Part XI

, pp. 53-55_], 1615.

Trin. II, Jac. Reg. King's Bench.

[The Master, Wardens, and Community of the Tailors and Workers of cloth of the town of Ipswich in the County of Suffolk brought an action for 13l. 13s. 4d. against William Sheninge. They allege

(i) that by the letters patent incorporating them they had power to make reasonable rules and ordinances and to impose fines for breach of them;

(ii) that they had made a rule that no person occupying any of the said trades in Ipswich should keep any shop or chamber, or exercise the said faculties, or any of them, or take an apprentice or journeyman, till he should present himself to the Master and Wardens of the said society, should prove that he had served an apprenticeship, and should be admitted as a sufficient workman, on pain of 5 marks fine;

(iii) that in accordance with 19 Hen. vii., cap. 7, they had submitted these rules to the justices of assize, who had allowed them;

(iv) that William Sheninge had worked 20 days as a tailor without complying.

The defendant pleaded he was an apprentice by the space of 7 years, that he had been retained as domestic servant for a year and that as such he made garments for him, his wife, and children, which is the same use and exercise wherein the plaintiffs demur.]

And in this case upon argument at the Bar and Bench, divers points were resolved--

1. That at the Common Law no man could be prohibited from working in any lawful trade, for the law abhors idleness ... and especially in young men, who ought in their youth ... to learn lawful trades and sciences which are profitable to the common weal.... And therefore the law abhors all monopolies, which prohibit any from working in any lawful trade. And that appears in 2 H. 5, 56. A dyer was bound that he should not use the dyers' craft for 2 years, and there Hull holds that the bond was against the common law, and by God if the plaintiff was here he should go to prison till he paid a fine to the king; so for the same reason, if an husbandman is bound that he shall not sow his land, the bond is against the common law.... And if he who undertakes upon him to work is unskilful, his ignorance is a sufficient punishment to him ... and if any one takes him to work and spoils it, an action on the case lies against him. And the Statute of 5 Eliz. 4, which prohibits every person from using or exercising any craft, mystery, or occupation unless he has been an apprentice by the space of 7 years was not enacted only to the intent that workmen should be skilful, but also that youth should not be nourished in idleness, but brought up and educated in lawful sciences and trades: and therefore it appears that without an Act of Parliament none can be prohibited from working in any lawful trade. Also the common law doth not prohibit any person from using several Arts or mysteries at his pleasure....

2. That the said Restraint of the defendant for more than the said Act of 5 Eliz. has made was against law, and therefore for as much as the Statute has not restrained him who has served as an apprentice for seven years from exercising the trade of a tailor, the said ordinance can't prohibit him from exercising his trade till he has presented himself before them, or till they allow him to be a workman; for these are against the liberty and freedom of the subject, and are a means of extortion in drawing money from them, either by delay or some other subtil device or by oppression of young Tradesmen by the old and rich of the same Trade, not permitting them to work in their trade freely; and all this is against the Common Law and the commonwealth. But ordinances for the good order and government of men of Trades and Mysteries are good, but not to restrain any one in his lawful mystery.

3. It was resolved that the said branch of the Act of 5 Eliz. is intended of a public use and exercise of a trade to all who will come, and not of him who is a private cook, tailor, brewer, baker, etc., in the house of any for the use of a family, and therefore the said ordinance had been good and consonant to law. Such a private exercise and use had not been within it, for every one may work in such a private manner, although he has never been an apprentice in the trade.

4. It was resolved that the Statute of 19 H. 7, cap. 7, doth not corroborate any of the ordinances made by any corporation, which are so allowed and approved as the Statute speaks, but leaves them to be affirmed as good, or disaffirmed as unlawful, by the law; the sole benefit which the corporation obtains by such allowance is that they shall not incur the penalty of 40l. mentioned in the Act, if they put in use any ordinances which are against the king's prerogative, or the common profit of the people.

Judgment for defendant.

[Footnote 272: This case is important as an illustration of the attitude of the Common Law Courts towards rules made in restraint of trade. See below, section III of this Part, Nos. 17 and 24.]

19. THE GRIEVANCES OF THE JOURNEYMEN WEAVERS OF LONDON [_Gildhall Library. The case of the Commonalty of the Corporation of Weavers of London truly stated_],[273] _c._ 1649.

Humbly presented to the consideration of the honourable House of Commons.

All legal jurisdictions over a number of people or society of men must either be primitive or derivative. Now primitive jurisdiction is undoubtedly in the whole body, and not in one or more members, all men being by nature equal to other; and all jurisdictive power over them, being founded by a compact and agreement with them, is invested in one or more persons, who represent the whole, and by the consent of the whole are empowered to govern by such rules of equality towards all, so that both governor and governed may know certainly what the one may command and what the other must obey; without the performance of which mutual contract all obligations are cancelled, and that jurisdictive power returns unto its first spring (the people) from whence it was conveyed.

And doubtless whatever power our Governors of the Corporation of Weavers may pretend and plead for, if they had any rationally, they had it at first from the whole body, as it stands incorporated into a civil society of men walking by such rules, established for the preservation of the trade, advancement and encouragement of the profession thereof.

And if it be objected that they had a charter granted them by the King, wherein they are invested that power they challenge, we answer that there is not any one liberty that is granted to them but that is also granted to the meanest member of the said company. The words of the charter are these:--

[Here follows a copy of the charter granted by King Henry II to the Weavers of London.]

So that it is clear that this grant was not to so many particular men, but to the whole society; and what power soever any person or persons were afterwards invested withall must of necessity be by the consent, election, and approbation of the whole body; and if our Egyptian taskmasters have any further commission for their usurped power over us, why do they not produce it? Certainly, if they could, they would. But having none they plead custom and precedents, both which they will find but broken reeds to lean upon, but rotten props to support their worm-eaten sovereignty.

1. For first, there must be these two things to make a custom valid: (i) Usage; (ii) Time. Yet that time must be such whereof there is no memory of man, and the usage must be peaceable, without interruption. But both these are wanting to strengthen their claim to their pretended power over us.

2. Suppose there were a custom, and that it had been time out of mind also, yet if long usurpations of power could make the exercise thereof legal, the very foundation of just government were subverted.

3. No custom against an Act of Parliament is valid in law. But the custom claimed by our governors is against the very fundamental constitutions both of all civil societies and of several Acts of Parliament, which ordain that all elections shall be free, chiefly 3 of Ed. I, chap. 5, by virtue of which the people choose all their officers and magistrates in the several parishes and precincts in this kingdom. And if it be according to law in the major, the commonwealth, it must consequently hold in the minor, a particular corporation or civil society of men, as we are, etc.

4. But customs are only valid when reasonable.... Now nothing in the world can be more unreasonable than that such a number of men as 16 should have liberty to exercise a power over as many thousands, without, nay against, their wills, consent, or election ..., the challenge and exercise of such a power over a people being the perfectest badge of slavery that men can be subjected to.

But we shall proceed in a discovery of those oppressions and abuses which we complain so much against in our governors.

1st Charge. They have admitted aliens to be members for sums of money, contrary to the statutes of the realm, orders of the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen, customs of the city, and ordinances of the company.... They have brought in by their own confession three hundred and twelve strangers to be masters of the said company, and have taken for their admittance 5l. a man, which amounted to 1,560l., or thereabouts.... They object that the strangers admitted are broad weavers and deal not in the commodities that we trade in, viz., ribbon, lace, etc.

The objection is false; for most of us can, and many of us have wrought, as good broad stuffs as are nowadays made, and would do still, were it not for the vast number of strangers (which have engrossed the trade).... And if it be demanded how or by what means they got the trade into their hands, we answer that at the beginning of the war many of us and our servants engaged for the Parliament, and, in our absence, they, being generally malignant, staying at home, and keeping servants all of their own country, never employing any English, as they by law ought, by degrees got all the trading, so that now the war is ended, and we returned to follow our callings, we can get no employment. By which means many hundreds have been forced to leave the trade, as to be porters, labourers, water-bearers, etc., and many forced to take relief from the several parishes wherein they dwell....

2nd Charge. They have admitted natives to weave and set up weaving in their gild, without serving seven years, contrary to the statutes, orders and customs aforesaid, as hath been proved by several witnesses before the Committee of the honourable House.

3rd Charge. They exact extraordinary fees of those persons that they make free or admit, taking a silver spoon of an ounce and a half weight, and five shillings and eightpence in money, contrary to the Statute of 22 of Hen. VIII, chap. 4, and 28 of Hen. VIII, chap. 5....

4th Charge. They have deprived the commonalty of their rights in their first ordinance, which saith the bailiffs are to be chosen by the bailiffs, wardens, assistants, and commonalty, which ordinance is grounded upon the Statute of 3rd of Ed. I, chap. 5, which saith elections ought to be free, etc.

As touching the right of election, sufficient hath been spoken in the preamble before these charges; only give us leave to insert a few

## particulars in answer to their objection.

1. Whereas they object, that the commonalty are represented in the livery of the said company, we answer:--Legal representatives must be legally chosen by the persons represented, or else they cannot, or at least ought not, to be bound by their determinations. But the livery-men of our company are chosen by the bailiffs and governors, and not by the commonalty, so may properly be called the governors' representatives and not ours, we being never called upon to give our voice in their elections. Neither are they, indeed, elected, but brought in for 5l. a man. In lieu whereof they are invested with a peculiar privilege above others, by being empowered to keep more servants than ordinary, by which means the commonalty is destroyed also....

5th Charge. They have dismissed the yeomanry contrary to six several orders made with their consent by the Lord Mayor and Court of Assistants.

But they object that they have not dismissed them, etc. If they had not dismissed them, what needed so many several orders to be made to the contrary? But we desire you to take notice that the yeomanry did consist of sixteen persons which were authorized by the aforesaid six several orders to search and find out the abuses in trade, viz., intruders that had not served seven years, and that none but serviceable goods might be made for the commonwealth. Now, because these governors gain by intruders, making them pay for their permission, and driving the greatest trade, making much light and deceitful work, therefore they have dismissed the said yeomanry, by reason whereof both the said evils are continued. Besides, the yeomanry by the said orders were to have the journeymen's quarteridges for their pains, but now being by them dismissed they gather the quarteridges and share it among themselves.

6th Charge. That they have wasted the treasure and stock of the company in byways, and have not made that provision for the poor members of the company as by their trust they ought to have done.

So that what with their feastings, defending vexatious suits contrary to law, purchasing a monopoly, large fees for councillors, bills, demurrers, suits against weavers of other companies, etc., they have in one year out of the company's stock and income (which amounted but to 791l. 5s. 5d.) spent 566l. 19s. 8d., which year's account agrees with their disbursements other years also; and for 200l. given by one Mr. Ralph Hamon to purchase land for the poor, they have purchased none to this day, but have shared the money among themselves....

The premises considered, and all other circumstances duly weighed, our desires for the freedom of elections being both legal and rational, our sufferings and abuses under usurping pretended governors so abusive and offensive, our wants so great, company so numerous, trading so little, and that too devoured by strangers, ... we therefore hope that all these things put together will be of such weight with all conscientious, godly men in this honourable House of Commons, as that we shall not need to fear your willing assistance for the redressing of these great evils and granting our just desires. The speedy performance whereof will not only gain unto you the prayers of many thousand persons who are ready to perish for want of trading, but also engage them, as heretofore, so for the future, to stand by you in your greatest necessities, for the strengthening your hands in the execution of justice and judgment, and redress of the oppressions of the nation.

[Footnote 273: Part of this document is quoted by Unwin, _Industrial Organization in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries_, pp. 205-6.]

SECTION III

THE REGULATION OF INDUSTRY BY THE STATE

1. Proposals for the Regulation of the Cloth Manufacture (_temp_ Henry VIII)--2. Administrative Difficulties in the Regulation of the Manufacture of Cloth, 1537--3. An Act Touching Weavers, 1555--4. Enactment of Common Council of London as to Age of Ending Apprenticeship, 1556--5. William Cecil's Industrial Programme, 1559--6. The Statute of Artificers, 1563--7. Proposals for the Better Administration of the Statute of Artificers, 1572--8. Draft of a Bill Fixing Minimum Rates for Spinners and Weavers, 1593--9. Draft Piece-list Submitted for Ratification to the Wiltshire Justices by Clothiers and Weavers, 1602--10. An Act Empowering Justices to fix Minimum Rates of Payment, 1603-04--11. Administration of Acts Regulating the Manufacture of Cloth, 1603--12. Assessment made by the Justices of Wiltshire, dealing mainly with other than Textile Workers, 1604--13. Assessment made by the Justices of Wiltshire dealing mainly with Textile Workers, 1605--14. Administration of Wage Clauses of Statute of Artificers, 1605-08--15. Administration of Apprenticeship Clause of the Statute of Artificers, 1607-08--16. The Organisation of the Woollen Industry, 1615--17. Proceedings on the Apprenticeship Clauses of the Statute of Artificers, 1615--18. A Petition to Fix Wages Addressed to the Justices by the Textile Workers of Wiltshire, 1623--19. Appointment by Privy Council of Commissioners to Investigate Grievances of Textile Workers in East Anglia, 1630--20. Report to Privy Council of Commissioners appointed above, 1630--21. High Wages in the New World, 1645--22. Young Men and Maids Ordered to Enter Service, 1655--23. Request to Justices of Grand Jury of Worcestershire to Assess Wages, 1661--24. Proceedings on the Apprenticeship Clauses of the Statute of Artificers, 1669.

The documents in this section illustrate the regulation of industrial relationships by the government of the Tudors and of the first two Stuarts. The principal aims of their policy were to check the movement of the textile industries from the town to country districts (Nos. 3 and 6), to prevent the concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists (Nos. 3 and 11), or the creation of a necessitous proletariat (No. 4), to exercise a police supervision over the movement of labour (Nos. 6, 7 and 14), to maintain the quality of English goods (No. 2), to prevent class encroaching on class (Nos. 5 and 6) either through the wage earner demanding excessive wages (No. 5) or through the employer beating them down unduly (Nos. 8, 10, 19, 20), in short to crystallize existing relationships with such changes only as the economic developments of recent years, particularly the fall in the value of money (No. 6), and the spread of the textile industries into rural districts (No. 3) made inevitable.

The system was developed in numerous Acts, of which the most important are given below (Nos. 3, 6 and 10). The most comprehensive measure was the Statute of Artificers of 1563 (No. 6). There was little original in this Act. Just as the Statutes forbidding depopulation ( Part II , section I) really only developed manorial customaries into a national system, and the Poor Law Statutes ( Part II , section IV) were based on the experiments of municipal authorities, so the Statute of Artificers was based partly on the practices of gilds ( Part II , section II), partly on the mediæval Statutes of Labourers (see