City of London Livery Companies Commission. Report; Volume 1. Originally published by Eyre and Spottiswoode, London, 1884.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
"To inquire into all the Companies named in the second report of the Commission appointed to inquire into Municipal Corporations in England and Wales, and into the circumstances and dates of the foundation of such Companies, and the objects for which they were founded, and how far those objects are now being carried into effect, and into any Acts of Parliament, charters, trust deeds, decrees of court, or other documents founding, regulating, or affecting the said Companies or any of them."
The "Companies named in the Second Report of the Commission appointed to inquire into Municipal Corporations in England and Wales," are 89 in number, 12 great Companies, 77 minor Companies. Out of these latter (fn. 1) 13 proved to have become extinct since the date of the Municipal Commissioners' Report, while 4 (fn. 2) proved not to be "Livery Companies," and for this reason were outside the purview of our inquiry.
History of the London Companies.
The Mediæval Guilds in which the Companies of London had their origin, present a close analogy to the "collegia opificum" which existed under the Roman Empire. These were associations arising out of the urban life of the period, the primary objects of which were common worship and social intercourse, the secondary objects the protection of the trades against unjust taxes, and their internal regulation. They also served as burial clubs, defraying the expenses of burial and funeral sacrifices for deceased members, in some cases out of legacies left for that purpose. (fn. 3)
It has been suggested that Mediæval Europe reverted to and borrowed this part of the industrial organization of the Roman Empire, but the better opinion appears to be that the mediæval guilds were not a relic of Roman civilization but an original institution. (fn. 4)
Mr. Hallam describes the guilds as (fn. 5) "fraternities by voluntary compact, to relieve each other in poverty and to protect each other from injury. Two essential characteristics belonged to them; the common banquet and the common purse. They had also in many instances a religious, sometimes a secret, ceremonial to knit more firmly the bond of fidelity . . . . . . They readily became connected with the exercise of trades, with the training of apprentices, with the traditional rules of art." A vast number of such fraternities existed throughout Europe during the Middle Ages. Every hamlet had a guild of some kind. In the towns the guilds were very numerous.
The passage cited suggests a classification of the fraternities which has been adopted by subsequent writers. The guilds have been divided into social or religious guilds, and craft guilds. But the guilds of the former class, those which were not industrial corporations, by no means limited their purposes to mutual relief and protection. They showed much public spirit, and undertook public burdens of every kind. The repairing of roads and bridges, the relief of pilgrims, the maintenance of schools and almshouses, the periodical exhibition of pageants and miracle plays, are a few of the objects which they promoted (fn. 6).
(fn. 7) Another community differing from these, but which also was of importance during the middle ages was the "guild merchant." It existed in the towns and was, as compared with the craft guilds, an aristocratic body. The better opinion seems to be that originally the "guild merchant" was an association of the owners of the land on which the town was built, and of owners of estates in the neighbourhood. Many of these patrician families carried on business in the towns, and for a considerable time governed them through the guilds merchant. (fn. 8) Eventually, however, in every case the aristocratic municipality had to give way, though sometimes not till after a long and fierce struggle, to the general body of the citizens as represented by the more plebeian craft guilds. In London the victory of the popular party had become assured as early as the reign of Edward II.
The guilds merchant and the craft guilds were thus the germ of the municipalities of Europe. Speaking of the English communities from this point of view, Mr. Hallam says: (fn. 9) "They are frequently mentioned in our Anglo-Saxon documents, and are the basis of those corporations which the Norman kings recognized or founded. The guild was, of course, in its primary character, a personal association; it was in the state, but not the state; it belonged to the city without embracing all the citizens; its purposes were the good of the fellows alone. But when the good was inseparable from that of their little country, their walls and churches, the principle of voluntary association was readily extended; and from the private guild, possessing already the vital spirit of faithfulness and brotherly love, sprang the sworn community, the body of citizens bound by a voluntary but perpetual obligation to guard each others' rights against the thefts of the weak or the tyranny of the powerful."
According to the Bishop of Chester, who has given the closest attention to the subject of the origin of the municipal institutions of Europe, it is doubtful whether any primitive merchant guild ever existed in London, and the process by which a popular form of local government became established at the period just mentioned is obscure. There is no doubt, however, that some of the corporations which are the subject of this inquiry (some had existed before the Norman conquest), were, to a great extent, the instruments through which the municipal independence of London was achieved. In the following passage this learned historian describes the nature of the municipality of London and the position of the guilds in relation to the municipality:—"During the Norman period, London appears to have been a collection of small communities, manors, parishes, churchsokens, and guilds, held and governed in the usual way: the manors descending by inheritance; the church jurisdictions exercised under the bishop, the chapter, and the monasteries; and the guilds administered by their own officers and administering their own property:—as holding in chief of the King, the lords of the franchises, the prelates of the churches, and even the aldermen of the guilds, where the guilds possessed estates, might bear the title of barons. It was, for the most part, an aristocratic constitution, and had its unity, not in the municipal principle, but in the system of the shire." (fn. 10)
The early returns discovered by Mr. Toulmin Smith present a vivid picture of the state of the social guilds and craft guilds of the provincial towns of England during the fourteenth century. They are the answers of the guilds to an inquisition directed by Richard 2nd and his Parliament sitting at Cambridge in 1388. Two writs were ordered to be issued to the sheriff of each county, the first calling upon "the masters and wardens of all guilds and brotherhoods" (social guilds) to send up to the King's Council all details as to the foundation, statutes, and property of their guilds; the second calling upon the "masters, wardens, and overlookers of all the mysteries and crafts" ( (fn. 11) craft guilds) to send up in the same way copies of their charters or letters patent. These writs are in Latin. The returns are some in Latin, some in Norman-French, some, a majority, in early English. (fn. 11)
(fn. 12) The provincial guilds of England in the reign of Richard 2nd seem to have been associations of neighbours or of members of the same trade which assembled for the purposes of common worship and feasting, and which served—to borrow the language of modern life—as benefit societies and burial clubs. They were also private tribunals for the settlement of disputes, and—the craft guilds—seminaries of technical education.
From the mention of sisters in almost all the returns it may be inferred that women were equally eligible with men for membership, and that they attended the masses specially solemnized for the benefit of the associations, and their banquets.
The number of members varied indefinitely from a very few to 15,000. (fn. 13)
The members met from once to four times a year, either in the guild hall or guild house, if the guild possessed a hall or house, or at the houses of different members in rotation. They arrived clad in a costume or livery, the colour and pattern of which had been selected by the founders. At the meetings officers were appointed, new brethren were admitted, and relief was voted. It does not appear whether all the members were summoned for the transaction of ordinary business or whether the aldermen or wardens and stewards practically themselves managed the affairs of the guilds. After the business was over there was a common meal.
(fn. 14) On the "gild-day," i.e. generally the day of the saint to whom the guild was dedicated (and nearly all the guilds were so dedicated), the brethren and sisters, arrayed in their livery, and carrying candles, went in procession to church to hear mass performed at an altar, the light before which was maintained by the guild. One of the ordinances of many consisted in a special or "bidding" prayer which was said on this occasion, and in some cases at the commencement of all the meetings of the fraternity. After the conclusion of the mass alms were distributed to the poor by the stewards, and the guild returned in procession to their hall to enjoy the chief banquet of the year.
On a more sombre occasion too the brethren and sisters were seen in their livery, viz., at the funerals of members, and at the performance of masses for the repose of the souls of their dead. The guild provided the customary wax lights and the pall.
An entrance fee, a fixed annual payment to the common purse, and dues to the aldermen and officers were the contribution made by members to the funds of the guild. In some guilds each member on joining had to undertake to leave the guild a legacy at his decease. Many such legacies were left to the guilds, chiefly of lands, where the guilds had licences in mortmain, as was commonly the case. Usually these legacies were coupled with a condition that an obit should be annually performed for the soul of the testator. The guilds themselves also invested their savings in lands. Many of them by these means became large holders of real property.
The incomes of all the guilds were up to a certain point expended in much the same way. The maintenance of the hall, the expense of the feasting, the payment of salaries, the relief of poor members, and of the widows and orphans of poor members, the finding of portions for poor maids, and the payments for funerals and obits were the first purposes to which the common funds were applicable. The funds of the craft guilds were secondarily applicable to trade purposes, such as the binding of apprentices, loans to young men starting in business, the purchase of new receipts and inventions, and the prevention of adulteration. Both the social and craft guilds also relieved the poor, supplied the place of highway boards and bridge authorities, maintained churches, endowed schools colleges and hospitals, and exhibited pageants, partly out of legacies partly with the contributions of existing members.
The rules of all the bodies were such as to inculcate respect for the law, commercial honesty, and a high standard of conduct, together with kindness and consideration for the brethren and sisters, and for the poor. They also breathe a spirit of very simple piety.
The urban craft guilds were subject to the jurisdiction of the municipal authorities. Their regulations were liable to be declared void if inconsistent with the franchises and liberties of the towns, and the mayors and town councils frequently issued precepts to them with respect to the hours of labour, the methods of manufacture, the education of apprentices, and the mutual relations of the different trades.
The guilds of Norman London mentioned in the italicized parts of the above extract from the work of the Bishop of Chester, were voluntary associations, precisely similar to those provincial guilds which made the returns above analyzed. They have had a double history, (1) a history in connection with the municipality of London, (2) a domestic history, as industrial, mercantile, and charitable corporations.
1. By the time of Edward II., the government of London had assumed, partly in consequence of the terms of the City's charters, partly as the result of civic revolutions, a popular form, composed of both Anglo-Saxon and Norman elements, and substantially indentical with the present constitution of the municipality. The old manorial jurisdictions had been swept away, a civic court of law had been established, and the servile tenures had been replaced by "free burgage," the urban analogue of the rural free soccage. (fn. 15)
(fn. 16) The craft guilds of London, which appear by this time to have absorbed the "Knighten guild" and other similiar bodies, represented the popular party in the contest, and in the result, substituted themselves, though for a short time only, for the wards as the constituent parts of the municipality. The trades had at this time in many cases their recognized quarters in the City, so that the temporary substitution of the bodies which represented them for the wards still left the representation local. This arrangement, however, lasted only till the next reign, when the machinery of the wards, which survive to the present day, was revived, with the differences consequent upon the abolition of all feudal or semi-feudal privileges.
It is, as we conceive, no part of the duty which we owe to your Majesty under the terms of your Majesty's Commission, to dissect the strange and composite constitution of the municipality which was thus founded. That subject has been dealt with by the Municipal Commission which was appointed by your Majesty's Royal predecessor King William IV. in 1834, and by the City of London Commission which was appointed by your Majesty in 1854, and is at present under the consideration of your Majesty's Government.
It is only necessary that we should here state that (1) at the present day, notwithstanding the entire alteration in the constitution of the companies of London, which is herein-after described, and notwithstanding the recommendations of the two abovementioned Commissions, the body called in those reports the "Common Hall," and which is composed of members of the present Livery Companies, continues, jointly with the Court of Aldermen, to elect the Lord Mayor and certain other civic functionaries; and that (2) from the time mentioned, which is five centuries ago, up to the year 1835, membership of a city company continued to be a condition precedent to the full citizenship of the City of London.
2. As regards the domestic history of the companies as industrial mercantile and charitable corporations, the early part is, according to the Bishop of Chester, (fn. 17) who has carefully studied all the extant information, as difficult and obscure as the early part of their municipal history. He believes that their present constitution, which is herein-after described as involving three grades of membership, the court or governing body electing itself by co-optation, the livery, and the simple freemen, was a departure from their original constitution, which may have involved a greater measure of equality. The returns, though the archæological portions of several of them are valuable, throw no light on this subject. The probability, however, seems to be, that their present constitution, one obviously of great advantage to the Courts, has existed since considerably before the reign of Edward III., in which, as it is well known, they received their first charters. The distinction between the "twelve great" and the minor companies seems to be of about equal antiquity.
A craftsman, a member of the Mercers' guild, became Mayor in 1214, and before the end of the thirteenth century, the Mayors were always members of the craft guilds, particularly (1) of the Mercers', Grocers,' and Goldsmiths' Companies, which were no doubt from the earliest times full of wealthy merchants and shipowners; and (2) of Companies such as the early Woolstaplers' and Sheermens' guilds which represented the trade in wool and cloth. (fn. 18)
About a century after this period, having regard to the fact that the head men of the guilds were generally aldermen of the corporation, and that the corporation exercised, as Mr. Riley's collections show, a minute supervision over the trade and manufactures of London, we regard the companies as having become in effect a Municipal Committee of trade and manufactures. (fn. 19)
Soon after they had arrived at this position they were incorporated, and thereupon became, in our judgment, while retaining their position under the municipality, an institution in the nature of a State Department for the superintendence of the trade and manufactures of London.
In saying this, however, we do not forget the facts that the charters granted frequently recognise (fn. 20) a religious character in the guilds, and that among the corporate franchises banquets are in several instances enumerated. Also the terms of several of these instruments refer to the relief of the poor members of the guilds in such way as to show that a main object of the incorporation and of the grant of power to hold land in mortmain was the maintenance of almshouses.
For instance the preamble of the Mercers' charter is as follows: "In consideration that several men of the mystery of mercery of the City of London (fn. 21) often by misfortunes of the sea and other unfortunate casualties have become so impoverished and destitute that they have little or nothing in consequence to subsist on unless from the alms and assistance of the faithful."
The Grocers' charter grants to the wardens and commonalty of the mystery that they may "acquire lands" in the City and its suburbs "to the value of twenty marks per year, to have and hold to them and their successors towards the support of the poor men of the said commonalty."
The Goldsmiths' charter recites that "many persons of that trade by fire and the smoke of quicksilver had lost their sight and that others of them by working in that trade became so crazed and infirm that they were disabled to subsist but of relief from others; and that divers of the said city compassionating the condition of such were disposed to give and grant divers tenements and rents in the said city to the value of twenty pounds per annum to the company of the said craft towards the maintenance of the said blind, weak, and infirm."
The tenure in time became "free burgage." as herein-before described. An incident of this tenure, and an important one as regards the Companies of the City, was that it supplied the means of going beyond licences in mortmain. By the custom of the City, public bodies could accept lands held by citizens in free burgage and devised to them while so held without any limitation as to amount. The Companies appear to have become large purchasers of lands under the fiction of holding them by devise in free burgage. A Company found the money and had the land purchased and conveyed to trustees in trust to convey it to some one person in trust to devise it to the company by his will. The association then obtained the purchased land under the will of the nominee of their nominees (fn. 22).
Legacies for religious and benevolent purposes, some internal, some external, were early bequeathed to the guilds of London. The large trust estate, which is herein-after described, dates from the 14th century. It for some time constituted, in conjunction with the monastic and parochial endowments of the City, an organization of eleemosynary and educational charity, which was of great importance in the absence of a poor law and State education.
The works of the Bishop of Chester, Mr. Green, and Mr. Froude, illustrate the industrial and mercantile history of the Companies down to the Tudor period. By their charters and byelaws, and also by grants from the municipality of London, between the Crown and which there was much jealousy, the Companies obtained (1) monopolies, and (2) powers of search. They assumed to prevent non-members from trading and manufacturing, and they visited shops, manufactories, and houses for the purpose of testing wares, which were required by Act of Parliament, municipal precepts, or their own private regulations, to be of a certain standard or quality. They also enforced a strict system of seven years' apprenticeship.
London was during all this time a great manufacturing town, in or near which clothworking, the smelting of iron, the making of armour and bows, the working of silk and leather, the manufacture of the precious metalś, and other minor industries were practised with much success. It was also the chief port of Northern Europe, and as all the merchants of the staple were members of the guilds, and corresponded with the merchants of the staple in the provincial towns and on the continent, there can be little doubt that the halls of the guilds were practically exchanges. The leading members seem also to have given advice to the Privy Council as to the mercantile policy of the Crown.
Throughout the period, the State and the Municipality sought to regulate not only the manufactures and commerce of London, but also the wages, habits, and even the dress of the citizens to a degree not always consistent with personal liberty, and this system of statutes and precepts was to a great extent administered through the agency of the Companies. Artizans and tradesmen who made or sold bad articles were tried by the wardens, and if found guilty, were punished by the civic power, or occasionally by distresses levied by the Companies themselves.
As early, however, as the reigns of Edward III. and Richard II., in which the first charters are dated, the mediæval theory of status as the basis of the relations of master and servant and of employer and employed was being gradually undermined as villeinage disappeared, and the reformation began to make progress. From the time of their incorporation, therefore, the guilds, which had their origin in an earlier conception of society, appear to have excited the hostility of the artizans of London (fn. 23) (fn. 24). It is also obvious that the constitution of the guilds was only suited to a limited area, to the inspection of factories and shops in one street or one quarter, so that the spread of London beyond its walls and the growth of the great suburbs, particularly those of Westminster and Southwark, must have seriously interfered with their efficiency as superintendents of production. The later charters generally extend the local limits of the trade control, in order to meet this difficulty (fn. 25). Moreover the monopolies and the power of search which the guilds derived from the Crown or the Municipality, were of doubtful legality, and therefore liable to be resisted. (fn. 26)
These causes, probably from the earliest times, seriously crippled the guilds in the capacity of a State Department and Municipal Committee, which we have ventured to attribute to them. By the commencement of the Tudor period, in the opinion of Mr. Froude, as given in the early pages of his history, they had become, to a great extent, an obsolete institution as regards trade superintendence.
They continued to receive charters at the beginning of every reign for a long time after this date. Indeed, similar bodies were founded in the provinces as late as the time of Charles II., (fn. 27) and the term of apprenticeship sanctioned by the London and provincial guilds, viz., seven years, was adopted in an Act of 1662, which was not repealed till 1814. (fn. 28)
Their attendance at Bartholemew and Southwark fairs was in some instances not discontinued till a comparatively recent time, and, besides those statutable chartered or customary functions which are herein-after mentioned, there were some privileges, such as the charge of the City Beam by the Grocers' Company, and the superintendence of Blackwell Hall by the Drapers' Company, which were continued after the guilds had ceased to represent the trade and commerce of London. The date at which they definitely ceased to do so, may be fixed at the Restoration.
For a long time, however, after this period, these bodies were an important element in the City. The wealthy bankers, merchants, and shipowners who traded in the City had houses there, and belonged to the Companies. The commencement of the present century is the approximate date of the cessation of the connection of the Companies in this respect with the City.
Some of our number consider it important to state what is undoubtedly the fact, that during the Plantagenet and Tudor periods, and during those of the Rebellion, the Commonwealth and the Restoration, the Companies, probably because they constituted a convenient division of the citizens for purposes of taxation, were forced to contribute large sums to the national exchequer, chiefly for the purpose of defraying the expenses of wars, and that, under a custom of the City which has long been obsolete, they were at one time bound to lend money to the municipality with which to purchase corn and coals for the poor in times of scarcity.
(1.) In the course of the suppression of the religious houses, many lands held by the Companies to superstitious uses, such as the performance of masses for the dead, and the maintenance of chauntries, were confiscated. The Companies were, however, allowed to redeem the lands, on a representation that they were required for the purposes of the eleemonysary and educational charities of which they were trustees. (fn. 29)
(2.) The halls, almshouses, and house property of the Companies suffered severely in the fire. Its effects for a time greatly impoverished them, and large sums were raised by the governing bodies for rebuilding.
The growth of the great estate which is hereinafter described, has been gradual ever since the twelfth century. The Companies have been purchasers of land in the City of London and elsewhere under licences in mortmain, or the custom above referred to and many hundreds of legacies of land, or of money to be converted into land, have been left to them for charitable purposes. Their wealth has probably increased with each century, but the chief increase has no doubt taken place during the present century, and as a consequence of the great recent rise in the value of house property in the City of London.
It is right that we should here state that for many centuries with rare exceptions the Companies have never consisted exclusively of craftsmen. Patrimony, which causes the freedom of a company to descend to all the lawful issue, male and female, of a freeman, has always been a recognized mode of admission. (fn. 30)
It has been suggested to us that these corporations, by their power of admitting to their "freedom," were one of the causes of the disappearance of villeinage. There is no doubt that the custom of the towns by which freedom was obtained by means of residence for a year and a day within the walls was along with manumission and the growth of the copyhold tenure an instrument of enfranchisement, and that this custom obtained in London; but the Bishop of Chester, whom we have consulted, is of opinion that the influence exercised by the Companies of London was not in this respect considerable.
Provincial and Continental Guilds.
(1.) It is certain that of the 40,000 communities which are alleged to have existed in the provincial towns and rural districts of England during the middle ages, only a very few survive. Many were of course monasteries, nunneries or chauntries; these were suppressed, and their lands were confiscated at the Reformation. Many again, though not altogether clerical institutions, for instance, schools or hospitals, were so connected with the dissolved orders or had so much property settled to superstitious uses, that they perished along with the monasteries. (fn. 31) But there can be no doubt that a considerable number survived the Reformation.
The Bishop of Chester, speaking of these provincial bodies and of the action of the Government at the Reformation, says, that "the confiscation of the guild property together with the hospitals, was one unquestionable cause of the growth of town pauperism. The extant regulations and the accounts show how this duty was carried into effect; no doubt there was much self-indulgence and display, but there was also effective relief; the charities of the great London companies are a survival of a system which was once in full working order in every market town."
The Bishop of Chester is no doubt right in saying that the loss of the land settled to superstitious uses seriously injured the provincial companies; but it does not appear that all the property of the guilds in these towns was confiscated, (fn. 32) and there is evidence that one company at least was allowed to redeem confiscated lands (fn. 33) in the same way as the City companies redeemed theirs. Their halls also are not likely to have been held to superstitious uses.
In the histories of some of the old towns of England, an account, though not a full one, is to be found of their early guilds. We have caused these to be examined in the cases of (1) Bristol, (2) Coventry, (3) Newcastle-on-Tyne, (4) Norwich, (5) York.
In these five towns there existed upwards of 150 guilds, corporations exactly in every way resembling the London Companies, and some of them, such as the Merchants' Company of York, the Merchant Adventurers' Company of Newcastle, the Merchant Adventurers' Company of Bristol, and the guild of St. George of Norwich, bodies of great dignity and opulence. These guilds have all disappeared, except the Merchant Adventurers' Company of Newcastle, the Merchant Adventurers' Company of Bristol, which has, at this day, a large amount of house property at Clifton, and a few insignificant companies containing only a few members.
There are traces in the local histories (fn. 34) of the existence of many of these bodies up to a period long after the Reformation, indeed, till the middle of the last century, or later, (fn. 35) of sales by them of their halls, (fn. 36) of transferences of their almshouses, (fn. 37) and of sales of their estates, particularly houses, (fn. 38) as the number of members decreased.
We assume that the surviving members divided the proceeds of these sales, as, according to the view of the law which is taken by some authorities, they were entitled to do, unless they held the property subject to some trust. A similar course has been taken in London by Serjeants' Inn, Doctors' Commons, and Clement's Inn. So too the few surviving members of one of the ancient guilds of Newcastle recently obtained an order from the Master of the Rolls to divide the remaining property and dissolve the association.
These were cases in which there was no trust estate; but many corporations, which were trustees of charities appear to have dissolved without making provision for the future maintenance of their charities. (fn. 39)
It seems not improbable that some of the London guilds may have been thus dissolved. We have been informed that at the time of the revival of the Needlemakers' Company, the number of members had become very small, and that, but for the influx of new members, the survivors might have divided the assets. But we have not met with any actual instance of a London Company so dissolving itself.
(2.) We have obtained information through the Foreign Office and otherwise as to the history of the guilds of France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Norway, Sweden, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Russia, and Turkey.
Two learned archæologists, Mons. Pigeonneau, Professor at the Sorbonne, and Mons. Levasseur of the French Institute, have been kind enough to send us interesting communications on the subject of the French guilds. These gentlemen, like the English and German antiquarians, adopt the classification of the mediæval companies into merchant guilds, of which they choose the Parisian company of Mercers as an example, and craft guilds. We learn from them that all such bodies in France were suppressed during the third year of the Revolution, 1791. They had existed from a period prior to the 12th century. They were reorganised by Colbert in 1673, and their suppression was attempted by Turgot prior to the Revolution, during his short ministry in 1776. They were very numerous. At the Revolution, 50 still existed in Paris. They possessed halls, almshouses, and chapels, but not much other real property. Their funds consisted chiefly of accumulations of dues and fines, and during the eighteenth century they had become impoverished. At their suppression, their property was devoted to State purposes, but compensation was in some instances paid to existing members. Patrimony appears to have entered, though to a limited extent, into the composition of the French guilds.
In Belgium the guilds were suppressed, and their property was confiscated, during the French Revolution in 1794. (fn. 40)
In the Netherlands the trade guilds were suppressed in 1798; their property was vested in commissioners. In 1820 the municipalities were directed to sell the property and hold it in trust for the relief of indigent members of the suppressed corporations and for that of the poor of the communes. (fn. 41)
In Switzerland many of the trade guilds still exist under the names of "abbayes" or "zünfte," and have, especially, it is believed, at Berne, considerable real property. Some have dissolved, either dividing the estate among the survivors, or applying it to public purposes, particularly education. (fn. 42)
In Germany, under the "Gewerbe-Ordnung" of 1869, an Act depriving the ancient guilds of their privileges, placing them under communal or state control, and rendering them incapable of acquiring land without the consent of the communal authority, the communities began rapidly to disappear. An Act of 1878 reversed the policy of the "Gewerbe-Ordnung," and in 1881 an Act was passed for the encouragement of the guilds. They have now power "to create industrial schools, to make rules for advancing the technical education of masters and journeymen, to establish a system of examinations, to create tontine and sick and invalid funds, and to appoint tribunals of arbitration." (fn. 43)
In Austria-Hungary the "Innungen" (trade guilds) were abolished, and their monopolies were repealed by a law of 1859. The Act establishes in their stead "Genossenschaften" local bodies, representing the master manufacturers and the journeymen—bodies apparently in the nature of trade councils and tribunals of arbitration, and having in some cases technical schools attached to them. The Act provides for the sale of the halls of the "Innungen" and for the payment of the proceeds, after payment of the debts of the suppressed bodies, to the Genossenschaften. (fn. 44)
In Norway and Sweden the old trade corporations, which are described as having been a serious drawback to the development of the native industries, were dissolved in 1846. (fn. 45)
In Italy, (fn. 46) the ancient guilds, with a few exceptions, were abolished during the present century, before the union of the kingdom. After the union in 1878 and 1879 Acts were passed abolishing all monopolies, but in these Acts provision is made for the regulation of certain trades by the municipalities, and for "institutions of mutual assistance," i.e., benefit societies in connection with such trades. (fn. 47)
In Spain many of the mediæval craft guilds, "Gremios," still exist. Their rules as to apprenticeship were cancelled in 1836, but they were not dissolved, and still survive as benefit societies and trade councils. They possess halls or houses of meeting, but no other real property. (fn. 48)
In Portugal the craft guilds were suppressed in 1834. They appear to have possessed little real property. (fn. 49)
In Russia and Turkey, two backward countries, there are at the present day many institutions resembling the craft guilds of the middle ages. (fn. 50)
Present condition of the London Companies.
Thus while in the provinces of England the craft guilds have almost disappeared, and while many of those on the Continent have been suppressed or reorganized by the State, the guilds of London have continued in existence, and have never been interfered with in any way by the Legislature (except indeed as regards the appointment of the Charity Commission and of the Endowed Schools Commission, to which we hereafter refer). The condition in which, with few exceptions, they have been allowed to continue in existence, apart from the administration of their trusts, has been, at all events for the last two centuries, that of societies, in some instances very richly endowed, the only purposes of which have been entertainments and benevolence.
It has been suggested to us that the Companies' charters, which seem to contemplate a continuous connection between the guilds and their trades, might be cancelled by process of law, on the ground of the cesser of this connection; but we are advised, and we should be surprised if it were otherwise, that the trade franchises, i.e., the monopolies and powers of search, are separable from the other corporate franchises, and that, although it might be possible for the Crown to seize the former in an action of Quo Warranto, the non-user of them at the present time would not be held to avoid the charters altogether, and the incorporation of the Companies as social communities and benefit societies under their more recent charters would be held to continue good.
Statutable and customary present powers of the Companies.
As regards powers conferred by statute upon the Companies or at present exercised by them by virtue of custom or in reliance on the terms of their charters, we humbly report to Your Majesty as follows:
1. The Fishmongers' Company, relying on its charters but without authority by any statute, appoints and pays "fish meters" who attend at Billingsgate Market, examine the fish offered for sale there, and condemn any which may be proved to be unsound. The company defrays the expense of deodorizing and removing the fish thus condemned.
The Fishmongers' Company also discharges the duty of prosecuting offenders against the provisions of "The Fisheries (Oyster, Crab, and Lobster) Act," 40 & 41 Vict. c. 42., with respect to the sale of undersized fish or of fish during "close time."
2. The Goldsmiths' Company, under the Acts 12 Geo. 2. c. 26. (an Act obtained at the instance of the company themselves) and 7 & 8 Vict. c. 22, are empowered to assay and mark plate, and to prosecute persons who in any part of England sell plate requiring to be marked which is below standard or who forge the company's marks or utter wares bearing counterfeit marks.
Also under the Coinage Act of 1870 provision is made for an annual trial of the pyx, and this trial, in accordance with a practice which has prevailed since the reign of Edward 1st, takes place at the Goldsmiths' Hall.
3. The freemen of the Vintners' Company who have become such by patrimony or by apprenticeship, and the widows of such freemen, enjoy by custom the right of selling foreign wines without a licence throughout England.
5. The Society of Apothecaries have powers under the Apothecaries Act, 1815, and the Apothecaries' Act Amendment Act, 1874, to examine candidates for licences to practise as apothecaries, to confer such licences, and to recover penalties from persons so practising without licence.
The society also maintains extensive chemical and pharmaceutical laboratories in connection with its hall, and keeps up a botanical garden in Chelsea, in respect of which it employs a botanical demonstrator to give instruction in botany.
7. The Gunmakers' Company has a proof house in London, and has powers under the Gun Barrel Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 113.) for enforcing the proving and marking of guns, pistols, and small arms, and the prosecution of offenders against the Act.
8. The Scriveners' Company, under the Act 41 Geo. 3. c. 69. s. 13., conducts an examination for admission to the office of a notary, and can prevent any person practising as such who has not passed such examination.
9. The Stationers' Company, which consists exclusively of craftsmen, maintains a register of all publications under the authority of the Copyright Act of 1842. This Company also carries on in its corporate capacity the trade of a publisher, its principal publications being Almanacs.
The [Eranoi]] and [Phiasoi]] of the Greeks, which have been compared to the mediæval guilds, were distinctly religious communities, not in any way craft guilds, as is shown by Professor Newton, of the British Museum, from the evidence of inscriptions in his "Essays on Archæology," pp. 170, 171.