally absent my selfe from the Company yett thus much I ingenuously and religiously profess that I will alwayes in harty love be present and ready press either by the Kinge my M{r} or any other wayes to doe the Companye any loveing Service I may, And so ceasing further troubling you but desireing to heare of yo{r} smoothe acceptance, I rest.
Whereas he was chosen renter warden of this Companie for this yere ensueing w{ch} place by reason of this contagious tyme and other respects he is not able to execute, It is thereupon ordered by this courte that he shalbe discharged from the said place of youngest warden and second warden of this Company, And it is further ordered that he shall take place next unto the youngest of our assistants that have served the place of upper warden and when he shall have served the place of upper warden of this Companye then he to take his precedencye and ranck according to that service.
21st August, 1626. Serjeant Clowes was elected Master, but it seems his election was called in question, as it was the turn for a Barber this year, and it was moved that the electors should be fined for breach of the ordinance in choosing a Surgeon, but the Court decided not to do so. There was evidently a dislike to Mr. Clowes on the part of some of the Company, as the Wardens of the Yeomanry were on the 20th September, fined 40_s._ for refusing, or neglecting to carry the Standing Cups before him and the Wardens of the Livery on the Election day.
1638. Serjeant Clowes was again elected Master.
9th April, 1641. M{r} Warden Martin Browne made his complaint against M{r} Serjeant Clowes and he did freely declare that he did forgive the Serjeant his personall Wrong, and did referr the Wrong due to the Court unto the Court, And this Court did order that M{r} Serjeant Clowes shall acknowledge that in his anger and passion he did speake some words to the wrong of this Court, and this being done this Order to be annihilated.
22nd September, 1642. Alsoe for the more peaceable treaty and discussing matters in times of Courts of Assistants It is ordered That decency be held in these Courts proceedings and that every one of the Assistants as he is in his turne and time of Delivery to yeild his voyce shall not use any impertinent speeches or divert the matter in question into some other busines but give his answer freely to the present matter proponed and that during the time of his delivery of his speech or opinion none other of the Assistants shall give crosse or thwarting speeches or calumniate that Assistant And if any Assistant shalbe soe Uncivill That then the present M{r} or Governour shall cause him to be silent and shall put such Assistants Interrupc͠on of speech to question concerneing his ffine for evill behaviour and such Interruptor being found faulty shall pay the ffine of vj{s} viij{d} according to the Ordinance in that behalfe made.
3rd October, 1642. Alsoe M{r} Cotton layed downe his ffines imposed on him at the last Court of Assistants viz{t} xxvj{s} viij{d} The M{r} of the Company moveing by the consent of the last Court M{r} Cotton to withdrawe himselfe according to Orders and Custome, he gave this Court this peremptory answer, I will not goe out of the Court nor the M{r} hath noe power to bidd mee goe out and that the Court had noe power to fine him, then he threatned M{r} Warden Arris as he sat in the Court saying Winter will come, Alsoe he abused M{r} Dye in his delivery of speech to this Court that his speeches were rotten speeches and thwarted him to the generall disturbance of the Court, and to M{r} Martin Browne threatning him I will make you know it better in another place Alsoe he sought to disable the M{rs} hand which was signed to Ticketts for his and other appearances at the Hall for defaults saying they might choose whether to appeare or not Alsoe he told the Court with high language I will not be dismissed.
fforasmuch as this Court is informed and it doth fully appeare to this present Court of Assistants That M{r} Lawrence Cotton hath from time to time bin a disturber of the Unity peace and amity of this Society and hath by many reproachfull Words and ill behaviour abused the present M{rs} of the Company and divers of the Assistants and Members of this Company Whereupon this Court doth dismisse the said M{r} Cotton out of and from his place of an Assistant and being an Examiner.
Mr. Cotton subsequently made his peace, was reinstated and served the office of Master, 1645!
8th July, 1644. Whereas by Order of the Honourable house of Comõns assembled in Parliament of the 28{th} June last the President of the Colledge of Physicians was appointed to call this Company before them and to tender the Covenaunt by them This Court conceiveing their Priviledges to be thereby infringed this Co{rt} the M{r} doe advise with Councell Doth order that a Petic͠on be framed to be preferred by all the Assistants that are now present or the major part, to the House of Comõns to have the tendring of the Covenñt themselves to theire owne Members and the Charge to be allowed out of the Comõn stock.
THE COMMONALTY.
The admission to membership in the Company has ever been by servitude, patrimony, or redemption, and the fines and fees payable have varied so much at different periods in our history, and have frequently been so capricious, that no attempt has been made to tabulate them, though references will be made here and there to the prevailing fees of the period. The fees for apprentices have always been of a nominal description, and generally so of freemen, though, in olden time, the Court, as became the Masters of the mystery of “bleeding,” not unfrequently bled a new member by a substantial fine on admission, but also put him to the expense of a dinner into the bargain.
[Footnote: The initial letter T is reduced from one in the Audit Book 1614-15.]
An ample fine, suited to the period, has always been taken from the Liverymen who were, in the days of the Tudors and Stuarts a comparatively small section of the Company, and rarely exceeded fifty in number; they were always chosen from the more substantial of the Yeomanry, and if on election they refused “to take the clothing,” as was frequently the case, a heavy penalty was imposed, which, if not paid, the unhappy yeoman was forthwith committed to the Compter, where, upon reflection, he generally came to the conclusion to submit. It is right, however, to state that at all times the Court have, in cases where the proposed Liveryman was actually a poor man, remitted the fine, and allowed him to continue a yeoman; on the other hand, contumacious refusal was invariably met in the firmest manner and conquered.
The practice of calling up yeomen to the Livery was at times resorted to as a means of putting the Company into funds, and as these calls generally took place at periods of national trouble, when the coffers of the Company had been emptied by the King or the Parliament, the intended Liverymen were themselves not unfrequently in sore straits, and great contentions arose.
About one hundred and fifty years ago the practice of enforcing these fines was in regular operation, but since then it has been attended with varying success; not that the Company has not by law the power of enforcement, but a prejudice had grown up against the system, and the Court has been unwilling to sanction a resort to extremities.
Early in the present century three or four actions were brought against freemen to recover penalties of £20 for refusing to accept the Livery; in one case which was ripe for trial the Company withdrew the record and paid the costs, and the others seem to have been abandoned.
All freemen on being sworn were liable to pay “quarterage,” which has been from the earliest period, and still is, 2_s._ per annum.[169] On a man coming up for admission he was “presented,” that is, seen by the Court who enquired into his position, knowledge, fitness and general qualifications, and if approved he paid his fees and was sworn. Some of the earlier forms of oath will be seen on reference to the Ordinances, and that used up to a very recent period was as follows:--
[169] The quarterage is now usually compounded for on admission by payment of a sum down.
You shall swear That you shall be True and Loyal to our Sovereign Lady Queen Victoria and faithful and true in all lawful things unto the Corporation and Company of the Mystery of Barbers of London, whereof you are now made free, and accordingly be obedient to the Master and Governors thereof: and as much as in you lieth maintain amity and unity therein; and obey observe and perform all the lawful rules statutes and ordinances thereof; and be proportionably contributory to the best of your power, to all lawful or reasonable charges contributions and payments belonging or necessarily appertaining to you to bear and pay as other Brethren of the same Company do. And also you shall obey all manner of summons or warnings done, or to be made by the Clerk Beadle or other officer of the said Company thereunto assigned in the name of the Master and Governors, having no lawful or reasonable excuse to the contrary. All these articles you shall duly, truly, fully and faithfully observe, perform and keep to the best of your power. So help you God.
A few years since, this oath was changed into a declaration, the words “You shall declare” being substituted for “You shall swear.”
It was generally the practice, when a member wished to be translated to another Company or entirely discharged, that he should pay a fine for his dismission. In 1724, Mr. John Bamber, a Surgeon, informing the Court that he intended to practise as a Physician and to become a Member of the College of Physicians prayed for his discharge, which was granted to him on payment of thirty guineas, and there are other entries to the like effect.
The regulations for the governance of the members are very fully contained in the Ordinances referred to elsewhere, and it would therefore be tedious to further allude to them here. On a perusal of the extracts from the minutes, etc., many curious particulars will be seen concerning both freemen and liverymen who were liable to be expelled for not being “able” (i.e., solvent) and also for not attending in their livery gowns and hoods upon summons. There are many and often reminders to the livery to appear in their gowns with their hoods upon their shoulders, and there are also cases in which individuals were forbidden to wear their gowns and hoods by way of punishment. The dress of the livery has been well described in Herbert’s Livery Companies, and Planche’s Costume, and we can see it in our great Holbein picture, though the dresses worn on that occasion were of a much richer description than those in daily use.
It will be seen that the Livery were constantly going out in procession in days of old. There were the services at St. Paul’s on Christmas and Candlemas days, the Lord Mayor’s procession, the setting of the watch on Midsummer Eve, the celebration of 5th November, the anniversary of Gowrie’s Conspiracy, the Election Service at St. Olave’s, Silver Street, days of thanksgiving and humiliation, Royal progresses and Civic pageants. To all of these the Livery were bidden to go by precept, and on neglect of the summons were fined. In many cases certain of them were appointed to ride on horseback with velvet coats and chains of gold about their necks, and when not so apparelled they appeared in their gowns of black and scarlet, with their hoods upon their shoulders. What would we not give for a photograph of one of these gorgeous scenes wherein we should see the “liverie of our solempne and grete fraternite” riding “ayenst,” say, Queen Elizabeth in 1599?
Our earlier records of freemen are unfortunately lost, the first register commencing in the year 1551, but at Guildhall I have discovered several admissions of freemen Barbers to the freedom of the City, and here place a few of them upon record. The first is in 1309:--
Thomas Orgor barbitonsor admissus fuit in libtãte civitatis & jurˀ &c die sabĩ pˀxima post festñ scĩ Edmundi Regis & martirˀ anno R. E. filˀ R. E. tcĩo coram Nich̃o de ffarendon Joh̃e de Wyndesore & Henrˀ de Dunolm Aldris Et dat commitati xx{s} quos pˀdcĩ Aldr̃i recepˀunt.
(TRANSLATION.) Thomas Orgor, Barber, was admitted into the freedom of the City and sworn, etc., on Saturday next after the feast of Saint Edmund the King and Martyr in the third year of King Edward, the son of King Edward, before Nicholas de Farendon, John de Windsor and Henry de Durham, Aldermen, And gave to the Commonalty 20_s._, which the aforesaid Aldermen received.
Other entries are much in the same form, a few of which, abridged, follow:--
1309. John de Dodinghurst, Barber, admitted and sworn, etc., Friday next after the feast of St. Thomas the Apostle; paid half a mark.
1310. Ralph the Barber admitted, etc., 16th March; paid one mark.
1310. Gilbert Blaunchard, Barber, admitted, etc., 1st April; paid 10_s._
1310. Peter de Pecham, Barber, admitted, etc., 12th May, “at the instance of Roger le Brabanzon, a justice of our Lord the King”; paid 5_s._
1310. Galfridus de Trengye, Barber, admitted, etc., Saturday before the feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist; paid 10_s._
1311. John Syward, Barber, admitted, etc., Monday before the feast of St. Edmund the King, at the instance of the Lord Walter, Bishop of Winchester, Chancellor, “et ideo nichil dat ꝓ liᵬtate habenda,” “and therefore gave nothing to have the freedom!”
1312. Ralph de Bosbery, Barber, admitted, etc., on Monday in the feast of St. Valentine; paid half a mark.
1312. John de Fynceham, Barber, admitted, etc., 6th April; paid 10_s._
1312. Henry de la Chaumbre, Barber, admitted, etc., on Monday in the vigil of the Assumption; paid half a mark.
1312. Thomas de Mangrave who was the apprentice of Richard le Barber of Bread Street, was admitted on Wednesday before the feast of St. James the Apostle, on the testimony of Katherine, widow of the said Richard and of Robert de Gloucester, the executors of his will; paid 2_s._ 6_d._
The “Richard le Barber” mentioned in the last entry was Master of the Company in 1308.
The freemen were formerly enrolled in the “yeomanry” and formed a minor fraternity within the Company (see the chapter on the Yeomanry).
All freemen practising as journeymen or assistants, if Barbers, Surgeons, or Barber-Surgeons were “sessed at the Hall,” that is, their wages were settled for them by the Court, and entered in a book, together with the period for which they agreed to serve, the period being never less than one year nor more than three. These men were often called “covenant servants,” but they paid quarterage, and were entitled to all the privileges of freedom, excepting that they could not take apprentices.
If a freemen desired to start in business, the By-laws of 1530 required that he should prove to the Court as an act precedent to his so doing, that he was possessed of goods to the value of ten marks.
A certain class of members called “Foreign Brothers” are very frequently alluded to in the Books, and it has been a matter of some difficulty to ascertain what their status exactly was, but by collation of numerous entries I have come to the conclusion that, with very few exceptions, they were all of them practising Surgeons, and that they had not been apprenticed to freemen of the Company. If practising within the jurisdiction of the Company, they were compelled to join, or else to forbear to practise, and it seems that on admission they were required to satisfy the Court by the production of their Indentures of apprenticeship to Country or other Surgeons that they had duly served seven years, and to give ample proof of their skill and knowledge before the Examiners; exceptions to the production of indentures were, however, made in favour of those who came with recommendations from persons of quality, or of such as had acquired eminence and position in the profession. All sea surgeons were “Foreign Brothers” and paid a fine (generally seven guineas) on admission, they also paid quarterage as freemen, and when they resided within the jurisdiction were subject to all the rules and ordinances of the Company as other freemen, being frequently fined and imprisoned for malpractice, etc., though they were not entitled to the benefit of the charities, to come to the dinners, or to confer the right of admission by patrimony upon their sons, nor do they seem to have been necessarily free of the City. Many Surgeons practising in the Country became Foreign Brothers for the sake of the diplomas granted at Barber-Surgeons’ Hall.
There are a few instances of “Barbers” being compelled to become Foreign Brothers, for which I am unable to give an explanation, unless they be errors of description by the Clerk for “Barber-Surgeons.”
Every freeman on admission formerly paid 3_s._ 4_d._, and every apprentice on “presentation” 2_s._ 6_d._ For many years the names of these persons are entered in the Audit Books, and thus it has been possible to ascertain the number admitted extending over a considerable period.
It appears that from the year 1603 to 1674, 3,479 persons were admitted to the freedom, an average of about 48 per annum; and 9,554 apprentices were presented, an average of about 133 per annum. The greatest number of freemen admitted was in the year 1647 when 82 came on, and the least in 1666 when but 23 were admitted. With apprentices the greatest number presented was in the year 1629 when there were 219, and the least again in the year of the Great Fire when there were but 54.
Between 1674 and 1745, about 75 freemen and 162 apprentices would be the yearly average.
After the separation in 1745, and indeed down to the beginning of this century, a respectable average was maintained, being about 40 freemen and 60 apprentices per annum.
In the hundred years between 1746 and 1845, 2,964 persons were admitted to the freedom and 4,298 apprentices were presented, being an average of about 30 of the former and 43 of the latter for each year. The least number of freemen coming on was in 1845, when only 5 were admitted, and of apprentices in 1844, when but 4 were presented.
The apprentices always seem to have been a fruitful source of trouble both to their Masters and to the Company, and numerous are the entries of their floggings and imprisonments. The term of servitude was generally seven years, but in a few instances it was eight and even nine, the age at which boys were taken was usually fourteen, and before the Indentures were sealed the boy was “presented” to the Court that it might be seen that he was clean and not deformed or diseased. If approved, the Indentures were executed and recorded, and in all cases the apprentice actually lived with his Master, who covenanted to find him meat, drink, apparel, lodging and all other necessaries according to the custom of the City. If the boy’s master died or for other reasons was unable to continue his business, it became necessary for him to be “turned over” to another master, free of the Company, and that such turn over should be approved and recorded, otherwise the apprentice was disqualified for his freedom. When his term expired the Master brought him to the Hall and “testified” to his faithful service, whereupon he became entitled to the freedom on payment of a nominal fine. Sometimes Masters refused to make their apprentices free, in which cases the Court enquired into the circumstances, and acted in accordance with the merits of the case.
From the earliest times the custom has prevailed to admit women to the freedom, mostly by apprenticeship, but also by patrimony, and these freewomen bound their apprentices, both boys and girls, at the Hall; of course the ladies were not admitted to the livery, but otherwise they had the same privileges as freemen so far as the same were compatible with their sex. At the present time (1890) there is one freewoman of the Barbers’ Company.
APPRENTICES.
Ordered 17th July, 1551. That Water Lynche whiche was prentise w{th} John Tholmwoode Barborsurgeon shalbe and ys contented to serve Thomas Woolf as a prentice from the daye above written untyll the viij{th} yere of King Edward the sixte and so the sayd Water Lynche his yeres to be fully ended and ronne out at the feaste of all Saints as may appere by his Indenture.
19th September, 1552. Ordered that when any prentise dothe goo awaye from his M{r} the same M{r} shall bring in his Indenture and here to remayne tyll the prentice come agayne and to be regestred.
It was also ordered that the Beadle should make out all Indentures of apprenticeship, and any one else presuming to do so should pay a fine of 3_s._ 4_d._
27th April, 1556. It was ordered that no apprentice should wear a beard of beyond fifteen days’ growth, and that on breach of this order the master of the apprentice was to pay a fine of half a mark.
15th October, 1566. Here in this Court John James the appñts of John Shryve for pylferyng, & so here he had his correction.[170]
[170] That is, he was flogged.
27th May, 1567. Robert Cholmeley complained of his apprentice
for y{t} he doth not his worke as he ought & for his other ill demeanors And so in the pˀsents of this Court the saide appˀnts humbled hym upon his knees and pˀmyssed his amendment.
1567. The quarrels between masters and apprentices about this period were numerous, and occupied a great deal of the time of the Court, who in dealing with them generally pursued a policy of reconciliation and made the parties friends again. In certain cases, masters were fined for ill-treating apprentices, whilst some of the latter had their Indentures cancelled or “torn in Court” and were either whipped or ordered to behave better, or to find new masters.
22nd August, 1569. Here was Rich Upton Playntyf agaynst his app̃nts W{m} Fyshe for that he ranne awaye frome his said M{r} the xxj{th} of the former moneth and tooke w{th} hym sˀten instruments for surgery & other things more, w{ch} pˀtyculers were here pˀsently sene & by the said W{m} Fyshe confessed and that he had no cawse to go frome his said M{r} but that he wolde have gon to the sea and accordynge to his desert had correction and punnyshment unto auncyent custom w{th} roddes.
22nd November, 1569. Memorandˀ upon the xxij{th} day of November 1569 in the afternowne Gyles Swalldell thappeñtꝭ of Chrystofor Swalldell for goyng forth of his maisters house at unlawfull tymes and houres & in evell company wastinge and consumyng his M{rs} grocery wares also therebye he the appntꝭ then had the correction of this hall accordyng to his desertꝭ as the justice & equytie by the M{r} & govˀnors thoughte at the request of his said M{r} to be most mete and convenient. And so the said Gyles Swalldell appntꝭ hathe promysed here that he wylbe a good faythfull & trusty servant unto his said M{r} and never hereafter offende any more.
1st June, 1570. Here was John thappntꝭ of Thomas Wayte (for) abusying of Rog{r} Laborne & his wyfe and his M{r} also and he had favorable correction for his offencꝭ.
John possibly thought it rather unfavourable.
By the next entry it would appear that Master Ralph Soda found the society of the ladies more congenial to his tastes than the practice of shaving and bloodletting.
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 Westm{r} in the church and also had delt unhonestly w{th} his 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 M{r} Warden 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 dry humour--
6th October, 1573. Here was an order taken between Danyell Botham and his appˀntice that he should well and trewly sˀve his M{r} and not to make any more complainte or trouble the M{rs} any more, and yf he do nott sˀve his M{r} accordyngly 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 behavio{r} by hym comytted in his masters house w{th} his 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 w{th}out 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 M{r.}
22nd January, 1600. This daye Daniell Hinkesman brought in his fine of xl{s} for sufferinge his apprentice to dwell w{th} a 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 40_s._, 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 M{r} ffrederick shalbe comitted to the compter for his unreverent behaviour towardes his M{r.}
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 w{th}in his terme And it was thereuppon furth{r} ordered 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 w{ch} uppon 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 w{th} sufficient 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 M{rs} therew{th} It 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 M{rs} at 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 furth{r} ordered 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 anoth{r} of the same arte.
16th March, 1602. This daye it is pˀmised & undertaken before the M{rs} of 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 M{r} be 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 xl{s} for puttinge a waye his Apprentice Tho. Hobbes w{th} out o{r} M{rs} consent (see 18th June).
4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Roger Kiffin shalbe dischardged of his apprentiship w{th} Richard Bonner for that hee wanteth meate drinck & apparrell And hee is to finde him selfe a nother M{r} of 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]
[171] The contempt being that Udall having “put away” his Apprentice, (i.e., had him locked up in Bridewell, without the leave of the Court,) and being fined 40_s._ for that offence, had refused to pay his fine.
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 x{s} for 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 M{r} for the residue of his terme to come for that his said M{r} hath 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 w{th} his freindꝭ And is not to sˀve any pˀson that useth the trade of silck weavinge any more w{th} in 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 M{rs} to discharge his appˀntice out of Bridewell w{ch} he holdeth there And then to be before o{r} said M{rs} at their next Court both he and his apprentice.
14th January, 1606. John Browne is to bringe in his fine for puttinge away his appˀntice w{th}out the M{rs} order.
5th July, 1608. This daye in the Controversie betwixt Nicholas Braye and Humfrey Pittꝭ It is ordered for that the M{rs} doe fynde that the Apprentice is not kept as hee ought to be but is lowsie and also his M{r} for want of change of apparrell And that therefore wee doe not fynde him a fit M{r} It 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 anoth{r} freeman 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 w{th}out the M{rs} order And it was mittigated to xx{s.}
19th November, 1611. At this Court it is ordered that John Todd shall on the next tuesdaies Court bring in his fyne of 40{s} for that he did not bynde an appˀntice w{ch} is now w{th} him 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 M{r} as also for his lewd & bad service brought before the M{rs} whereupon he promising of amendem{t} his faultꝭ was for this tyme remitted.
22nd February, 1613. In the complaint made by William Richardson against his M{r} John 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 M{r} shall not use hereafter any such unlawfull correction for if he doe & his appˀntice make complaint thereof to the M{rs} of this Company, then the appˀntice shall be taken awaye from him And further it is ordered that the appˀntice shall doe his M{r} just & true service, And that the said Sabyn shall the next Court daie bring in his fyne for not inrowling of his said appˀntice w{th}in the tyme lymitted by the ordynancꝭ of this howse.
22nd February, 1613. This daye Joseph Boreman made promise to pˀforme such order as the M{rs} did 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 w{th}out any fraud.
27th September, 1614. At this Court Raph Dixon the appˀntice of our M{r} Hassall for manie lewd misdemeano{rs} & for getting a woman w{th} child, 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 w{th} the said appˀntice the some of Tenn poundꝭ doth now turne him away & refuseth to restore the monie w{ch} he had w{th} him. 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 w{ch} being duely herd at this Court It is ordered that the said appˀntice shall from henceforth weekelie make unto his M{ris} a trew & just accompt of such monie as he shall gett in the same shop & that from henceforth he shall be at the appoyntment of his mistris & of the M{rs} of this companie and his M{ris} shall 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 M{r} w{ch} beinge examyned at this Court It is aparyant that the boy hath very stubburnlie & naughtielie behaved himself unto his M{r} Whereupon it is this daie ordered that the boy shall goe home agayne w{th} his M{r} & behave himselfe more honestlie then formerlie he hath done w{ch} the boy promiseth to doe.
18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by M{ris} Wootten 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 M{r} ffletcher 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, see p. 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 M{ris} was 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 and imployed onely for digging delveing & planting and pruneing potatoes & tobacco in the Barmoothoes Iland. (Query Bermudas.)