10 Anniversary Address. 



demption, and further punished at the discretion of the 

 Mayor." There was also a penalty for one brother of the 

 Guild offending another by indecent speeches during the 

 time of their meeting. These orders were no dead letter, 

 for we find in loOi Robert Morton was imprisoned for 40 

 days for speaking scandalous words against Mr Mayor ; and 

 in 1639 one John Dolderby, burgess, was disfranchised for 

 having stated that Wm. Fen wick, late Mayor, was a shallow 

 fellow, and did not do justice in the year of his Mayoralty. 

 But six months afterwards, Dolderby was reinstated on 

 coming forward and making a humble apology, and paying 

 a Mne of 20s besides his fees. Matters could not have im- 

 proved as time went on, for, in an order of Guild of 14th 

 January 1658, it is stated: — " Inasmuch as it is apprehended 

 by the Guild, that, at their meetings at General Guilds, there 

 hath been, and still is, a great disorder at their assembling 

 together, some speaking about their own private occasions, 

 others speaking to a motion or question in Guikl V)y four, 

 five or more at a time, in a most unseemly and confused 

 manner, which proceedings both distract and liinder busi- 

 nesses, it is therefore thought fit, and so hereby ordered, for 

 the more decent and orderly proceedings in disputes, &c., at 

 Guilds, that no burgess shall hereafter speak in Guilds about 

 their own jirivate businesses, but to the matter in hand, and, 

 when they propose or answer a question, to do it regularly 

 by one at a time (none interrupting) and then to direct their 

 speech to Mr Mayor, who is to know the Guild's pleasure, 

 and return him their answer. This order is to be read 

 every Guild, before any matters be fallen in hand, and the 

 offenders against this order to be punished at the Guikl's 

 discretion." In 167*3, George Watson, junior, was committed 

 to gaol for most impertinently interrupting the Mayor by 

 indiscreet and saucy speeches. 



Not only wore they particular as to their pi'oceedings in 

 debate, but also as to their apparel, for orders were made as 

 early as 1620, which appear to be confirmation of previous 

 orders, that a fine of 2()s be imposed upon all such, as have 

 been Aldermen and Bailiffs, who absent themselves from the 



