THE MILLER AND HIS TOLLS.
In old times corn mills were always important factors in manors, and a
source of considerable profit to the lord of the same. All the tenants
of the manor were bound by custom to have their corn ground at the
manor mill, paying a toll to the lord, for the mill was part of his
demesne. The tenants owed suit to the mill in the same manner as they
owed suit and service at the Manor Court. This, however, did not apply
to the grinding or bruising of malt, and there were probably two good
reasons for it—one, that the tenants could perform the operation on
their own premises; and the second, that if it were done at the mill it
would be likely to spoil the flour next ground.
Very many instances of these mills may be given, but one will suffice,
more especially as in this case it was carried down to modern times.
There was at Wakefield, Yorkshire, a corn mill which was a franchise
of the Pilkington family, of Chevel Park, by charters from one of the
Edwards. The monopoly of grinding the corn at this mill was a great
sore to the inhabitants, and the cause of much litigation, but the
holders of the rights always came off the victors. They claimed the
right of grinding not only for the town of Wakefield, but for some
miles round, including the villages of Horbury, Ossett, Newmillardam,
and others; so that all the corn used in this district was obliged
to be ground at the ‘Soke Mill,’ or, as it was otherwise called, the
‘King’s Mill,’ and neither meal nor flour could be sold unless it
were ground there. The tenant of the mill demanded a ‘mulcture’ of
one-sixteenth—that is, out of 16 sacks of corn he kept one for himself
for grinding the other 15.
Some time about 1850 the inhabitants of Wakefield and the adjacent
villages determined to purchase the rights, and this was done by a rate
spread over a series of years, and called the ‘Soke Rate.’ The purchase
money amounted to about £20,000. The same kind of property existed at
Leeds and at Bradford; but from neglect on the part of the owners, and
lapse of time, the inhabitants turned restive and independent, and
‘broke the Soke,’ without compensating the Lords of the Manors. These
mills are still called the King’s Mills.
Nor was this custom confined to England. In Scotland, in feudal
times, it was common for the tenants of a barony to be bound to have
their corn ground at the barony mill. Centuries ago the erection of a
substantial building, with the millstones, driving machinery, and other
plant necessary for a mill, together with the drying-kilns, mill-dams,
lades, weirs, and watercourses requisite for a corn mill involved the
expenditure of a considerable sum of money, such as only the baron
could find. He, therefore, assured himself of a return for his capital
invested by binding his tenants to use his mill. Of course, he got
a good rent for his mill, which was the manner in which the benefit
arising from the bondage of his tenants found its way into his coffers.
Sir James A. Picton, in his _City of Liverpool_ selections from the
municipal archives and records, states that in 1558 the Corporation
of the Borough ordered that ‘every miller, on warning, shall bring
his toll-dish to Mr. Mayor, to a lawful size thereof sealed, under
a penalty of 6d.’ That this toll-taking on the part of millers was
occasionally perverted there can be but little doubt, and it was
sometimes very severely commented on, as we may see in this passage
from a tragedy by Wm. Sampson (1636), called _The Vow-Breaker; or, the
Fair Maid of Clifton_. ‘Fellow Bateman, farewell; commend me to my old
windmill at Rudington. Oh! the mooter dish—[Multure or Toll-dish]—the
miller’s thumbe, and the maide behind the hopper!’
In the Roxburghe ballads (vol. iii., 681) we have The Miller’s Advice
to his _Three Sons in Taking of Toll_:
‘There was a miller who had three sons,
And knowing his life was almost run,
He called them all, and asked their will,
If that to them he left his mill.
He called first for his eldest son,
Saying, “My life is almost run,
If I to you this mill do make,
What toll do you intend to take?”
“Father,” said he, “my name is Jack.
Out of a bushel I’ll take a peck,
From every bushel that I grind,
That I may a good living find.”
“Thou art a fool,” the old man said.
“Thou hast not well learned thy trade.
This mill to thee I ne’er will give,
For by such toll no man can live.”
He called for his middlemost son,
Saying, “My life is almost run.
If I to thee the mill do make,
What toll do you intend to take?”
“Father,” says he, “my name is Ralph.
Out of a bushel I’ll take it half,
From every bushel that I grind,
So that I may a good living find.”
“Thou art a fool,” the old man said;
“Thou hast not learned well thy trade.
This mill to you I ne’er can give,
For by such toll no man can live.”
He called for his youngest son,
Saying, “My life is almost run.
If I to you this mill do make,
What toll do you intend to take?”
“Father,” said he, “I am your only boy,
For taking toll is all my joy.
Before I will a good living lack,
I’ll take it all, and forswear the sack.”
“Thou art my boy,” the old man said,
“For thou has well learned thy trade.
This mill to thee I’ll give,” he cried,
And then he clos’d his eyes, and died.’
To show the popular idea of a miller’s integrity, I may mention that
the children in Somersetshire, when they have caught a certain kind
of large white moth, which they call a _Miller_, chant over it this
refrain:
‘Millery! millery! Dousty Poll!
How many sacks of corn hast thou stole?’
and then they put the poor insect to death on account of its imaginary
misdeeds.
Even Chaucer must have his gird at the miller:
‘The millere was a stout carl for the nones,
Ful byg he was of brawn and eek of bones;
That proved wel, for over al ther he cam
At wrastlygne he wolde have alwey the ram[8].
He was short sholdred, brood, a thikke knarre[9],
There was no dore that he ne wolde heve of harre[10].
Or breke it at a reunying with his head
His berd, or any sowe or fox was reed,
And ther to brood, as though it were a spade
Upon the cope right of his nose he hade
A werte, and ther on stood a toft of herys,
Reed as the brustles of a sowes crys;
His nose thirles[11] blake were and wyde;
A swerd and a bokeler bar he by his syde;
His mouth as greet was as a greet forneys,
He was a janglere and a goliardeys[12],
And that was moost of synne and harlotries,
Wel konde he stelen corne and totten thries[13],
And yet he hadde ‘a thombe of gold’ _pardee_
A whit cote and a blew hood wered he,
A bagge pipe wel konde he blowe and sowne,
And ther with al he broghte us out of towne.’
The ‘thombe of gold’ has somewhat puzzled commentators on Chaucer. One
thing is certain: that a miller has been traditionally credited with a
broad thumb, and the little fish the _Bullhead_ is called _The Millers’
Thumb_, from a fancied resemblance. Every one connected with the navy
knows what the ‘purser’s thumb’ is, from the legend that, when serving
out their tots of rum to the men, his thumb was invariably inside the
measure (doubtless necessitated by the rolling of the old men-of-war),
which resulted in a large profit to himself during a long cruise, and
this seems to illustrate Chaucer’s meaning, especially as it occurs
immediately after the miller’s ill-gotten gains, that by putting his
broad thumb into every measure he made thereby gold during the year.
But there is another and a kindlier explanation of the term, which
rests on the authority of Constable, the painter, according to Yarrell,
in his _History of British Fishes_, when writing of the Bullhead. ‘The
head of the fish is smooth, broad, and rounded, and is said to resemble
exactly the form of a miller’s thumb, as produced by a peculiar and
constant action of the muscles in the exercise of a particular and
most important part of his occupation. It is well known that all the
science and tact of a miller are directed so to regulate the machinery
of his mill that the meal produced shall be of the most valuable
description that the operation of grinding will permit, when performed
under the most advantageous circumstances. His profit or his loss,
even his fortune or his ruin, depend upon the exact adjustment of all
the various parts of the machinery in operation. The miller’s ear
is constantly directed to the note made by the running-stone in its
circular course over the bed-stone, the exact parallelism of their two
surfaces, indicated by a particular sound, being a matter of the first
consequence; and his hand is as constantly placed under the meal spout
to ascertain, by actual contact, the character and qualities of the
meal produced. The thumb, by a particular movement, spreads the sample
over the fingers; the thumb is the gauge of the value of the produce,
and hence have arisen the saying of _worth a miller’s thumb_, and _an
honest miller hath a golden thumb_, in reference to the amount of
profit that is the reward of his skill.’
Any notice of flour would, of course, be valueless without an analysis
of its constituent parts, which, as anyone can understand, will vary in
different wheats; there can be no standard, because of the difference
of the soils on which it grows, a fact which is fully borne out by the
following tables by famous analysts. Jago (_The Chemistry of Wheat,
Flour, and Bread, &c._ Brighton, 1886), quoting Bell, says:—
—-—-——-——————-—+——————————————-——+—————-——+—-——————+—-——————+—-—————-+—-——————
│ │ │ │ │ │Caroline
Constituents. │ Wheat │ Long- │ English│ Maize. │ Rye. │ rice
+—-——————+—-——————+ eared │ Oats. │ │ │ without
│Winter. │Spring. │ Barley.│ │ │ │ husk.
—-—-—-———————-—+—-——————+—-——————+—-——————+—-——————+—-—————-+—-—————-+—-———-——
Fat │ 1·48 │ 1·56 │ 1·03 │ 5·14 │ 3·58 │ 1·43 │ 0·19
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Starch │ 63·71 │ 65·86 │ 63·51 │ 49·78 │ 64·66 │ 61·87 │ 77·66
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Cellulose │ 3·03 │ 2·93 │ 7·28 │ 13·53 │ 1·86 │ 3·23 │ Tr’ces
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Sugar │ │ │ │ │ │ │
(as Cane) │ 2·57 │ 2·24 │ 1·34 │ 2·36 │ 1·94 │ 4·30 │ 0·38
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Albumin, &c. ╮ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
insoluble │ │ 10·70 │ 7·19 │ 8·18 │ 10·62 │ 9·67 │ 9·78 │ 7·94
in Alcohol ╯ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Other ╮│ │ │ │ │ │ │
nitrogenous ││ │ │ │ │ │ │
matter ││ 4·83 │ 4·40 │ 3·28 │ 4·05 │ 4·60 │ 5·09 │ 1·40
soluble in ││ │ │ │ │ │ │
Alcohol ╯│ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Mineral ╮ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
matter ╯ │ 1·60 │ 1·74 │ 2·32 │ 2·66 │ 1·35 │ 1·85 │ 0·28
│ │ │ │ │ │ │
Moisture │ 12·08 │ 14·08 │ 13·06 │ 11·86 │ 12·34 │ 12·45 │ 12·15
—-—-—-———————-—+—-——————+—————-——+—-——————+—-——————+—————-—-+————-——-+—-—-————
Total │ 100·00 │ 100·00 │ 100·00 │ 100·00 │ 100·00 │ 100·00 │ 100·00
—-—-—-———————-—+—-——————+—-——————+—-——————+—————-——+———————-+—————-—-+—-—-————
Professor Graham, in a lecture delivered at the International Health
Exhibition, London, July 3, 1884, quoting Lawes and Gilbert, says:—
—-—-—-—-————————+—-—————+————-——+————-——+————-——+————-——+—-————
Constituents. │ Old │Barley.│ Oats. │ Rye. │ Maize.│ Rice.
│ Wheat.│ │ │ │ │
—-—-———————-—-——+————-——+————-——+—-—————+————-——+—-—————+—-————
│ │ │ │ │ │
Water │ 11·1 │ 12·0 │ 14·2 │ 14·3 │ 11·5 │ 10·8
Starch │ 62·3 │ 52·7 │ 66·1 │ 54·9 │ 54·8 │ 78·8
Fat │ 1·2 │ 2·6 │ 4·6 │ 2·0 │ 4·7 │ 0·1
Cellulose │ 8·3 │ 11·5 │ 1·0 │ 6·4 │ 14·9 │ 0·2
Gum and Sugar │ 3·8 │ 4·2 │ 5·7 │ 11·3 │ 2·9 │ 1·6
Albuminoids │ 10·9 │ 13·2 │ 16·0 │ 8·8 │ 8·9 │ 7·2
Ash │ 1·6 │ 2·8 │ 2·2 │ 1·8 │ 1·6 │ 0·9
Loss, &c. │ 0·8 │ 1·0 │ 0·2 │ 0·5 │ 7·0 │ 0·4
+————-——+—-—————+—-—————+—-—————+—-—————+—-————
Total │ 100·0 │ 100·0 │ 100·0 │ 100·0 │ 100·0 │ 100·0
—-—-—-———————-——+—-—————+————-——+————-——+————-——+————-——+—-————
Messrs. Wanklyn and Cooper (_Bread Analysis, &c._, London, 1881)
say that, according to their analysis, this wheaten flour, which is
the flour commonly to be bought in this country, has the following
composition:—
Water 16·5
Ash 0·7
Fat 1·5
Gluten 12·0
Vegetable Albumen 1·0
Modified Starch 3·5
Starch Granules 64·8
—-—
100·0
A comparison of these tables by well-known analysts shows us, if we
only take the single article of wheat, how the grain varies. Let me now
say something about the constituents of wheat in as simple a form as
possible.
The fat is of a yellow colour, and, as far as is known, is not a
particularly valuable component part; but as all fats are foods, of
course, it is of service.
The starch in wheat is the ordinary starch (of the best kind)
of commerce; and, seeing that it forms the greater part of all
breadstuffs, it naturally is an important element in them. In good,
sound wheat the starch granules are whole; in sprouted wheat, or
that heated by damp, they are rotted, and, consequently, the starch
they contain is changed, more or less, into dextrin and sugar, and,
consequently, a difference is made in the food value of the wheat.
Dextrin and sugar are small components of good wheat. The dextrin, no
doubt, has a beneficial effect in small quantities, but not in large.
Sugar, such as is found in wheat, affords the necessary amount of
saccharine matter for fermentation.
Cellulose is more useful to the plant than to the miller, to whom it is
as so much bran.
There are two kinds of albuminoids, or gluten, present in wheat—one
insoluble, the other soluble in alcohol. The former makes what is
called a ‘strong bread,’ and the latter acts, in bread-making, on the
former, and, under the influence of yeast, it attacks the starch,
converting it into dextrin and maltose.
The ash of wheat contains principally phosphoric acid and potassium;
magnesium ranks next; then lime, silica, phosphate of iron, soda,
chlorine, and sulphuric and carbonic acids.