IX.
THE OCCUPATIONS.
DURING the Middle Ages the trade of Leicester was almost entirely regulated by the Guild Merchant, or Chapman's Guild. As soon as a man had entered that Guild, he was free to carry on his special business, without paying the tolls which a non-guildsman would have to pay, and he shared all the privileges of the great trading fraternity of the town. So real was the brotherhood of the Guild, that, if any member happened to be present when a bargain was made by another member, he was entitled to have a share in it. Only Guildsmen were allowed to carry on any retail trade within the town — a rule which is proved by the exception of a few strangers being specially licensed to sell in the market, who were known as "homines stallati," or stall-men, and eyed with suspicion. And when a man entered the Guild, he was bound to conform to all the regulations that were laid down by the twenty-four Jurats of the Guild.
It would seem as if some of the Leicester traders resented these regulations, and aspired to self-management as early as the 13th century. The fullers, for instance, held meetings on their own account before the year 1260, and even, it would seem, appointed their own overseers, and fixed their own prices. It was resolved, however, by the Chapman's Guild, "with the consent of the merchants and the weavers and fullers," that, after that year, the fullers should not hold any "morning-speech," except in the presence of two merchants of the Guild of Merchants, who should have been chosen for that purpose from the community of the Guild ; and also that they should conform to certain customs and rules then settled by the Guild. The weavers at the same time also consented to the regulations of their trade then laid down. But, five years afterwards, when a resolution had been passed by the Guild fixing their wages, and ordering them not to weave any cloth of country villages as long as they had enough work from the men of Leicester, they again took matters into their own hands, and made "a certain provision about weaving against the community of the Guild of Merchants." The fullers too had to be fined soon afterwards for holding an independent meeting. In the next century the Mayor and Community appointed two Wardens to look after defaulting fullers and "to present their short-comings when they find any." And when the weavers again became troublesome, two men were chosen "by all the town of Leicester" to rule their craft. Both in England and on the Continent, Weavers were the earliest craftsmen to form Guilds, and their unions had been recognised in many other towns long before this is known to have been the case at Leicester. At London and Oxford they received charters as early as the reign of Henry I, and the Weavers' Guild at Nottingham was acknowledged by Henry II. But Doering suggests (Studien zur Verfassungsgeschichte von Leicester, Hanau, 1908, p. 68.) that the Leicester Guild did not admit working Weavers, because there was an outside Weavers' Company as early as the first Guild-rolls where only one Weaver is mentioned (a guildsman's father.)
In the 14th century an attempt was made by the Leicester Water-men to organize themselves into a Company, but the Guild Merchant suppressed it immediately by ordering proclamation to be made that "henceforth the lochel-men, called water-men, shall be separated, and shall serve the commune well and loyally according to the custom before used, and if any association be found among them, and they shall be attainted of this, that the Chamberlains cause 3s. 4d. to be levied from each of them at the first default, to the use and profit of the community, and at the second default, 6s. 8d., and so on increasing 3s. 4d. at each default, until they will submit to this ordinance."
In spite of these occasional differences between particular classes of tradesmen and the general body of merchants, a number of Leicester trades became organized into distinct unions, which were commonly known, in the 15th and i6th centuries, as " Occupations." They were not independent of the Guild Merchant; in fact all their regulations were subject to the approval of the Mayor and his brethren. Thus, in the year 1521, it was ordained by the Guild that "Mr. Mayor and his brethren 4 or 5 or 8 shall accept and prove all Ordinals of all the Occupations, within this town, and those customs that be good to allow them, and those that be evil to damn them." Some years later the duty of considering and approving, or condemning, fresh additions to any Ordinal was given to a Common Hall "or at least to the Mayor and two Justices of the Peace." It was afterwards required by Statute that every Ordinal should be confirmed by the Judges of Assize.
According to Thompson, the companies which were in existence and recognized as semi-independent organizations in the early part of the 16th century, were the Tailors, the Smiths, the Shoemakers, the Bakers and the Butchers. The Tailors' Occupation was undoubtedly one of the earliest. Thompson gives the date of its establishment as 1450; and it was certainly existing in the time of the mayoralty of John Fresley (1466), when it was agreed "by the Wardens and all the Occupation of the craft of Tailors that there shall no tailor set up his craft as a master within the town of Leicester but the Wardens of the said craft shall bring in l0s. in money and pay it to the Chamberlains for his duty to the Chapman's Guild, a fortnight before the Chamberlains enter into their account, upon pain of forfeiting 20s. of the guild of Tailors' money to be levied by the Chamberlains."
The Occupations that are referred to in the published Records of the Borough number seventeen, and a list of them is subjoined, together with the dates at which they were first mentioned. The date, as a rule, shows only that the Occupation was then existing; it may have been established, in some cases, long before. And it must be borne in mind that the town records are entirely missing from 1380 to 1465.
Occupation |
Date of first mention |
Reference in the Borough Records | ||||
| 1. | Tailors | . . | 1466 | Vol. | II. | 363. |
| 2. | Bakers | . . | 1488 | Vol. | II. | 318. |
| 3. | Shoemakers | . . | 1531 | Vol. | III. | 31. |
| 4. | Butchers | . . | 1540 | Vol. | III. | 45. |
| 5. | Smiths | . . | 1540 | Vol. | III. | 44. |
| 6. | Barbers | . . | 1553 | Vol. | III. | 78. |
| 7. | Glovers | . . | 1553 | Vol. | III. | 78. |
| 8. | Coopers | . . | 1553 | Vol. | III. | 78. |
| 9. | Fullers, or Walkers | . . | 1557 | Vol. | III. | 91. |
| 10. | Chandlers | . . | 1558 | Vol. | III. | 89. |
| 11. | Drapers | . . | 1560 | Vol. | III. | 99. |
| 12. | Shearmen | . . | 1560 | Vol. | III. | 99. |
| 13. | Tanners | . . | 1566 | Vol. | III. | 119. |
| 14. | Weavers | . . | 1573 | Vol. | III. | 152. |
| 15. | Ironmongers | . . | 1573 | Vol. | III. | 152. |
| 16. | Cutlers | . . | 1573 | Vol. | III. | 152. |
| 17. | Brewers | . . | 1574 | Vol. | III. | 154. |
The Glovers were not granted an Ordinal in proper form until 1600, but they had an Ordinal in use as early as 1559.
The Brewers' Occupation was established in 1574, when it was agreed at a common hall that "the Brewers shall together become a fellowship or brotherhood and to have certain orders and decrees made amongst them by the consent of the Mayor before the 25th day of March 1575, and then amongst them to appoint Wardens and such other officers as shall be needful, and the same to be ratified and allowed from time to time by the Mayors there." The Master and 2 Wardens were appointed by the Mayor.
Half of the fines which were incurred for breaches of the rules contained in a trade's Ordinal were paid over to the Chamberlains for the Guild Merchant. Entrance fees were also paid to them by the Steward of an Occupation, when members set up their craft. Moreover, the keeping of apprentices was regulated by the governing body of the town. No one, in the 16th century, might keep an apprentice unbound above forty days, and every apprentice had to be enrolled before the Mayor. All persons entering a craft were required to swear the same Oath, which ran thus:—
"I shall truly do and execute all good rules and customs contained and specified within mine Ordinal. I shall be obedient to my Wardens' commandment at all times convenient. I shall truly and duly pay all such duties and forfeits as shall be due within the said Ordinal and all other good rules and customs belonging to the said Ordinal to my knowledge and power I shall maintain and keep. So God me help and all His Saints."
The Occupations appear to have been managed, as a rule, by two Wardens and a Steward. The Oath taken by these officials is thus given by Nichols in its 17th century form:—
"You shall swear truly to observe and keep and of your and every of your parts cause to be observed and kept all the good and lawful rules, ordinances and constitutions contained and specified within this your Ordinal, so far forth as in you is, and by the law of the realm you ought. You shall truly without partiality collect and gather up or cause to be collected and gathered up all and every such fines, pains, penalties, forfeitures and sums of money whatsoever that shall be forfeited, payable or due by any of you, or any of your Occupation, or by any other person or persons whatsoever by reason or force of this your Ordinal; and therefore shall at the end of your year make and yield up in writing a just and true account to all the rest of your said Occupation, or to the most part of them, that shall to that purpose assemble together: and shall also truly without fraud or delay yearly and at the end of your year, or at the furthest within one month before the Chamberlains of the said Borough of Leicester shall make their accounts, pay or cause to be paid to the said Chamberlains of the town, and to the use of the town, the just moiety or one half of all the said fines, pains, penalties, forfeitures and sums of money as shall come to your hands by force of the said Office. These and all other things belonging to your said office and offices you and every of you shall well and truly perform to the best of your power and skill. So help you God."
In the first roll of the Guild Merchant, which dates from 1196, the men who are described as entering the guild were members of more than 50 different callings, a list of which is subjoined.
| Trade. | Description. | Numbers. | |
| 1. | Baker | Pistor, furnur | 15. |
| 2. | Mercer | 9. | |
| 6. | Smith | Faber | 9. |
| 4. | Merchant | Mercator, marcant | 6. |
| 5. | Dyer | Tinctor, brasiler . . | 6. |
| 6. | Cook | Keu, coc | 6. |
| 7. | Parchment-maker | Parcheminer | 5. |
| 8. | Waterman | Aquarius, ouarius | 5. |
| 9. | Forage-merchant | Avenator, avener, plantefene | 5. |
| 10. | Goldsmith | Aurifaber | 4. |
| 11. | Leatherworker | Parmentor | 3. |
| 12. | Cooper | Cuuer | 3. |
| 13. | Miller | Molendarius, muner | 3. |
| 14. | Wheelwright | Rotarius | 3. |
| 15. | Saddler | Seler, paneler | 3. |
| 16. | Farrier | Ferator, ferur | 2. |
| 17. | Carpenter | 2. | |
| 18. | Tanner | Tannator | 2. |
| 19. | Fisher | Piscator | 2. |
| 20. | Butcher | Carnifex | 2. |
| 21. | Hosier | Hoser | 2. |
| 22. | Shoemaker | Corvisor, sutor | 2. |
| 23. | Tavernkeeper | Belhoste | 1. |
| 24. | Tailor | 1. | |
| 25. | Turner | 1. | |
| 26. | Porter | 1. | |
| 27. | Leech | Medicus | 1. |
| 28. | Corder | 1. | |
| 29. | Grassmonger | Gressemonger | 1. |
| 30. | Girdlemaker | Seinter | 1. |
| 31. | Potter | 1. | |
| 32. | Ostler | Stabler | 1. |
| 33. | Granger | 1. | |
| 34. | Woolpacker | Packere | 1. |
| 35. | Woolcomber | Combere | 1. |
| 36. | Cloth-binder | Liur de dras | 1. |
| 37. | Cloth-driver[1] | Pannebetere | 1. |
| 38. | Clothdubber | Dubbere | 1. |
| 39. | Confectioner | Flauner | 1. |
| 40 | Palmer | 1. | |
| 41. | Mason | Macun | 1. |
| 42. | Painter | Pinctor | 1. |
| 43. | Plumber | Plummer | 1. |
| 44. | Hospital Attendant | Spitelman | 1. |
| 45. | Serjeant | Servians | 1. |
| 46. | Chancellor | Cancellarius[2] | 1. |
| 47. | Preacher | 1. | |
| 48. | Clerk | Clericus | 1. |
| 49. | Maltmonger | 1. | |
| 50. | Mustarder | 1. | |
| 51. | Groom, or Squire | Daunsel | 1. |
| 52. | Hallknave | 1. | |
| 53. | Vilein | 1. | |
It will be noticed that the Bakers' trade was more fully represented than any other. No other trade, indeed, was quite so essential to the community; none was so jealously watched nor so stringently governed; and therefore, in order to learn how the Guild Merchant dealt with mediaeval trade, and how the Leicester Occupations were regulated, it may be well to gather some information about this ancient and life-giving fraternity.
For several centuries after the Conquest, the inhabitants of Leicester, who were compelled to grind their corn at the Earl's mills, were obliged also to bake their bread at his ovens. These were situated mainly in that quarter of the town which lay nearest to the Castle. Hot Gate, the "vicus calidus" of the 14th century, is said to have received its name from the genial warmth of the glowing furnaces, and their memory is also preserved in the name of Bakehouse Lane. A Bakers' Row ("rengia Pistorum") is mentioned in the Mayor's Accounts for 1306.
The value attached to bakehouse rights, and the compulsory character of the suit or service by which tenants were bound to bake at their lords' ovens, are illustrated by a document, executed about the year 1200, in which Petronilla, the widow of Robert Blanchmains, and mother of Robert FitzParnel, Earls of Leicester, confirmed a grant of certain land and houses outside the South Gate of Leicester to a namesake of hers, Petronilla, the daughter of Richard, Roger's son, of Leicester. The property included a bakehouse, or oven, (furnus), and the Countess of Leicester gave to Petronilla Rogerson and her children and heirs all the suit of the men outside the South Gate to bake at the bakehouse, with all the liberties and free customs, saving the customary tenants of the Countess who were bound to the bakehouses of the Countess within the town of Leicester, and saving the liberty of the Countess' burgesses outside the said Gate. If Petronilla Rogerson should desire to remove the bakehouse elsewhere upon her lands the Countess granted that they might have suit wherever the bakehouse might be placed on her lands. At the same time a deed in similar terms was made by the Countess' son, Robert FitzParnel, the Earl; and, two or three years later, a like confirmation of the grant was executed by Saher de Quincey, Earl of Winchester, the husband of the Countess' daughter Margaret.
It is not clear whether a burgess could then make an oven of his own, though the reservation of the burgesses' rights in the Countess' grant suggests that this may have been so. No burgess would be allowed to do so, we may be sure, without paying a "furnage" toll to the lord.[3] Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, who was beheaded in 1322, was the owner of six common ovens at Leicester, which were rented at £10 a year ; and John of Gaunt, in his Charter of 1375, thought best to reserve to himself all his bakehouse rights. But the common ovens were sometimes let out at rents which do not seem to have been extortionate. Thus, in the year 1422, a Leicester baker, named Thomas Harding, took from the Duchy of Lancaster a thirty years lease of the common oven outside the North Gate of Leicester at a yearly rental of 20s., the lord undertaking to maintain it in good repair — a very favourable bargain, one would think, for the tenant.
A case which arose at the end of the sixteenth century touching the furnage rights of the Crown, as representing the House of Lancaster, will be referred to later. In the middle of the 14th century, the Earl complained that some burgesses, "who had nothing by which they could be distrained, except their flour in the mill or their bread," claimed that they ought not to be distrained at the mill or the oven, and therefore "caused their flour to be carried away at night from the mill to the oven." It was agreed, however, in 1352, that distress might be levied "as well within houses as without, as well at the mill and at the oven as elsewhere."
Besides the restrictions upon promiscuous baking which were imposed by the lord's monopoly of ovens, the Bakers of Leicester were subject to strict regulations regarding the price and quality of their bread. The Statute for regulating the price of bread throughout the Kingdom by a public assize was passed in 1266, and the Leicester Guild Merchant saw to it that the town bakers obeyed this law. The assize is not mentioned in the published Records until the year 1335, when it was ordained "that the Assize of Bread be kept, that is to say that all bakers shall bake four loaves for a penny of whatever kind of bread, well cooked and well baked, so long as the quarter of wheat is within the price of 4s."
Bakers were fined for selling defective bread, for short weight, and for divers other offences against the assize of bread. They claimed, as a custom, that on the first default they should be fined 1s. 4d., at the second default 2s. 8d., at the third default 5s. 4d., at the fourth that they should be put in the pillory, or pay 40s. These fines were at first collected by the Earl's Stewards for his benefit. Thus, in 1462 a valuation of the lord's perquisites gave the value of the fines against assize of bread at £4 2s. 9d. a year. The fines were sometimes remitted to impecunious or importunate bakers. It was ordained, therefore, in 1352, by agreement between the Counsel of the Lord and the Mayor and good people of the town, that, since the bakers claimed such a custom, and no increase could be charged on bakers who were rich, no remission should be allowed to those who were less rich. The Leicester bakers were indeed dealt with leniently, for in other towns punishments more stringent than fines were enforced. Thus in London fraudulent bakers had to stand in the pillory with lumps of dough round their necks. This is almost as amusing an example of the mediaeval custom of fitting the punishment to the crime as the case of John Penrose, who was accused of selling unwholesome wine to the common people in 1364. Judgment was that he should drink a draught of the same wine which he sold to the common people, and the remainder of the wine should then be poured on his head.
In the year 1352 the assize of bread was taken in October, and the price of wheat was then very high, as a result of the Black Death, and the agricultural depression which immediately followed it. The quarter of best wheat was worth 8s. 6d., of medium 8s., and of the worst 7s. 6d. In the following year the price fell again to 4s., and during the next hundred years it averaged about that price, rising once, in 1362, to 8s. 6d., and in 1364 to as much as 12s.
The weight of the loaf, it should be noted, was measured by the weight of certain coins. "The pound sterling," as it has been said, "was not a coin in mediaeval England, but a weight of metal, coined or otherwise; it is therefore common to find fractions of a pound weight expressed in shillings and pence." Thus an Act of 51 Henry III (1266-7), enacted that "when a quarter of wheat is sold for xii d., then wastel bread of a farthing shall weigh vi pounds and xvi shillings." The weight of the farthing white loaf (at the same price of wheat) was to be vi pounds and xviii shillings; that of the halfpenny white loaf 13 pounds and 16 shillings; that of the halfpenny wheat loaf xx pounds and xiv shillings; and that of the horse-loaf xxvii pounds and xii shillings. So the price of the loaf did not vary, but it purchased a varying weight.
When the price of the quarter of wheat was 4s. a loaf would have to weigh as much as 36 shillings: when the price rose to 6s., the loaf should weigh 22s. 8d.; and when the price was 11s. the loaf was to weigh only 12s. 412d. In 1357 the Guild Merchant ordered that bakers should bake four wastells for a penny, and two wastells for a halfpenny, and also of cocket bread, and similarly of all kinds of bread, under pain of a heavy fine. A century later, in 1467, it was again enacted that all bakers should bake "symnell, wastell, coket lovys,iiii for a penyof good pastegood bulture," (i.e. well-boulted meal) "and well baken and of rynged and of temsed" (sifted) "breed iiii lovys for a peny and of all other kyndes of breed sesonable and of good weyght and pryse after the forme aforsaid and iiii lovys for a peny of hors breed made of clene peyse and benys in his kynde suyng the pryse and weyght."
Wastell, it may be explained, was the best bread. (Old French, 'wastel, gastel, modern, gâteau). Cocket bread was slightly inferior. Simnell, (Old French, simenel), was cake of fine wheaten flour. Horsebread was the common artificial food of horses in the Middle Ages. "The modern dog-biscuit is its nearest equivalent." In 1521 it was ordered that bakers selling horsebread within the houses at Leicester to every guest should sell but two loaves for a penny. In the time of Queen Elizabeth the assize was three loaves a penny, and thirteen penny-worth, (a baker's dozen), for 12 pence, everyone of the three loaves to weigh the full weight of a penny white loaf.
Apart from the quality and price of bread, the mediaeval legislators were concerned (1) to insure supplies, (2) to insure good weight, and (3) to protect the Occupation from outside competition.
(1) Bread might not be sold which had been kept more than a week, and regrators and regratresses who broke this rule, and did not give the loaves back to the bakers, had to pay for all damage incurred by their keeping them. "And let them be right well amerced," said John of Norton, who was Mayor of Leicester in 1323, "if they be attainted of this after our prohibition}}." On the other hand, it was ordered in 1357 that, if it chanced that bread were wanting in the town through the bakers' fault, and if they had their flour in their houses and would not bake it, and this was discovered, that flour was forfeit.
Women who sold bread were ordered to put it in their windows, and not to hide it "in hutches or corners," and not to sell bread with butter or cheese or eggs, but each separately. In 1467 a drastic measure was passed "that the town lack no manner of bread, white nor brown, nor no other kinds of bread, in pain of imprisonment as long as the Mayor likes when the town is breadless." That such measures as this were not uncalled for is shown by a strike of bakers which occurred, a few years after this date, in 1484, at Coventry. The bakers then went to Bakynton, leaving the City destitute of bread, wherethrough "strangers resorting to the city and the inhabitants of the same were unvictualled." They were fined £20, of which £10 was given to them again.
(2) In order to insure good weight, no baker might take bread into the country without first bringing it on horseback to the mayor, or to the Wardens of the Bakers' Occupation to be weighed, "and see whether it be able bread and wholesome for man's body." And, on the other hand, no bread was to be received from the country till seen and weighed before Mr, Mayor or by his officers and by the Wardens of Bakers. Bread in the custody of the bailiffs had to be weighed within the same day or the next " so that it might not dry up too much while in their keeping."
(3) In order to protect the town bakers' Occupation, it was resolved by the Guild Merchant in 1520 that no country baker should bring in bread except on market days, Wednesday and Friday, "and to set down at the High Cross and sell by the 1d. worth or 2d. worth." No foreign bakers were allowed to take bread to customers "on pain of forfeiting their bread to the King, and their bodies to be imprisoned at Mr. Mayor's commandment"; but on Saturdays they might bring it to the Saturday Market, and sell it there. The country bakers were required to take the following oath:— "You shall swear you shall well and truly observe and keep all and everything contained in the three branches in the Bakers' Ordinal and which concerns the Bakers of the country and do and perform all other matters and things as in any sort concern the good orders and rules of the said trade so far forth as concerns you to the best of your knowledge, skill and ability. So help you God."
Bread forfeited under the assize was usually given away to poor people by the Mayor. In the year 1482 it was ordained that the Mayor's brethren should not bake to sell, within their houses or without, on pain of losing their office; but soon afterwards a more excellent way was found. This order was abolished, and a new provision was made, that, if the Mayor or any of his brethren were bakers, and offended against the assize, they should pay double the usual penalty.
Towards the end of the 16th century, a claim made by some Leicester bakers to bake at their own houses bread and cakes, which were not for their own consumption, was resented by the general body of the baking fraternity who used the Crown bakeries. An action was brought in the Court of the Duchy of Lancaster to test the validity of this claim. The case was that one William Becket, who was a common victualler of Leicester, used to bake at the Queen's common bakehouses, but he had also an oven in his own house, at which he was accustomed, "as divers others in that town have done," to bake "pies, pastries, and sometimes spiced bread and cakes." The defendant acknowledged his suit to the Queen's ovens, and the Court of the Duchy ordered that from thenceforth he should bake his bread at the Queen's ovens, and should forbear to bake any spiced bread or cakes, except that he might bake at his own oven such only and so much as the Mayor and Aldermen might give him license to do according to the direction of the Privy Council. Mr. and Mrs. Becket continued their private baking as before, apparently without any such license, and thereby roused the active resentment of the other bakers of the town. Their opposition became so violent, that in April, 1599, two months after the order of court, William Becket went over to Ashby-de-la-Zouch, and laid his case before the powerful Earl of Huntingdon. The Earl took Becket's part, and sent him back to the Mayor of Leicester with the following letter. "Mr. Mayor: I understand by the bearer hereof, William Becket, that he hath been licensed to victual in your town of Leicester, and, for that his wife hath uttered, for the better maintenance of herself and her great charge, some spiced cakes or bread, whereat the bakers have seemed to take exceptions, and thereupon so molested them as thereby they be greatly impoverished; my desire is for the relief of him and his charge, that since it lieth in you to grant him a license to sell and utter such cakes, that you should so permit him to do without any further molestation by them offered: for as I do hear by information that there is an order set down in the Duchy Court that you may make and confirm him a license so to do, and thereby free the poor man from any trouble hereafter by any of them procured, which I would wish you to do for the better relief of him and his great charge. And so I bid you farewell. Ashby the viii April, 1599
Your friend,
George Huntingdon."
The Mayor does not seem to have acceded to the Earl's request. At any rate, in October of the same year, two Judges of the Court of Exchequer and the Attorney of the Council of the Duchy issued an Order, requiring the Mayor and Aldermen "to take such order with the bakers that you and they permit the said Becket to bake such small things as he hath used in your town in his own house, as divers others in that town have done, which in our opinions may be done in some measure, considering how the price of corn is fallen, without prejudice either to your corporation or the said bakers of the said town. Of your accomplishment whereof in some moderate sort we do not doubt." After the receipt of this Order, the Mayor and Corporation summoned Becket and the Bakers before them. Becket then said that, unless he might be suffered to bake such sorts of bread and as much weekly as he had heretofore used, he would "answer them (the Plaintiffs) to the law." The Mayor and his brethren then reported to the Attorney, that, in view of Becket's attitude, they had "taken no order betwixt them," but had "left them to the order of the honourable court of the Duchy." One of the Plaintiff Bakers, Roger Hall, having made an affidavit to the effect that the Defendants had disobeyed the injunction which prohibited them from baking in their houses "spiced cakes, buns, biscuits and such other spiced bread, and to sell the same, (being bread out of assize and not by law allowed)," the Duchy Court made an Order on Jan. 25, 1600, and appointed the ensuing 21st of April for hearing the matter. The case seems, however, to have been settled before that date, on April 3rd, when the bakers agreed that Becket should be allowed to bake spiced bread, &c. one day in the week, upon his undertaking not to bake more than would serve his guests.
The Ordinal of the Leicester Bakers' Occupation has not been preserved, but no doubt it corresponded generally to those of other towns. Its contents may be inferred, in some degree, from the Composition of the Hull Bakers, dated 1598, which is still extant. This ordinance provided in the first place for the government of the company. One Warden and two Searchers were to be chosen yearly, who, on the day after their election, should be sworn before the Mayor, and who should give bonds to the company; and only freemen were to be admitted to the company. Provision was made for the protection of the trade: no innholder or other person within the town not free of the company of bakers might bake any bread for sale, nor for serving their guests; no inhabitant might bake cakes to sell, and no person from outside the town might sell bread within the town except on Market Days, and then only by retail. Offenders were to be fined; and the Warden and Searchers might distrain for such fines, calling in, if necessary, the Mayor's officers. The Bakers undertook to serve the town well with all kinds of bread, and to keep the assize, to pay half the fines to the Mayor and Burgesses and ten shillings yearly for the composition, and not to take apprentices without the consent of the Mayor and the greater part of his brethren. The Warden and Searchers were to come weekly to the Mayor to take their assize to sell by; and the company were to deliver bread to poor women and other of the town to retail the same again, thirteen loaves to the dozen. The Hull Composition was executed by the bakers, and also by the Mayor and Burgesses under their common seal.
It is greatly to be regretted that the account books of the mediaeval Occupations of Leicester have not come down to us. Their testimony to the past life of the town would have been of the highest value. The trading guilds of the Middle Ages, were, as we know, "no mere formal organizations for purposes which ended with the hard toil of the working day." It is highly probable that they developed out of religious guilds. At any rate they were undoubtedly inspired by the same ardent feeling of Christian brotherhood. "The warm blood of the life of the time circulated in them. Their members sat together at the feast, stood by each other's honour in the mart, lived in the same quarter, shared the same purchase, marched side by side in the pageant, acted together in the play, and fought together in the part of the city walls committed to their care. The esprit de corps was as strong among them as among knights of higher rank. Honesty and fair dealing were dear to them, and they followed the bier of the departed, and paid wax for the rest of his soul in peace." Now and then echoes of this ancient life sound faintly in the surviving records of mediaeval Leicester. There is, for instance, the report of a Common Hall which was held on the 26th day of March, 1477, at which the Players who played the Passion Play in the preceding year brought in a bill for certain debts incurred, and asked the Guild Merchant "whether the Passion should be put to the crafts to be bound or nay"; and, at the same time the Players gave to the Pageants all the proceeds of the play up to that time, and all their raiments and all other manner of stuff that they had. The Guild Merchant thereupon chose 21 persons to have the direction of the play. Mr. Kelly thought that this record indicated that at Leicester, as in many other ancient boroughs, such as York and Chester, the Passion Play was acted by players selected from the different crafts or trading guilds. They do not seem however to have had the management of the Play, for this proposal that the crafts should manage it was not accepted, the governing body of the town deciding that it should be managed by a committee of their own, "with two beadles." Whether the crafts of Leicester arranged the Passion Plays or not, they used undoubtedly to get up and present outdoor Pageants on days of High Festival. Nor did the fraternities of trade lag behind the religious guilds in public spirit and generosity. Thus, in the year 1540, the Occupations of Smiths and Butchers and Bakers and Corvisors, or Shoemakers, all subscribed according to their means towards the expense of obtaining Henry VIII's charter of Fairs.
The deep sense of brotherhood which animated the old Leicester Occupations is well brought out by the record which tells how, in the year 153 1, the Warden and Company of Journeymen Shoemakers agreed to pay to the Dominicans or Black Friars ten marks over and above the usual offering duties, to have their prayers; and how, in the following year, it was agreed, before Mr. Nicholas Reynold, then Mayor, by consent of the Wardens and all the Company of Journeymen Shoemakers, that they should give yearly to the Austin Friars in Leicester, for all the brethren and sisters to be prayed for, in ready money 10s., to be paid at two times in the year, besides the offering days before used. Women were not admitted to the Guild Merchant of Leicester, but it appears from this record that the Shoemakers' Occupation admitted both brothers and sisters.
Again, the Occupations acted as Insurance and Friendly Societies for their members, and helped them when they were in distress. Thus, the Articles of the Leicester Glovers' and Fellmongers' Ordinance, which have been preserved, contain the following clause:—
"That if any of the masters' apprentices or dwelling in the said borough fall into poverty or decay by God's visitation, by fire or by sickness, to have relief of such moneys and forfeitures as shall arise to the said occupations at the discretion of the said masters and greater part of the said company."
And the fraternal spirit which inspired the trade crafts of mediaeval Leicester is delightfully indicated by another provision contained in the same Articles:—
"That, at the death and marriage of the said masters' wives, children and servants, upon notice of the beadle, all the said masters, not having reasonable excuse (to be allowed at the next meeting), shall be present, contagious times excepted, on pain for each sixpence."
- ↑ Miss Bateson has panbeater, or Tinker, but a derivation from pannus, cloth, seems more probable.
- ↑ Doering suggests that some names, of which this is one, may be nicknames. This man, however, appears elsewhere as "del canc" i.e. of the Chancery."
- ↑ In the reign of Henry VII burgesses were ceasing to use the Crown ovens and erecting their own. (Records of the Borough of Leicester Vol. II. Introduction xxi., note.)