670 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences , Arts, and Letters. 
day when the distinguished men met in St. Peter’s, Cornhill, 
“to go in procession from thence through the City, accord-* 
ing to the ancient custom, to the Church of St. Paul,” John 
Sely 1 appeared in his business suit. 2 Punishment was meted 
on the spot. It was decided then and there that Sely should 
give a dinner at his home 3 on the following Thursday to his 
fellow Aldermen and the Mayor. Not only that, but he “was 
to line his cloak in manner aforesaid; and so it was done.” 
Moreover, any alderman in the future who is not properly 
attired for a procession shall pay a like penalty. 4 
Every scrap of evidence one can find indicates that the 
guildspeople had sufficient property and income. As 
has been pointed out 5 the guilds became all-powerful after 
1376. They had gained not only in worldly goods but in 
municipal power as well. Though the King had favored the 
stronger (victuallers) for a number of years, Chaucer lived 
to see the day when the purchasing power of all London 
guilds was curbed. This was in 1391. In this year Parlia¬ 
ment enacted a statute whereby the guilds were to be “sub¬ 
ject to a license of amortization.” Sharpe points out that 
this indicates “that up to that time they had enjoyed un¬ 
limited power of acquiring property in mortmain without 
such license.” 6 
This statute, presumably the result of jealousy, 7 had its 
beginnings in 1388. In November of that year (shortly 
after the meeting of Parliament at Cambridge) “under the 
auspices of the lords appellant” 8 “an important step was 
taken towards regulating not only the Guilds of the City of 
1 Alderman of Walbrook. 
2 “Cloak that was single and without a lining.” 
3 “At his house, and that at the proper costs of the said John.” 
4 Cf in passim the apprentice in the Cook's Prologue. (A. 4365 ff). 
6 See pp. 1 ff. 
6 Letter-Book, H, p. XLIX. Cf. Stat ., 15 Richard II, Cap. V. Some 
of the guildspeople held property to the uses of religious houses. For a 
discussion of this complicated and vague question see text. Sharpe 
{Letter-Book, H, XLIX) quotes Stubbs {Const. Hist., III. pp. 586, 590) 
in saying that jealousy on the part of the governing body of the City 
provoked this statute. The reason given is, the City enjoyed no such 
privilege. This however does not seem to me a sufficient reason for the 
governing body of London was composed of guildspeople. I have not 
been able to find the reference to Stubbs. 
7 See previous note. 
8 The proceedings unfortunately are not set forth in the Rolls of Parlia¬ 
ment (Cf. Letter-Book, H, pp. XLVIII, 336). 
