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.