Part VII

, pp. 541-3_], 1597[264].

But now, as if all these wrongs should be redressed, and all the cries and curses of the poor should be removed, it hath pleased you, Mr. Speaker, to exhibit this bill to our view as a complete remedy. I will not say 'it is worse than the disease.' But this I may truly say, 'It is too weak for the disease!' Three things I find exactly and providently respected. First, that the law is general, without exception, drawing in the purchaser as well as the first offender, whereat, howsoever some may shake their heads, as pressed with their own grief, yet is there no new imposition charged upon them, but such as is grounded upon the common law. For being without contradiction that this turning of the earth to sloth and idleness, whereby it cannot fructify to the common good, is the greatest and most dangerous nuisance and damage to the common people, the law hath provided that the treasure of wickedness shall profit nothing, but that the nuisance shall be reformed in the hands of the people that come in upon the best consideration.... And 26 Eliz. in the Exchequer, in Claypole's case, an exhibition was exhibited upon the Statute of 4 Hen. VII[265] against a purchaser for converting of tillage into pasture, and adjudged good, though the purchaser were not the converter, but only a contriver of the first conversion. So as this new law tends but for an explanation of the old, that every one by the eye may be informed what ought by the hand to be amended. Nay, though it be not fit, Mr. Speaker, to be published among the ruder sort, who, if they were privy to their own strength and liberty allowed them by the law, would be as unbridled and untamed beasts, yet is it not unfit to be delivered in this place of council, that is, that where the wrong and mischief spreads to an universality, there the people may be their own justices, as in 6 Ed. II and 8 Ed. III Ass. 154 and 447 it is adjudged that if a wall be raised atraverse the way that leadeth to the Church all the parishioners may beat it down, and 9 Ed. IV 445, if the course of a water that runs to a town be stopped or diverted all the inhabitants may break it down. Are the people thus interested in the Church wherein their souls are fed, and shall we not think them to be as deeply interested in the corn and increase of the earth that feeds and maintains their bodies? Therefore most wisely hath the gentleman that penned the law pressed the case upon the purchaser that he plough, lest the people plot to circumvent him.

The second thing so well provided is ... that it turns one eye backward to cure the ancient complaints and old festered disease of dearth and scarcity that hath been so long among us, and turns the other eye forward to cut out, as it were, the core that might draw on hereafter mischiefs of the same nature; where the gentleman that framed this bill hath dealt like a most skilful chirurgien, not clapping on a plaster to cover the sore that it spread no further, but searching into the very depths of the wound, that the life and strength which hath so long been in decay by the wasting of towns and countries may at length again be quickened and repaired.

The third thing most politicly respected is the intercourse and change of ground to be converted into tillage, keeping a just proportion. For it fareth with the earth as with other creatures that through continual labour grow faint and feeble-hearted, and therefore, if it be so far driven as to be out of breath, we may now by this law resort to a more lusty and proud piece of ground while the first gathers strength, which will be a means that the earth yearly shall be surcharged with burden of her own excess. And this did the former lawmakers overslip, tyeing the land once tilled to a perpetual bondage and servitude of being ever tilled.

But this threefold benefit I find crossed and encountered with a fourfold mildness and moderation fit to have a keen edge and sharpness set upon it, wherein I acknowledge my master that drew this project to have shewed himself like a tender-hearted physician, who coming to a patient possessed and full of corrupt and evil humours, will not hastily stir the body, but apply gentle and easy recipes. But surely, Mr. Speaker, a desperate disease must have a desperate medicine, and some wounds will not be healed but by incision.

The first moderation I mislike in this new law is that the most cunning and skilful offender shall altogether slip the collar; for if a man have decayed a whole town by enclosures, and hath rid his hand of it by exchange with Her Majesty, taking from her ancient enclosed pastures naturally yielding after the rate that his forced enclosed ground can yield upon such corrupt improvement, and to justify the true value shall take a lease back again of the Queen, the man is an occupier within the words of this law. But by your favour, Mr. Speaker, not within the intent of this law to plough this new enclosure, because Her Majesty is in reversion, and this law doth not extend neither to her nor to her farmers. And that none might escape it were good that all of this kind might be enforced either to a contribution toward the poor,[266] who are chiefly wronged, or to the breaking up of the grounds he received from Her Majesty because they come in lieu of the former.

The second moderation that would be amended is in the imposition of the pain ... which is but 10s. yearly for every acre not converted. By your favour, Mr. Speaker, it is too easy: and I will tell you, Sir, the ears of our great sheep-masters do hang at the door of this house, and myself have heard since this matter grew in question to be reformed, that some, enquiring and understanding the truths of the penalty, have prepared themselves to adventure 10s. upon the certainty of the gain of 30s. at the least. The third moderation is in the exception that exempts grounds mown for hay to be converted into tillage. And, if it please you, Sir, the first resolutions our enclosed gentlemen have is to sort and proportion their grounds into two divisions, the one for walks whereon their sheep may feed in the fresh summer, the other for hay whereon their sheep may feed in the hard winter; so that these grounds that carry hay have been as oil to keep the fire flaming and therefore no reason why they should be shielded and protected from the ploughshare.

The fourth moderation is that after this reconversion there is no restraint, but that every one may keep all the land ploughed in his own hands; whereupon will follow that as now there is scarcity of corn and plenty of such as would be owners, so then there will be plenty of corn, but scarcity of such as can be owners. For until our gentlemen that now enclose much, and then must plough much, shall meet with more compassion toward the poor than they have done, their small will be as small as it hath been, and then every one will be either an engrosser under false pretence of large housekeeping, or else a transporter by virtue of some license he will hope to purchase. And therefore it were good that every one should be rated how much he should keep in his own hands, and that not after the proportions of his present estimation; as, if a man hath lifted up his countenance by reason of this unnatural and cruel improvement after the rate of a gentleman of a thousand pounds by year, where the same quantity of land before would yield but a hundred pounds by year, I would have this man ruled after his old reckoning....

We sit now in judgment over ourselves: therefore as this bill entered at first with a short prayer 'God speed the plough.' so I wish it may end with such success as the plough may speed the poor.

(Endorsed: 1597. To Mr. Speaker against enclosures.)

[Footnote 264: Two Acts against depopulation were passed in this year, 39 Eliz., c. 1, and 39 Eliz., c. 2 (see No. 17 of this section). The name of the member making the following speech is not known.]

[Footnote 265: 4 Hen. VII, c. 19, by which all occupiers of 20 acres and upwards which have been tilled for the last three years are to maintain them in tillage.]

[Footnote 266: For the exaction of such a contribution see Section IV, No. 20 of this Part.]

19. SPEECHES IN HOUSE OF COMMONS ON ENCLOSURES [_D'Ewes Journal, p. 674_], 1601[267].

The points to be considered of in the continuance of Statutes were read, and offered still to dispute whether the Statute of Tillage should be continued.

Mr. Johnson said, In the time of Dearth, when we made this statute, it was not considered that the hand of God was upon us; and now corn is cheap; if too cheap, the Husbandman is undone, whom we must provide for, for he is the staple man of the kingdom. And so after many arguments he concluded the Statute to be repealed.

Mr. Bacon said the old commendation of Italy by the Poet was _potens viris atque ubere glebae_, and it stands not with the policy of the State that the wealth of the kingdom should be engrossed into a few graziers' hands. And if you will put in so many provisoes as be desired, you will make it useless. The Husbandman is a strong and hardy man, the good footman. Which is a chief observation of good warriors, etc. So he concluded the statutes not to be repealed.

Sir Walter Raleigh said, I think the law fit to be repealed; for many poor men are not able to find seed to sow so much as they are bound to plough, which they must do, or incur the penalty of the law. Besides, all nations abound with corn. France offered the Queen to serve Ireland with corn for 16s. a quarter, which is but 2s. the bushel; if we should sell it so here, the ploughman would be beggared. The low countryman and the Hollander, which never soweth corn, hath by his industry such plenty that they will serve other nations. The Spaniard, who often wanteth corn, had we never so much plenty, will not be beholding to the Englishman for it....

And therefore I think the best course is to set it at liberty, and leave every man free, which is the desire of a true Englishman.

Mr. Secretary Cecil said, I do not dwell in the country. I am not acquainted with the plough. But I think that whosoever doth not maintain the plough destroys this kingdom.... My motion therefore shall be that this law may not be repealed, except former laws may be in force and revived. Say that a glut of corn should be, have we not sufficient remedy by transportation, which is allowable by the policy of all nations?... I am sure when warrants go from the Council for levying of men in the countries, and the certificates be returned unto us again, we find the greatest part of them to be ploughmen. And excepting Sir Thomas More's Utopia, or some such feigned commonwealth, you shall never find but the ploughman is chiefly provided for, the neglect whereof will not only bring a general, but a particular damage to every man.... If we debar tillage, we give scope to the depopulator; and then if the poor being thrust out of their houses go to dwell with others, straight we catch them with the Statute of Inmates; if they wander abroad they are within danger of the Statute of the Poor to be whipped.

[Footnote 267: No action was taken to amend or repeal existing laws. For Bacon's views see his _History of King Henry_ VII.]

20. RETURN TO PRIVY COUNCIL OF ENCLOSERS FURNISHED BY JUSTICES OF LINCOLNSHIRE [_S.P.D. Charles I, Vol. 206, No. 7_], _c._ 1637.

_Lincoln._--An abstract of such depopulators as have been hitherto dealt withal in Lincolnshire, and received their pardon.

The persons in number 9 The sum of their fines 300l. The number of houses by bond to be erected 33 The time for the erection, within one year The number of farms to be continued that are now standing 22 The fines are already paid.

Sir Charles Hussey, knt. Fine 80l.

Bond of 200 marks, with condition to set up in Honington 8 farmhouses with barns, etc., and to lay to every house 30 acres of land, and to keep 10 acres thereof yearly in tillage.

Sir Henry Ayscough, knt. Fine 20l.

Bond 200 marks. To set up 8 farmhouses in Blibroughe with 30 acres to every farm, and 12 thereof to be kept yearly in tilth.

Sir Hamond Whichcoote, knt. Fine 40l.

Bond 200 marks. To set up 8 farmhouses, etc., in Harpswell, with 40 acres to every house; and 16 thereof in tillage.

Sir Edward Carre, knt. Fine 30l.

Bond 100l. To set up 2 farmhouses in Branswell, and 1 in Aswarby with 40 acres to every house, 16 in tillage.

Sir William Wraye, knt. Fine 30l.

Bond 100l. To set up in Gaynesby 2 farmhouses with 2 acres at least to either, 10 in tillage, and to continue 2 farms more in Grainsby and 3 in Newbell and Longworth, with the same quantity, as is now used there, a third part in tilth.

Sir Edmund Bussye, knt. Fine 10l.

Bond 100l. To set up one farmhouse in Thorpe with 40 acres, 14 thereof in tillage, and to continue 14 farms in Hedor, Oseby, Aseby, and Thorpe, as they now are, with a third part in tillage.

Richard Rosetor, esqr. Fine 10l.

Bond 50l. To set up one farm in Limber with 40 acres, 16 in tillage, and to continue 1 farm in Limber, and 2 in Sereby, _ut sup._

Robert Tirwhitt, esqr. Fine 10l.

Bond 50l. To set up one farm in Cameringham with 40 acres, 16 in tillage.

John Tredway, gent. Fine 10l.

Bond 40l. To set up one farm in Gelson with 30 acres, 10 thereof in tillage.

[Endorsed.] Lincoln Depopulators fined and pardoned and the reformations to be made.

21. COMPLAINT OF LAUD'S ACTION ON THE COMMISSION FOR DEPOPULATION [_S.P.D. Charles I, Vol. 497, No. 10_], 1641.

That upon the Commission of enquiry after depopulation, the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury and other the Commissioners, at the solicitation of Tho. Hussey, gent, did direct a letter in nature of a Commission to certain persons within the County of Wilts, to certify what number of acres in South Marston in the parish of Highworth were converted from arable to pasture, and what number of ploughs were laid down, etc.

Whereupon the Archdeacon with two others did return certificate, to the Lord Archbishop, etc.

Upon this certificate, Mr. Anth. Hungerford, Mr. Southby, with 15 others, were convented before his Grace and the other Commissioners at the Council Board, where, being charged with conversion;

Mr. Anth. Hungerford and Mr. Southby with some others did aver that they had made no conversion, other than they had when they came to be owners thereof.

His Grace said that they were to look no further than to the owners. And certificate was returned that so many acres were converted and so many ploughs let down.

They alleged that this certificate was false and made without their privity, and therefore Mr. Hungerford in the behalf of the rest did desire that they might not be judged upon that certificate; but that they might have the like favour as Mr. Hussey had, to have certificates of the same nature directed to other Commissioners, or a Commission, if it might be granted, to examine upon oath whereby the truth might better appear.

His Grace replied to Mr. Hungerford, "Since you desire it and are so earnest for it you shall not have it."[268]

They did offer to make proof that since the conversion there were more habitations of men of ability and fewer poor, and that whereas the King had before 4 or 5 soldiers of the trained band he had now 9 there; that the impropriation was much better to be let.

His Grace said to the rest of the Lords, "We must deal with these gentlemen as with those of Tedbury, to take 150l. fine, and to lay open the enclosures."

Which they refusing to do they were there threatened with an information to be brought against them in the Star Chamber. And accordingly were within a short time after by the said Mr. Hussey served with _subpoenas_ at Mr. Attorney his suit in the Star Chamber: And this, as Mr. Hussey told Mr. Hungerford, was done by my Lord Archbishop his command.

[Endorsed.] Depopulation. Mr. Hungerford and Mr. Southby. (1641.)

[Footnote 268: See Clarendon, _History of the Rebellion I_, 204.

"And the revenue of too many of the Court consisted principally in enclosures, and improvements of that nature, which he [_i. e_., Laud], still opposed passionately except they were founded upon law; and then, if it would bring profit to the King, how old and obsolete soever the law was, he thought he might justly advise the prosecution. And so he did a little too much countenance the Commission for Depopulation, which brought much charge and trouble upon the people, which was likewise cast upon his account."]

SECTION II

TOWNS AND GILDS

1. A Protest at Coventry against a Gild's Exclusiveness, 1495--2. A Complaint from Coventry as to Inter-municipal Tariffs, 1498--3. The Municipal Regulation of Wages at Norwich, 1518--4. The Municipal Regulation of Markets at Coventry, 1520--5. The Municipal Regulation of Wages at Coventry, 1524--6. An Act for Avoiding of Exactions taken upon Apprentices in Cities, Boroughs, and Towns Corporate, 1536--7. An Act whereby certain Chantries, Colleges, Free Chapels, and the Possessions of the same be given to the King's Majesty, 1547--8. Regrant to Coventry and Lynn of Gild Lands Confiscated under 1 Ed. VI, c. 14 (the preceding Act), 1548--9. A Petition of the Bakers of Rye to the Mayor, Jurats, and Council to Prevent the Brewers taking their trade, 1575--10. Letter to Lord Cobham from the Mayor and Jurats of Rye concerning the Preceding Petition, 1575--11. The Municipal Regulation of the Entry into Trade at Nottingham, 1578-9--12. The Municipal Regulation of Markets at Southampton, 1587--13. The Municipal Regulation of Wages at Chester, 1591--14. The Company of Journeymen Weavers of Gloucester, 1602--15. Petition of Weavers who are not Burgesses, 1604-5--16. Extracts from the London Clothworkers' Court Book, 1537-1627--17. The Feltmakers' Joint-Stock Project, 1611--18. The Case of the Tailors of Ipswich, 1615--19. The Grievances of the Journeymen Weavers of London, _c._ 1649.

The documents in this section illustrate certain aspects of the life of towns and gilds from 1485-1660. In the first half of the sixteenth century two important changes in the legal position of gilds were made by Act of Parliament, (i) Owing to the growing complaints of their exclusiveness (Nos. 1 and 6). Parliament had already by 15 Hen. VI, c. 6, and 19 Hen. VII, c. 7, compelled gilds to submit their ordinances to the approval of extra-municipal authorities before they became valid (Nos. 6 and 17). By 22 Hen. VIII it fixed 2s. 6d. as the maximum fee to be charged persons entering and 3s. 4d. as the maximum fee for persons leaving their apprenticeship. By 28 Hen. VIII c. 5 it forbad restrictive agreements designed to prevent apprentices or journeymen starting in trade on their own account (No. 6). (ii.) By 37 Hen. VIII c. 4 and 1 Ed. VI. c. 14 (No. 7) Parliament confiscated for the benefit of the Crown that part of gild property which was applied to religious purposes. The latter Act was, however, strongly opposed in the House of Commons, and the confiscated estates were restored to two towns, Coventry and King's Lynn (No. 8).

Apart from these changes towns and gilds pursued in the sixteenth century much the same economic policy as in earlier ages. They imposed inter-municipal tariffs (No. 2), and regulated markets (Nos. 4 and 12), wages (Nos. 3, 5, and 13), apprenticeship and the entry into trades (Nos. 1, 9, 10, 11, 15) on high moral grounds (No. 10), but sometimes with consequences unpleasant to those who were excluded (Nos. 1 and 15). Indeed their anxiety to preserve their monopoly occasionally brought them into conflict with the law, which "abhors all monopolies" (No. 18). Inside the gilds, however, a momentous change was going on. The fifteenth century had seen the rise within gilds of "yeomanry" organizations consisting of journeymen, of which an example is given below (No. 14, and