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.) 28th January, 1635. It is ordered that Jonas Gargrave shalbe prosecuted to be disfraunchised at the charge of this house in regard he tooke a married mann apprentice knoweingly. Mr. Heydon’s apprentice, next referred to, was doubtless a gay and swaggering young gentleman, and the Court in meteing out its amusing sentence must have been conscious of touching him on a sore place.