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.