24th January, 1643. The Kings Letter sent to the Mrs & Wardens of this Company was read in Court and the printed Letter in it and the Cittyes Petic͠on and his Maties 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 24to 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 Matie to the Mrs 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 Matie. And the other intituled his Maties Letter and declarac͠on to the Sheriffes and City of London Dated the 17th of January, which evidently tendeth to sedition and setting of the whole State in a Combustion. These are therefore strictly to charge & comand the Mrs 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 Mrs 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 400li 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 280li by a Writeing of Bargaine and Sale this day sealed with this Companyes Com̃on Seale bearing date the 16th day of this Instant Aprill with a provisoe of Redempc͠on. And borrowed of Mr. George Dunn 100li more at Interest at vjli 10s pˀ annum pˀ centum for wch 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 Mr of this Company Doth this day desire to know the mind of this Court concerning the 1,200li by him lent to this Company and sequestred in this Company’s hands and compounded ffor 500li 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.