The system was all very excellent and satisfactory, but its carrying out
was defective. Negligent clerks did not send their returns in spite of
admonition, caution, fine, or brotherly persuasion. The searchers'
information was usually unreliable. Complications arose on account of
the Act of the Commonwealth Parliament requiring the registration of
births instead of baptisms, of civil marriages, and banns published in
the market place; also on account of the vast mortality caused by the
Great Plague, the burials in the large common pits and public burial
grounds, and the opposition of the Quakers to inspection and
registration. All these causes contributed to the issuing of unreliable
returns. The company did their best to grapple with all these
difficulties. They did not escape censure, and were blamed on account of
the faults of individual clerks. The contest went on for years, and was
only finally settled in 1859, when the last bills of mortality were
issued, and the Public Registration Act rendered the work of the clerks,
which they had carried on for three centuries to the best of their skill
and ability, unnecessary. In the Guildhall Library are preserved a large
number of the volumes of these bills which the industry of the clerks of
London had issued with so much perseverance and energy under difficult
circumstances, and they form a valuable and interesting collection of
documents illustrative of the old life of the City.
One happy result of the duty laid upon the clerks of issuing bills of
mortality in the City of London was that they were allowed to set up a
printing press in the Hall of their company. The licence for this press
was obtained in 1625, and in the following year it was duly established
with the consent of the authorities. It was no easy task in the early
Stuart times to obtain leave to have a printing press, and severe were
the restrictions laid down, and the penalties for any violation of any
of them. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London had
mighty powers over the Press, and the clerks could not choose their
printer save with the approval of these ecclesiastical dignitaries.
Very strict regulations were laid down by the company in order to
prevent any improper use being made of the productions of their press.
The door of the chamber containing their printing machine was provided
with three locks; the key of the upper lock was placed in the charge of
the upper master, that of the middle lock was in the custody of the
upper warden, while the key of the lower lock was kept by the under
warden. They appointed one Richard Hodgkinson as their printer in 1630,
with whom they had much disputing. Six years later one of their own
company, Thomas Cotes, parish clerk of Cripplegate Without, was chosen
to succeed him. Richard Cotes followed in 1641, and then a female
printer carried on the work, Mrs. Ellinor Cotes, probably the widow
of Richard.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account