THE ’PRENTICE
This chapter is inserted in the Tudor period because the ’Prentice in
that century arrived at the height of his power and importance, chiefly
as a disturber of the peace. The following pages sum up the regulations
on the subject from the fifteenth to the eighteenth century, both
inclusive.
The importance of the apprentice system caused many ordinances and
regulations to be passed from time to time. Thus in 1406 no persons
were allowed to put out their children as apprentices who had not
land to the value of 20 shillings a year, a regulation intended, in a
populous town, to keep up the _status_ of trades and crafts. The Act
was, however, found impossible to work, and was repealed in 1429 “to
the great satisfaction of the citizens.” Later on, in 1486, another
attempt was made to restrict the Freedom of the City, and to keep out
“mean and improper” persons by an ordinance that no apprentice should
be taken nor freedom given except to such as were “gentlemen born”—this
is Maitland’s statement—“agreeable to the clause in the oath given
to every freeman at the time he was made free, in these words, ‘Ye
shall take none apprentice but if he be freeborn: that is to say, no
Bondman’s son, nor the son of any alien.’” It does not appear, however,
from the oath, that the freeman was required to be a gentleman unless
every freeborn person is a gentleman. How could a blacksmith or a
journeyman saddler be a gentleman?
In 1527 the Common Council passed a stringent rule as to the treatment
of Apprentices:—
“‘If hereafter any Freeman or Freewoman of this City take any
Apprentice, and within the Term of seven Years suffer the same
Apprentice to go at his large Liberty and Pleasure; and within or
after the said Term agree with his said Apprentice for a certain Sum
of Money, or otherwise, for his said service, and within or after the
End of the said Term, the said Freeman present the said Apprentice to
the Chamberlain of the City, and by good Deliberation, and upon his
Oath made to the same City, the same Freeman or Freewoman assureth and
affirmeth to the said Chamberlain, that the said Apprentice hath fully
served his said Term as Apprentice: Or if any Freeman or Freewoman of
this City take any Apprentice which at the Time of the said taking hath
any Wife: Or, if any Freeman or Freewoman of this City, give any Wages
to his or her Apprentice, or suffer the said Apprentices to take any
Part of their own Getting of Gains: Or if any Freeman or Freewoman of
this City hereafter colour any foreign Goods, or from henceforth buy or
sell for any Person or Persons, or with or to any Person or Persons,
being foreign or Foreigners, Cloths, Silks, Wine, Oils, or any other
Goods or Merchandize, whatsoever they be, whether he take any Thing or
Things for his or their Wages or Labour, or not: Or if any Person or
Persons being Free of this City, by any Colour or deceitful Means, from
henceforth do buy, sell, or receive of any Apprentice within this City,
any Money, Goods, Merchandize, or Wares, without the Assent or Licence
of his Master or Mistress; and upon Examination duly proved before the
Chamberlain of the said City for the Time being, and the same reported
by the Mouth of the said Chamberlain, at a Court to be holden by the
Mayor and the Aldermen of the same City in their Council-Chamber: That
as well the said Master, as the said Apprentice, shall for evermore be
disfranchised. _God save the King!_’” (Maitland, vol. i. pp. 229–230.)
To which was added an admonition to the Apprentices:—
“‘Ye shall constantly and devoutly on your Knees, every Day, serve God,
Morning and Evening, and make Conscience in the due Hearing of the Word
preached, and endeavour the right Practice thereof on your Life and
Conversation. You shall do diligent and faithful Service to your Master
for the Time of your Apprenticeship, and deal truly in what you shall
be trusted. You shall often read over the Covenants of your Indenture,
and see and endeavour yourself to perform the same, to the utmost of
your Power. You shall avoid all evil Company, and all Occasions which
may tend to draw you to the same; and make speedy Return when you shall
be sent of your Masters and Mistresses Business. You shall be of fair,
gentle, and lowly Speech and Behaviour towards all Men, and especially
to all your Governors. And according to your Carriage, expect your
Reward, for Good or Ill, from God and your Friends.’” (Maitland, vol.
i. p. 230.)
The history of “Evil May Day” (p. 24) is an illustration of the growing
turbulence of the ‘Prentices and the relaxation of order and discipline
in the City generally. The wards, in fact, had become too thickly
populated for the old and simple rule of a peripatetic alderman and
his sergeants: the turbulence was a sign of their weakness; yet three
hundred years were to pass before an efficient night and day police
could be established as the only remedy.
In the year 1582 an ordinance concerning the apparel of the ‘Prentice
shows still more clearly that he was getting out of hand. It was
enacted by the Lord Mayor and Common Council:—
“That from henceforth no Apprentice whatsoever should presume: 1. To
wear any Apparel but what he receives from his Master. 2. To wear no
Hat within the City and Liberty thereof, nor any thing instead thereof,
than a Woollen Cap, without any Silk in or about the same. 3. To wear
no Ruffles, Cuffs, loose Collar, nor other thing than a Ruff at the
Collar, and that only of a Yard and a half long. 4. To wear no Doublets
but what were made of canvas, Fustian, Sackcloth, English Leather, or
Woollen Cloth, and without being enriched with any manner of Gold,
Silver, or Silk. 5. To wear no other coloured Cloth, or Kersey, in Hose
or Stockings, than White, Blue, or Russet. 6. To wear little Breeches,
of the same Stuffs as the Doublets, and without being stitched, laced
or bordered. 7. To wear a plain upper Coat of Cloth or Leather, without
Pinking, Stitching, Edging or Silk about it. 8. To wear no other
Surtout than a Cloth Gown or Cloak, lined or faced with Cloth, Cotton
or Bays, with a fixed round Collar, without Stitching, Guarding, Lace
or Silk. 9. To wear no Pumps, Slippers, nor Shoes, but of English
Leather, without being pinked, edged or stitched, nor Girdles nor
Garters, other than of Crewel, Woollen, Thread or Leather, without
being garnished. 10. To wear no Sword, Dagger, or other Weapon, but a
Knife; nor a Ring, Jewel of Gold, nor Silver, nor Silk in any Part of
the Apparel.
It was likewise further enacted, That every Apprentice offending
against any of the above-mentioned items, was for the first offence
to be punished at the discretion of his Master; for the second to be
publicly whipped at the Hall of his Company; and for the third to serve
six months longer than specified in his indentures. And every Master
conniving at the crimes of his Apprentice committed against the tenor
of the premises, should, for every such offence, forfeit to the poor
of the parish wherein he dwelt six shillings and eightpence. It was
also farther ordained, That no Apprentice should frequent, or go to any
dancing, fencing, or musical schools; nor keep any chest, press, or
other place for the keeping of apparel or goods, but in his Master’s
House, under the penalties aforesaid. And every such Master permitting
or allowing his Apprentice to offend in any of the said cases, to
forfeit as in the case of forbidden apparel.” (Maitland, vol. i. p.
267.)
Maitland, after praising this wise ordinance, laments that in his time,
the middle of the eighteenth century, there could not be some such good
law passed to restrain the “more destructive practices of our modern
Apprentices,” viz. keeping mistresses, keeping horses, frequenting
tavern clubs and playhouses, and “their great excesses in clothes,
Linen, periwigs, gold and silver watches, etc.” He does not tell us
where they got the money for these expensive luxuries, but in the
_Confession of Latroun Meriton_ (1650) the way is fully explained: it
was, namely, by robbing their masters. In the year 1595 there were more
troubles caused by the ’Prentices. The Queen ordered sharp measures to
be taken:—
“‘And because such Assemblies and Routs were compounded of sundry Sorts
of base People; some known Apprentices, such as were of base manual
Occupations; some others, wandering idle Persons, of Condition, Rogues,
and Vagabonds; and some colouring their wandering by the Name of
Soldiers returning from the Wars, etc., therefore she had notified her
Pleasure to her Council, to prescribe certain Orders to be published
in and about the said City, which she would have streightly observed;
and, for that Purpose, that she meant to have a Provost-Marshal, with
sufficient Authority to apprehend all such as should not be readily
reformed and corrected by the ordinary Officers of Justice, and them
without Delay to execute upon the Gallows by Order of Martial Law. At
our Manor of Greenwich, the 4th of July, 1595.’” (Maitland, vol. i. pp.
278–279.)
Sir Thomas Welford, accordingly, was appointed Provost-Marshal. He
patrolled the streets with a number of horsemen armed with pistols: he
arrested many of the rioters, who were tried at the Guildhall. Five of
them were executed on Tower Hill, and the rioting ceased.
Of the Apprentices’ riot against the Spanish Ambassador in 1641 we have
heard in another place (_London in the Time of the Stuarts_, p. 38).
The Lord Mayor had a good deal of trouble in appeasing the Ambassador,
who said that he “hardly knew how to call that a City or even a Society
of rational creatures which was seemingly divested both of Humanity and
Government.”
At the outbreak of Civil War the ’Prentices were on the side of the
Parliament and enjoyed many opportunities of demonstrating their
views and opinions, not only without reproach, but rather with the
approbation of the Parliamentary party, the leaders of which encouraged
the young fellows to enlist in their army, as, for example, by the
following Proclamation:—
“‘Whereas in Times of common Danger and Necessity the Interests of
private Persons ought to give way to publick, it is ordained and
declared by the Lords and Commons in Parliament, That such Apprentices
as have been, or shall be listed to serve as Soldiers, for the Defence
of the Religion and Liberty of the Kingdom, his Majesty’s Royal Person,
the Parliament, and the City of London, their Sureties, and such as
stand engaged for them, shall be secured against their Masters, their
Executors, and Administrators, from all Loss and Inconvenience by
Forfeiture of Bonds, Covenants, Infranchisement, or other Ways: And
that, after this publick Service ended, the Masters of such Apprentices
shall be commanded and required to receive them again into their
Service, without imposing upon them any Punishment, Loss, or Prejudice,
for their Absence in the Defence of the Commonwealth.
‘And the Lords and Commons do further declare, That if it shall appear,
that the Masters of such Apprentices have received any considerable
Loss by the Absence of their Apprentices, they will take Care that
reasonable Satisfaction be made unto them out of the publick Stock of
the Kingdom, according to Justice and Indifferency.’” (Maitland, vol.
i. p. 361.)
In 1647 two Petitions of the “Young men and apprentices” were drawn
up and presented to the House of Lords by the two factions in the
City, that in the interest of the King being signed by 10,000 hands,
instigated, says Maitland, by their masters.
The action and attitude of the City on this occasion belong to its
general history.
The custom and practice as concerns apprentices in the eighteenth
century are laid down by Strype in his account of the duties and rules
of the Chamberlain’s Court.
“Before him, the said Chamberlain, all Apprentices are enrolled, and
made free; insomuch that none can set up Shop, or follow a Trade
within the City or Liberties, if not a Freeman, and sworn before him;
neither can any one turn over an Apprentice, but by his License. To
him all Complaints are brought for Differences betwixt Apprentices
and their Masters, who reconciles their Differences, and may punish,
by Imprisonment, those that disobey his Summons, or any Apprentice
that misdemeans himself to his Master or Mistress; but, upon the
Apprentice’s acknowledging his Fault, and begging Pardon, with Promise
never to offend any more, his Fault is forgiven.
Such Apprentices as have justly served their Term of seven Years, and
not broken their Indentures by Marrying, etc., are made free.
Upon the Admission of every Person into the Freedom of this City, the
Chamberlain causeth an Oath to be administered unto him, to be true to
the King, the Government, and observe and keep the Customs of the City;
which said Oath hath been mentioned before, Chap. XXIII.
If any Master shall refuse to make his Apprentice free, when the Term
of his Indenture is expired, upon Complaint made to the Chamberlain,
he will cause such Master to be summoned before him, and if he cannot
shew good Cause to the Contrary, will make the Apprentice free. And
if an Apprentice shall be unruly or disorderly in his Master’s House,
or commit any notorious Fault, upon Complaint made thereof, the
Chamberlain will send one of his Officers for such Apprentice, and send
him to Bridewell, or otherwise punish him according to the Nature of
the Offence.
If any Master shall misuse his Apprentice, by unreasonable Beating,
not allowing him Necessaries, or by neglecting to instruct him, or the
like, upon Complaint thereof made, the Chamberlain will send a Summons
for the Master to appear before him; and upon due Hearing both Parties,
will relieve the Apprentice, if his Allegations be proved to be just,
or else leave the Apprentice to take his remedy against his Master in
the Lord Mayor’s Court. And if the Master refuse to appear according
to his Summons, the Lord Mayor and Recorder, upon Complaint thereof
made unto them, will grant a Warrant to take him, and compel him to
appear.
When an Apprentice, by the Consent of his Master, is to be turned
over to another Master of the same trade, it must be done before the
Chamberlain. And it is observed, that, if an Apprentice be turned over
by the Company only of which the Master is free, it is no Obligation
on the second Master to keep such an Apprentice; nor is the Apprentice
compelled thereby to serve the second Master, but may depart at
Pleasure, by suing out his Indentures against the first Master. Which
may be done without the Privity or Knowledge of the second Master. And,
therefore, it is absolutely necessary, that all Apprentices should
be turned over before the Chamberlain. And thereby the first Master
is discharged from him, and the second obliged to keep him; and the
Apprentice will be obliged to serve the second Master, the full Term of
his Indentures, although the same were made for nine Years, or more.
It is the Interest of every Master and Apprentice, when any Difference
happens between them, to refer the Matter to the Chamberlain; who will
freely hear both Parties, and decide the Controversy, for 3s. Charge,
viz. 1s. to the Officer for the Summons, and 2s. to the Clerk for the
Order: Whereas, if they proceed at Law for Relief, it may probably cost
both Parties six Pounds, or more, in Charges; and the Conclusion may be
less satisfactory, than if decided by the Chamberlain.
THE FEES DUE TO THE CITY FOR MAKING FREE, AND THE ENROLLING
APPRENTICES.
An Apprentice made free, and not enrolled, the Master pays 00 13 2
The Apprentice pays 00 02 00
If turned over before the Chamberlain, the Master or
Mistress must pay extraordinary 00 02 00
And, by Virtue of the late Act for Orphans, over and above
these usual Fees,
An Apprentice, when bound, must pay 00 02 06
And when admitted a Freeman 00 05 00
If an Apprentice shall omit to take his Freedom, within convenient Time
after the Expiration of his Indentures, the Chamberlain may impose upon
the Apprentice such a Fine, in Reason, as he shall think fit, for this
Neglect, without just Cause to the Contrary.
Every Freeman ought to take particular Care not to make an Apprentice
free of London, by testifying for his true Service, unless such
Apprentice shall have really served him. For, if he shall privately
turn his Apprentice over to a Foreigner, and let his Apprentice
serve such a Foreigner, and yet testify to the Chamberlain, that the
Apprentice served a Freeman; in such Case, both the Master and the
Apprentice may be disfranchised, and fined at the Discretion of the
Recorder, and the Chamberlain, and may cause the Freeman’s Shop to be
shut up.” (Strype, vol. ii. pp. 475–476.)
As regards the ancient costume of an Apprentice, I again quote Stow and
Strype:—
“The ancient Habit of the Apprentices of London was a flat round Cap,
Hair close cut, narrow falling Bands, coarse side Coats, close Hose,
Cloth Stockings, and other such severe Apparel. When this Garb had
been urged by some to the Disparagement of Apprentices, as a Token
of Servitude, one, many a Year ago, undertaking the Defence of these
Apprentices, wrote thus, that this imported the commendable Thrift of
the Citizens, and was only the Mark of an Apprentice’s Vocation and
Calling (and which anciently, no Question, was the ordinary Habit of a
Citizen), which Point of ancient Discipline, he said, the grave common
Lawyers do still retain in their Profession; for the Professors of
that Learning, we see, do at this Present retain the party-coloured
Coats of Serving-men at their Serjeants’ Feasts; and he wished, that
the Remembrance of this ancient Livery might be preserved by the grave
Citizens, in setting apart a particular Time or Day for the Feast of
their Apprenticeship, when they should wear their former Apprentice’s
Garb; making Profession in this Way, that they gloried in the Ensigns
of their honest Apprenticeship.
In the Time of Queen Mary, the Beginning of Queen Elizabeth, as well
as many Years before, all Apprentices wore blue Clokes in the Summer,
and blue Gowns in the Winter. But it was not lawful for any Man, either
Servant or other, to wear their Gowns lower than the Calves of their
Legs, except they were above threescore Years of Age; but, the Length
of Clokes being not limited, they made them down to their shoes. Their
Breeches and Stockings were usually of white broad Cloth, viz. round
Slops, and their Stockings sewed up close thereto, as if they were all
but one Piece. They also wore flat Caps both then and many Years after,
as well Apprentices as Journey-men and others, both at Home and Abroad;
whom the Pages of the Court in Derision called Flat-Caps.
When Apprentices and Journeymen attended upon their Masters and
Mistresses in the Night they went before them carrying a Lanthorn and
Candle in their hands, and a great long Club on their Necks; and many
well-grown sturdy Apprentices used to wear long Daggers in the Day-Time
on their Backs or Sides.
Anciently it was the general Use and Custom of all Apprentices in
London (Mercers only excepted, being commonly Merchants, and of better
Rank, as it seems,) to carry Water Tankards, to serve their Masters’
Houses with Water, fetched either from the Thames, or the common
Conduits of London.
It was a great matter, in former Times, to give 10£ to bind a youth
Apprentice; but, in King James the First’s Time, they gave 20, 40, 60
and sometimes 100£ with an Apprentice; but now these prices are vastly
enhanced, to 500, 600, or 800£.” (Strype, vol. ii.)
The question in 1628 arose, and was solemnly argued, whether an
Apprentice, who is certainly bound to obedience, who must perform
servile offices, who is corrected by his master, clothed by his
master, and fed by his master, is or is not in a state of bondage or a
bondsman. The question was resolved by Philipot, Somerset Herald, to
the effect that he could not be considered a bondsman. The reason we
may pass over. But Strype’s remarks are interesting:—
“So that Apprenticeship in London is no Dishonour, nor Degradation;
but rather an Honour, and a Degree. He is very hardy that shall embase
honest Industry with disgraceful Censures, and too unjust, who shall
not cherish and encourage it with Praise and Worship, as the ancient
Policy of England did and doth, in constituting Corporations, and
adorning the Companies with Banners of Arms, and especial Members
thereof with Notes of Nobility. And, as it is an Honour, so it is a
Degree, or Order of good regular Subjects; out of whose, as it were,
Noviceship or Colleges, Citizens are supplied from Time to Time.
We call them Colleges, according to the old Roman Law Phrase, or
Fellowships of Men. For so indeed they are, comprehended within several
Corporations, or Bodies of free Persons, intended to be consociated
together for commerce, according to Conscience and Justice, and
named Companies. So that Apprentices, according to the Esteem of our
Commonwealth, when first they come to be Apprentices, first begin to
be Somebody, who before were young Men without any Vocation in the
World. And so by other Ascents or steps come to be Freemen of London,
or Citizens; thence to be of their Companies Liveries, Governors of
Companies, as Wardens and Masters; and Governors in the City, as
Common-Council-Men, Aldermen’s Deputies, Sheriffs, and Aldermen; and,
lastly, the principal Governors, or Heads of the City, that is, Lord
Mayors. And some also have been advanced, from being Citizens, to be
Counsellors of State to the Prince.
It is further evident, that Apprenticeship doth not deprive of Gentry;
for no Man loseth his Right to bear Arms, or to write Gentleman, unless
he be attainted in Law for such a Cause; the Conviction whereof doth
immediately procure Corruption in Blood; which in this Case no Man yet
hath dreamt of. The Apprentice hath no more lost his Title and Right
to Gentry, than he hath done to any Goods, Chattels, Lands, Royalties,
or any Thing else, which, if he had never been any Apprentice, either
had, might, or ought to have come unto him. The Rights of Blood are
more inherent than the Rights of Fortune, according to the Law Rule,
_Jura Sanguinum nullo jure civili dirimi possunt_, i.e. The Law of
Bloods cannot be destroyed by any civil Right. That Gentry is a Right
of Blood, may appear by this, that no Man can truly alienate the same,
or vest another in it, tho’ legally he may, in Case of Adoption, which
is but a human Invention, in Imitation of Nature; and, in the Truth of
the Thing, no Alienation at all, but a Fiction, or an Acceptation in
Law, as if it were such. Gentry is a Quality of Blood, as Virtue and
Learning are of one Mind.
This is the Sum of what that learned Herald argued, in Confutation of
that Opinion, that Apprenticeship extinguisheth Gentry. And he sent
this his discourse to the Gentleman who desired his Judgment herein;
whence, no Question, he received full Satisfaction. And the Herald took
the more Pains in confuting this false Conceit, that it was a Thing
unbeseeming a Gentleman to be an Apprentice to a Citizen or Burgess;
because it had filled England with more Vices, and sacrificed more
serviceable Bodies to odious Ends, and more Souls to sinful Lives, than
perhaps any one other uncivil Opinion whatsoever. For they who held
it better to rob by Land or Sea, than to beg or labour, did daily fee
and feel, that out of Apprentices rose such as set upon them, standing
out for lives as Malefactors; when they, a Shame and Sorrow to their
Kindred, underwent a Fortune too unworthy.” (Strype, vol. ii. pp.
435–436.)
Apprentices in certain cases ought to be discharged:—
“One was discharged from his Master, because his Master held no shop,
and withdrew himself from the City. Another, because his Master did not
teach him. Another, because his Master was in Ludgate, and entrusted
him not. Another, because not enrolled within a Year. Another, because
his Master was distracted in his Mind. Another, because his Master was
so poor that he could not exhibit to him. Another, because his Master
diverted himself to other Occupations than his own Mystery. Another,
because the Master was a Leper. Another, because the Wife, after the
Death of her Husband, taught him not. And lastly, another, because his
Master inordinately chastised him.” (Strype, vol. ii. p. 438.)
The decay of order among Apprentices may finish these notes on the
class:—
“I come, in the next place, to treat of Attornies’ Clerks, Apprentices,
inferior Tradesmen, Coachmen, Porters, Servants, and the lowest Class
of Men in this town, which are far the most numerous: And, first, of
the Lawyers’ Clerks and Apprentices, I find it a general Complaint,
that they are under no Manner of Government; before their Times are
half out, they set up for Gentlemen, they dress, they drink, they
game, frequent the Playhouses, and intrigue with the Women; and it is
a common Thing with Clerks to bully their Masters, and desert their
service for whole Days and Nights, whenever they see fit. And indeed
People consider little else at this Day, in the Choice of Clerks or
Apprentices, but the sums they are to have with them; one, two, or
three Hundred Pounds are given with a Clerk or Apprentice, who may be
looked upon rather as a Boarder than a Servant. He takes little Care of
his Master’s Business, and the Master as little to instruct him in the
Mystery of his Profession.” (Strype, vol. ii. p. 559.)