The Influence and Development of English Gilds Part 9

[Sidenote: _inevitable under the altered conditions of trade._]

[Sidenote: _But the companies themselves are unsatisfactory._]

[Sidenote: _Friction with the town authorities;_]

This was of course inevitable under the altered conditions of trade. But the companies exhibited in themselves all the radical defects which must pertain to such a system when it has outgrown its necessity. We have seen how free the earlier companies were from friction with the munic.i.p.al authorities. In the 17th century this is changed. The propriety of setting up a May-pole had formerly been almost the only ground of conflict between the bailiffs and the craftsmen. But in 1639 we find that the Tanners were thought to be overstepping their powers; the corporation appointed a committee to examine their composition. Some seventeen years later, extreme measures had to be taken with regard to the same company. It was the custom for the charters to be inspected by the corporation periodically. In 1656 the Tanners refused to comply with the request to produce their composition for the mayor's perusal, with the result that the company was prosecuted by the corporation[159].

The town had been willing to support the Drapers in their measures to draw the Welsh trade to Shrewsbury, but it did not approve of the line of action they tried subsequently to take, namely, to limit all the trade to their own members. In 1653 regulations were framed to prevent the company "forestalling or engrossing the Welsh Flannels, Cloaths etc.[160]" A more serious abuse transpired in connection with the Feltmakers' company in 1667. They refused to make one who had been lawfully apprenticed to the trade in Shrewsbury free of their company. On this occasion the mayor and aldermen exercised their right of supervision by ordering the Wardens to admit the man, "and the Mayor is desired to give him the oath of a Freeman of the said Company[161]." The importance of the mayor being thus empowered by the munic.i.p.al authorities to administer the oath of admittance to one of the Gilds is very great, and shows how real was the subordination of the latter to the town when the corporation chose to exert its rights.

An order of the corporation[162] directing that burgesses only are to be elected Wardens of the companies points to another abuse, the existence of which is proved by other evidence, viz., the admittance of non-residents in the town to membership in the companies on payment of a sufficiently large entrance fee. Yet the extent to which corruption could go was seen forty years later when the corporation stultified itself by pa.s.sing an order[163] allowing the Haberdashers to elect persons, though they might not be burgesses, as Wardens of their company.

The general impression which such transactions leave is that extreme laxity prevailed in all departments. The town woke up for a moment in 1702 when the prospect perhaps of a harvest of unpaid fines induced them to make an effort to recover all such[164]. It is to be regretted that nothing remains to show to what extent the abuse had prevailed, nor how far the present effort was successful. The annual fine of the Bakers'

company was 3. 6_s._ 8_d._ which they appear to have generally paid with considerable reluctance[165]. The supply of provision to the town seems to have given much trouble in the early years of the eighteenth century.

Permission was given, in 1730, to the country butchers to sell in the town unless the town butchers could furnish meat in sufficient quant.i.ty.

Similar permission was accorded to the country bakers, if the Bakers'

company in the town would not pay their yearly fine. This they were unwilling, or unable, to do, and the country bakers were in consequence called in[166].

[Sidenote: _with one another,_]

The picture given by such incidents is not more significant of the degeneracy of the Gilds than is that which the friction of the companies one with another presents. The Mercers and the Drapers had frequently made mutual complaints of intrusion: the Mercers and the Glovers also appear as great rivals in later years. In 1679 and at several subsequent dates there were actions at law between the two companies. In 1727 the records of the Glovers show that similar actions were again in process. In 1721 the company unanimously agreed to withstand the Tailors in the matter of widow Steen, whom they pledge themselves to support; "and that shee may goe on with makeing Brichess peruided shee dos not line them with flonen or Buckrom or cennet onlye Lether."

[Sidenote: _and with their own members._]

Nor is the evidence of intestine friction within the Gilds themselves less significant of decay. So early as 1636 the Mercers were fain to confess that the spirit of mutual a.s.sistance had disappeared, in the order which they pa.s.sed to the effect that any combrother refusing to pay his a.s.sessment was to be distrained upon by authority of the Wardens. There are several records of such distraints. In 1700 they find it necessary to pa.s.s an ordinance against freemen taking the sons of intruders as apprentices. The records of the other companies are, similarly, full of like evidences of demoralisation. The companies are declared to be impoverished by the taking of inordinate numbers of apprentices. The same sort of abuse is found in a complaint which appears in the Glovers' books in 1656: "the company is much impoverished by the taking in of foreigners freemen such as have not served" their due apprenticeship. "The disorderly manner of electing Wardens" about which the Glovers have to "take account"

in 1668 points to a great deterioration in the manner of holding Gild meetings from that which has been sketched in a previous chapter[167].

Worse than all is the confession that the Gild brothers have sunk so low as to connive at intruders "for fraudulent lucre and gain[168]." The Saddlers have the same sort of complaint in 1740. Some brethren are infringing on the trades of others: resolutions are pa.s.sed against such conduct. Their books show that the resolutions were soon forgotten[169].

The other Gilds experienced similar difficulties. In 1745 the Barbers levied a fine of ten shillings on brethren who should so far forget themselves as to instruct "men or women servants to dress hair."

The problem of regulating trade would have been difficult enough under the most favourable circ.u.mstances. With the Gilds in the condition which we have been considering it was an impossibility. There was indeed a feature in the modern companies which at the outset deprived the attempt to utilise them beneficially for trade-purposes of all chance of success.

[Sidenote: _The Gilds have changed to capitalist companies._]

The old Gilds, which had lived through the shocks of the Reformation, and the Elizabethan changes, had quite altered their character. The new ones which had arisen differed widely from the old fraternities. Instead of being brotherhoods of craftsmen desirous of advancing the public weal, they were now mere societies of capitalists, intent only on private and personal advantage. As a writer of 1680 observes "most of our ancient Corporations and Guilds [have] become oppressive Oligarchies[170]." There is a constant endeavour to restrict the companies to favoured individuals.

Every "foreigner" is subjected to a heavy fine, which grows larger in amount as the companies feel the trade slipping from their hands in spite of their desperate endeavours to restrict it. The new compositions continually point to this abuse by bringing back the fines to their original sum, or rather reducing them to an amount less inordinate than that which they have irregularly reached. The admission stamp of the Saddlers was 4/- in 1784. It reached 8/2 in 1799. In 1831 it was 20/2. The Mercers' fine was fixed at 40. 6_s._ 8_d._ in 1789, "besides fees." In 1823 it had sunk to 20. The Mercers were of course one of the richest of the companies, yet the sum was a large one to pay for the privilege of opening a shop in a provincial town.

Other means to restrict themselves were also attempted. Increase in the number of apprentices was viewed with disfavour. There are frequent complaints of the "impoverishment" of the companies through the indiscriminate admittance of "foreigners." All the evidence shows how entirely they have degenerated into mere societies of capitalists. Their records almost decline into bald columns of pounds, shillings and pence.

For it was to this completeness of degradation that the social body had sunk. The merest selfishness was lauded as a patriotic virtue. Private gain was recommended as a public benefit. Social disintegration and industrial anarchy ruled supreme, and when commercial success had come to be looked upon as the one avenue to honour and advancement, it was not to be expected that the companies would escape the general infection. They formed simply one among many means by which the individual was enabled to fill his own pockets at the cost of a suffering and squalid populace.

This change in their character, which became more marked as time went by, naturally was not unattended by a change in their government. All authority became engrossed by the richer members. The Four a.s.sistants with the Wardens and Stewards formed a close aristocratic board. Brentano, speaking it would appear more particularly of the London companies, says[171] the king nominated the first members of this court and afterwards as vacancies occurred they were filled by co-optation. This was not exactly the case with the Shrewsbury companies. There the annual meeting[172] retained a considerable power in the election of officers to the last. In some cases the a.s.sistants or Four Men were elected freely by the a.s.sembled combrethren, in others two only were thus elected, the two retiring Wardens completing the number. The Tailors' composition of 1563 provided that the two Wardens should be elected by the whole Gild: the Four a.s.sistants were then nominated by these Wardens "for advising them in the Government of the Gild." The Wardens and a.s.sistants then proceeded to nominate the two Stewards.

[Sidenote: _The companies and the close corporations._]

They were thus as exclusive and aristocratic as the town corporations had become. The degeneracy of the latter had been largely intensified by the degeneracy of the former. For the princ.i.p.al members of the companies were the princ.i.p.al members of the town corporation, which had silently, since the fourteenth century, been usurping the ancient powers of the general body of the burgesses. It was the companies which mainly profited by it.

They profited indirectly, by the influence which they exercised through individual members on the town council, which had obtained part of the functions of the Leet. They profited directly as they themselves acquired definitely other of the powers of the Court Leet. They became the chief or the sole medium for the acquisition of munic.i.p.al freedom, and were distinct town organs for the regulation of trade and industry.

[Sidenote: _The journeymen no longer in the companies._]

It is by reason of the widely-reaching influence of their degeneracy that their later history is of importance. For as regards the poorer members of society their history is useless. The workman disappears from their books.

That he no longer was looked upon as the brother member of the masters is quite evident.

"Our workmen do work hard, but we live at ease, We go when we will, and we come when we please[173]."

[Sidenote: _They begin to form benefit societies, animated by much of the old Gild-spirit._]

The most general means which the poor adopted to help themselves was the formation of Friendly Societies. These arose in great numbers during the 18th century. The companies were not slow in helping to swell public subscriptions and in a.s.sisting to pauperise the labouring cla.s.s. To the necessity of rendering real help to their unfortunate workmen they were however entirely oblivious. This side of the work performed by the old Gilds had been almost wholly overlooked by the post-reformation companies, though it had been one of the most important of their predecessors'

functions. It was found that society could not get along without something of the kind, and as the higher companies would not perform the work, the lower craftsmen found it necessary to do it themselves. Here was a distinct severance of interest between employers and workmen, yet it does not seem unlikely that it was the old Gilds themselves which formed the models for the new societies. At any rate the a.n.a.logies between the Gilds and the Benefit Societies, in the earlier phases of the latter, and looking at the social and religious side of the former, are very striking[174]. The simple rules of trade a.s.sociation show as much concern for the morals of members as did the charters of the Gilds: they had their annual feast, provided by subscription: they usually went in their procession to the parish church on the day of the feast. They were perhaps the earliest signs of that necessary return to something like the old Gild system which the later Trades Unions have done so much to bring about. The companies watched them grow up without a twinge of conscience, though it was their own neglect of duty which made such a.s.sociations an absolute necessity. Being the only forms of combination which were left unmolested by the government they were extensively formed, and this was well, for the need of them was very great.

[Sidenote: _Difficulties of reform; members would not, state would not, the town authorities would not._]

In spite of unmistakeable signs of inevitable changes the companies refused to take warning. Their reform was indeed difficult, and, as it proved, impossible. The workmen as we have seen could not, the masters would not, take steps in this direction. The state derived too good an income from them to be anxious for a change. The admission stamps, constantly increasing in amount, were a profitable source of revenue. The notices of "cessments for renewing the composition" are frequent. There were also continual contributions of men and money for the "exigencies of the State[175]." In 1798 the Mercers voted 100 annually to the government "during the continuance of the war." The town also seemed to profit by them. They were obliged, some of them at all events, to exhibit their compositions annually or periodically to the mayor and pay a customary fine on doing so. They continued to be of some service to the community in the inefficient condition of the public police. Their social utility to the town was also in their favour. In 1608 the corporation provided materials in case of fire, when each of the companies was required to maintain its proper proportion of hooks and buckets. Entries relating to the "spout or water engine" are frequent in their records. In aid of procuring public benefits the companies were not backward. Their chests were readily opened to a.s.sist towards improvements in the town, such as widening of streets, erection of bridges and the like.

To the last also they preserved something of their charitable character, though its exercise was as open to criticism as other forms of poor relief during the eighteenth century. Nevertheless if the membership lists of the Drapers and the Mercers could be made public they would be found to contain the majority of the public benefactors of Shrewsbury during this period. Public charities, such as the Infirmary and the Lancaster School received annual subscriptions until the companies came to an end. The necessity of continuing the annuities to the inmates of S. Chad's almshouses formed a chief argument against the dissolution of the Mercers'

company. "The Worshipful Company of Drapers" still subscribes to schools and charities year by year.

[Sidenote: _Contemporaneous opinion of the companies._]

In these circ.u.mstances we cannot wonder that the old companies found many champions. The following letter is valuable as affording a view of the contemporaneous opinion held of the Gilds by a man of ordinary common sense and average education. It appeared in the _Salopian Journal_ of August 27, 1823. It was evoked by a decision of the Judges of a.s.size in favour of the Mercers' company in an important case to which reference will be made in a later page. It was addressed to the editor of the newspaper and commenced--

"SIR,

As the Company commonly called 'the United Company of Mercers, Grocers, Ironmongers, and Goldsmiths' in this town have established the validity of their ancient customs by a suit at law of which there is no account of their having done so since the time when the King's Court for the Marches of Wales was held at Ludlow; at which time and place the Council then, who held the pleas, determined also a like suit in their favour: and as there is much argument for and against the existence and usage of this incorporate body; permit me to lay before the public an outline of both, that the subject at least might be better understood than we often hear it repeated. It is contended against, as exercising an arbitrary monopoly of trade, to the detriment and oppression of the subjects of the realm; and which is moreover injurious to the town itself, by depriving the Trade thereof of that compet.i.tion which brings down the Articles of manufacture to a fair marketable value for the supply of its inhabitants. These are the charges against them, which if indeed they could be substantiated would be sufficient to show that their existence was an evil. But let us look at the facts on the other side of the question, and see whether there is any reality in these serious charges. In the first place the Companies hold it requisite, in order to be free of their body, that all but the sons of Freemen shall serve a regular apprenticeship to one of the Corporation. Now in this they have been sanctioned and dictated to by the ancient law of the land ... that youths might be properly taught their respective arts, and that the community might not be imposed upon by pretenders to that which they were not properly acquainted with.

On Foreigners or such as have not served a regular apprenticeship they impose a fine of 20, before they will admit them as freemen, and certainly in doing this they do not over-rate a seven years'

servitude, when the one is made equivalent to the other.

Let us now see to the application of the money. A fund is made of it, somewhat similar to 'Benefit Societies.' No part of it is applied to private purposes; for even the Company's annual feast, about which there is so much said, is not always at the expense of the fund, but [is] borne individually; and the utility of such a feast to promote harmony and goodwill, is acknowledged by all Societies[176]. But further, these funds are confined to the relief of decayed and deserving members of the Companies[177], and to every charitable and public emergency wherein the general interest or welfare of the town is concerned; and their annual disburs.e.m.e.nts, for centuries past, have been regularly serviceable to the community at large as well as to individual cases of distress. This the account of their expenditure will show. Now, then this monopoly, as it is called, extends no further than to exact an apprenticeship of seven years, or to a fine of 20; the former sanctioned by law and the latter a sum of no comparative amount to a respectable person, desirous of establishing a respectable trade, especially if there be any truth in the argument, that goods are sold by this corporate body for more money than they would be, if no such corporation existed. Neither can the fine be called excessive, because it is added to a stock which he from whom it is exacted directs in common to be applied to the common good; and which he may himself, as many others have done in cases of distress, receive back again with large additions.

But the increased population of Birmingham and Manchester is brought forward as a proof of towns flourishing where trade is what is called _free_. Let us look a little into this argument. Are not the wares vended in these places proverbially _bad_? Do not all manner of imposters from these places deluge the country with their spurious goods, and impose them upon the unwary part of the public? Are these towns to be compared with London, Liverpool, Bristol, for respectability of their trade, for the goodness and cheapness of their articles, when the quality is taken into account? Yet the trade of these latter towns is regulated by corporations.

I contend therefore that the Corporation in question is _beneficial_ to this town and county, inasmuch as it tends to protect it from the inundations of empirics and imposters, while it holds out no hindrance to the fair and honest dealer who has a mind to compete with its respectable tradesmen and settle amongst them. I am not in trade myself; but hope I shall always see my native town preserved from that sort of population which it has never yet been disgraced with.

I have the honour to be, Mr Editor, In technical language, A COMBROTHER OF THE GUILD.

SHREWSBURY, Aug. 22, 1823."

CHAPTER VII.

SHREWSBURY SHOW.

[Sidenote: _Characteristic features of the Middle Ages._]

A strange glamour hangs around the Middle Ages. We know so little of man's actual life in those years,--and what little we do know seems to partake so largely of the mysterious and the picturesque--all, his modes of life and manners of thought are so far removed from our own,--that mediaeval history would easily resolve itself into an enchanting pageant bright with its colour and bewildering with its contradictions. It is perhaps in the strange contrasts which are presented to us that its chief wonder is found. In those years we find l.u.s.t and rapine, and sacrilege and tyranny, side by side with the fairest forms of chivalry[178], the most devoted readiness to champion the cause of religion, the firmest attachment to the forms of law[179]. We see only the prominent lights and the great shadows of the picture, but all that should go to make it human and comprehensible to us is hidden under the dust of centuries.

We have noticed the existence of something of this contradictory spirit in the view we have had of the early Gilds[180]. The elevated ideal which they set before their members must of course have been far above the level which was ever actually reached. We may smile at their vain attempts after the impossible, yet we cannot but allow that their perseverance betokens the widespread acceptance of a n.o.bler conception of human life than is common in our own too merely practical age. To the men of those days there seemed no great incongruity in the lofty ideals of the Gild-compositions and the lower standard which the brethren actually attained. It added but another to the many striking contrasts which environed their daily life.