QUEENHITHE WARD.

Note A.—In H.R. 225 (16) Sir John Shaa is described as Alderman of Queenhithe, under date May 2, 1499. This, however, is clearly an error, unless he was merely acting pro tem. for Tate. Shaa was Alderman of Bread Street from 1496 till his death. He is found acting as Alderman of the Ward on May 8, 1500 [H.R. 226 (12)] and the date of election of his successor in that Ward corresponds with that of the vacancy caused by his death (see page 47).

Note B.—There is no record of the election of either Hawes or Copynger for Queenhithe, nor have I been able to find any direct statement as to the Ward represented by the former. But the date of Hawes' first attendance is within three months of the last attendance of Tate, and there was no other vacancy at that period which he could have been elected to fill. Copynger is stated to have been Alderman of Queenhithe in the entry recording the election of his successor in that Ward, and the date of the election of his successor in Castle Baynard is within a fortnight of Hawes' discharge from the office of Alderman (see page 91). The correctness, therefore, of the allocation of these Aldermen to Queenhithe at the dates given in the text may be regarded as established beyond question.

Note C.—The entry in the Repertory and in the Letter Book states that "the election made by my Lorde Maior for an Alderman to be appoynted for the Warde of Queenhyth . . . . is voyde, because Mr. Alderman Langley hath desyred according to the custome of the Cytie, that he may be Alderman of that Warde, whiche was by this Courte agreed unto." What was 'the election made by my Lorde Major' there is no evidence to show, and I am not aware of any 'custome of the Cytie' which would have enabled Alderman Langley to transfer his services from one Ward to another, without having first been returned with three others by the electors of the Ward for the Court of Aldermen to make the final selection. It is possible, therefore, either that a return of four names, including Langley's, had been made and that another had been selected before it was ascertained that he was willing to serve, or that his name having been omitted from the return, he was now (when it was known that he desired to be transferred to Queenhithe), elected without the usual formal nomination of four. If this was the case it would appear to be a very irregular proceeding, and whatever was the actual course adopted, it seems strange that it is not more explicitly stated in the records.

Footnotes