THE DEATH OF THE GUILDS
1. _Their suppression in European Countries._--(_a_) The eighteenth
century, the first half of which was an age of analysis, criticism,
and social satire, was in its second half a time of innovation and
invention, bold in its theory and practice, eager to correct and reform
social organization in accordance with an ideal of justice born of
reason. It was therefore both destructive and constructive.
In its first years it saw the beginning of a new economic phase. A
revolution, as serious as that caused by the discovery of America
and the sea-route to the Indies, began to operate in the world. As
usual, it was commerce which, by its vast extension, broke the bounds
within which society had been circumscribed. It was conscious of its
importance and dignity. Voltaire sang the praises of the merchant
"who enriched the country, and from his office gives orders to Surata
and Cairo, and contributes to the happiness of the world." Sedaine,
in the _Philosophe sans le Savoir_, calls the merchant "the man of
universe," and compares the traders to so many "threads of silk which
bind together the nations and lead them back to peace by the needs
of commerce." In 1760 Turgot proposed to ennoble the great traders,
and great lords were not above going into business. The Duke of La
Force was a wholesale grocer. On the sea there was the continual
coming and going of vessels which ploughed the oceans, ransacked
the archipelagoes, and opened up yet another continent, Australia,
to European conquest: on land, improved means of communication and
transport trebled the passenger and goods traffic. England at that time
had her "canal fever": in France the wonderful network of roads was the
admiration of all strangers.
In all civilized nations the enterprise of Banks, Bourses, great
Companies and Chambers of Commerce resulted in such a circulation of
money and boldness of enterprise as had never been seen. All this
necessitated an intensity of production hitherto unknown, and the
invention of new methods. It was now necessary to create and supply
the demands of consumers who were no longer confined to the limits of
a State, however large it might be, but scattered over the face of the
globe; who no longer numbered a few hundred thousands, but amounted to
dozens or hundreds of millions. In short, markets began to expand to
the very ends of the earth, and the period of international economics
set in.
In this commercial expansion, European capitalism played the chief
part, and, in Europe, England held the chief place. Mistress of the
sea and of a colonial empire of which India and North America were
the most valuable possessions, she became enormously rich; France and
Holland followed, but some distance behind. We already know the natural
tendencies of "great" commerce: it dislikes all barriers and hindrances
to its activity. It always had been and was once more inimical to the
system of the closed market so dear to the small craft guilds. Its
ideal was free trade. So true is this that in France, in 1654,[138]
the Six Guilds strongly protested against the taxes which struck at the
importation of goods made outside the kingdom; moreover the liberal
movement against the guilds emanated from the merchant aristocracy, and
Gournay, its exponent in France, held the title of director of commerce.
"Great" industry developed with unprecedented strength under the same
impetus. The aged tree, in which the sap was still rising, suddenly
put forth vigorous branches. In England, engineering and coal-mining
are prime necessaries to its life, and the cotton industry imported
from the Indies attracted many thousands of workers in a few years
and kept them permanently employed. This industrial revolution took
place both in those vast enterprises in which the ancient hierarchy
of apprentices, journeymen, and masters became meaningless--since a
handful of masters possessed the capital and appliances, while the mass
of workmen possessed nothing:--and in those new enterprises which, like
the manufacture of cotton fabrics, owed to their recent origin the
fact that they had never been under the old guild system. The guilds
themselves could not but suffer from the extraordinary growth which
took place beside but outside their system.
Three forces in especial worked against them--three forces which led to
invention, to the transformation of technique, and so to the overthrow
of traditional rules: these were, the desire to save labour--a desire
which dominates all human activity,--science, and fashion.
(_b_) At first, masters and workmen were agreed on one point--the
reduction of effort which was imposed on them, and which meant
reduction of expenses for the former, and reduction of labour for the
latter. Workmen and workwomen had suffered from the imperfection of
the tools they had used, and from the craft which they carried on; for
generations they had contracted diseases and infirmities which were a
trade-mark; the silk workers of Lyons for instance were recognized by
their bent knees. Having seen their parents and grandparents die in
hospital, tired and worn out before their time, they eagerly sought for
means whereby they could save themselves, their children, and their
comrades, from dangerous and exhausting work. They thought out and
tried ingenious methods for lightening their tasks. The first inventors
of improvements were thus workers, familiar with the machines which
were their daily companions. From the time when the cotton industry
became mechanical in England we can follow the rivalry--the struggle
for speed which for half a century went on between spinning and
weaving, each in turn getting ahead of and then being passed by the
other;[139] it was a duel between inventors who were simple workmen
and happened to be mechanics. In France, Vaucanson and Jacquard did
the same thing for silk in Lyons, where labour was less regulated than
elsewhere. They were encouraged and led by their masters and sometimes
by the State; but they were unfortunate in unexpectedly encountering
the hostility of the silk workers whom they thought to help. This was
because (and there is nothing which more clearly demonstrates the
faults in the organization of labour) the introduction of all new
machinery, while it operates in favour of the master by advancing
the speed of production, throws on the streets a certain number of
workmen who are no longer wanted, and who, while waiting for increased
production to give them back their means of livelihood, fall a prey to
famine and misery. Montesquieu wrote on this subject:[140]
"If an article is of a fairly low price, and one which equally suits
him who buys it and the workman who has made it, machines which would
simplify its manufacture, that is to say diminish the number of
workmen, would be injurious; and if water-mills were not everywhere
established, I should not believe them to be as useful as people say,
because they throw innumerable hands out of work...."
This explains the curious spectacle offered by the world of labour
in the eighteenth century; the masters in "great" industry, like the
wholesale traders, were the revolutionaries; their workmen, like the
guilds, were the reactionaries.
(_c_) Science, however, was not long in coming to the rescue of the
inventors who had risen from the working class. The scientists, whose
function it is to increase human knowledge and the power of men
over nature, gave proof in their turn of creative imagination; they
captured and tamed hitherto unused or rebel forces: steam, subdued
and enslaved, became the magician which began by giving movement to
bands, wheels, hands of steel and iron, carriages and boats, and ended
by carrying on every sort of craft. It could spin, weave, screw,
rivet, plane, full, lift up, saw, cut off, glean, thresh corn, etc.
Chemistry and physics were by no means inferior to mechanical science;
they composed and decomposed bodies, transformed and melted them one
into another, created new ones by bold combinations, produced heat,
light, and energy. What weight had the old regulations in view of this
transformation of methods and appliances? Who could uphold them? The
guilds in defending them were like men with spades who should try to
stop a train going at full speed.
(_d_) Fashion acts in the same manner, for the word is synonymous with
change. It is a power in every country, but particularly where there
is smart, worldly society. The guilds learnt this to their cost in a
matter which was the talk of the court for years. In France an edict,
inspired by them, had prohibited the use of printed cottons which came
from India. They might be seized anywhere, even on people who were
wearing them. But it was an absurd notion to try to check by force the
changes of taste, when women, who love novelty in dress as much as they
often do in matters of belief and custom, took it into their heads to
wear a material which pleased them! The Marquise of Nesles appeared
openly in the gardens of the Tuileries, dressed in Indian cotton. They
dared not arrest her! Other Court ladies did as she had done, and,
after a long struggle, printed cottons won the day; they were installed
at the very gates of Paris, and made the fortune of Oberkampf their
manufacturer, and were well known under the name of "toiles de Jouy"!
(_e_) While the defences behind which the guilds had taken refuge were
thus battered down, a crusade against them was begun by public opinion.
Economists and philosophers united in attacking their principles in the
name of liberty and equality, two ideas which roused much enthusiasm
in the world at that time. The guilds were denounced as opposed to the
general interest of producers in that they stood for privilege and
exclusiveness and prevented numbers of people, who could neither enter
them nor set up beside them, from earning an honest livelihood. They
were condemned as being contrary to the general interests of consumers;
for, burdened with enormous debts, wasting their money in festivals,
feasts, and legal expenses, condemned to laborious methods of
manufacture through their inability to improve them, they were yet able
by means of their monopolies to keep up prices and to make unduly large
profits, without even being capable of satisfying their clients if they
expressed the smallest desire to have something out of the ordinary.
The physiocrats had another grievance against the guilds: they were
opposed to them because they diverted capital from the cultivation
of the land, in which, according to them, it would have been used to
much greater advantage. By degrees, among the two peoples which led
the European thought of the time--Great Britain and France,--these
accusations were condensed into a formula which was the death-warrant
of the guilds: _Laissez-faire! Laissez-passer!_ At Edinburgh in 1776
Adam Smith's famous work appeared, and was looked on as the Gospel of
the new doctrine. In 1775 there appeared in Paris a posthumous work by
President Bigot of Sainte-Croix, entitled _An Essay on the Freedom of
Commerce and Industry_.
2. It was in England, the country in which regulation was then
weakest and where it had not touched great cities like Manchester
and Birmingham,[141] where "great" commerce and "great" industry
made the strongest and most rapid advances, that these theories most
quickly triumphed, born as they were of surrounding realities. But,
in accordance with the English custom, there was no violent rupture
with the past, no solemn repudiation of theories hitherto followed,
no complete and sudden abolition of the guild system. The change in
economic organization came by a series of small local and partial
measures. The Statute of Labourers had in 1563 unified and codified
the rules of the Middle Ages; these were not wholly repealed, but,
in 1728,[142] the master hat-makers, dyers, and cotton printers
demanded of Parliament (and obtained their demand fifty years later)
that they should be exempt from obeying the rules as to the number of
apprentices, who might be replaced by men hands. In 1753 the statutes
of the stocking-makers were abolished as "injurious and vexatious
to the manufacturers" and "hurtful to the trade," as "against all
reason and opposed to the liberty of English subjects." In vain the
workers sometimes united with the small masters, and sought behind
these crumbling shelters protection against the ills inflicted on
them by the development of "great" industry and of machinery; in vain
they hoped for the application of the law which entrusted to the
justices of the peace the duty of fixing their wages; in vain they
made enormous sacrifices to get their rights established in legal
documents.[143] From the year 1756 the weavers of napery were abandoned
to their fate by the House of Commons. After a period of hesitation
and self-contradiction, "governmental nihilism" became under similar
circumstances the policy of Parliament. But it was still more than half
a century before the statute of 1563, which had survived from a former
age, disappeared under the blows struck at it by the "great" tradesmen;
it was suspended, then abolished for the wool industry in 1809, and
finally done away with in 1814. Almost at the same date, in 1813, the
right of fixing the wages of labour was taken away from justices of
the peace. Of the economic legislation of the Middle Ages, there still
remained the laws which prohibited workers from forming any sort of
combination, and decided that in every dispute the word of a master
should be accepted before that of a servant; but of the guilds nothing
was left but atrophied and lifeless bodies, which were little more than
memories, or names often given to what were far from being professional
associations.
In France, where there is a love of unity, logic, and harmony, things
developed differently. Guild monopolies continued, it is true, by means
of bribery; but their domain was narrowed by the creation of the Sèvres
factory and the Royal Printing Press, and by the working of many mines
at the expense of the State. In 1762 all industrial privileges were
limited to fifteen years, a serious menace directed against privileges
which had been held to be perpetual. In the same year the freedom of
rural industry was proclaimed; in 1763 that of the leather trade, and
in 1765 that of wholesale trade for commons as well as nobles. The corn
trade, in spite of the fear of monopoly, profited by a similar liberty
for a short time (1763). Simultaneously, the guilds were stripped, and
their doors thrown open. In 1755 it was decided that foreign journeymen
might be hired in every town in the kingdom except Paris, Lyons,
Lille, and Rouen. In 1767 the doors were opened wide to foreigners
and Jews--competitors as much hated as feared. In the same year the
invasion was completed by a large number of letters of mastership which
gave every craft in Paris twelve new masters, and every craft in the
provinces from eight to two, while the purchase of these licences by
the Six Guilds was not authorized even if a larger sum were offered.
Monopoly was therefore extended, not destroyed. But such a solution
was merely a compromise, and things developed in the direction of
suppression pure and simple.
It was Turgot, as every one knows, who took upon himself to do away
with wardenships and masterships. A disciple of both Gournay and
Quesnay, he condemned them in the name of industry and agriculture,
and in the interests of consumers and producers. The famous edict
of March 1776, which he signed as minister of Louis XVI., declared
that they were abolished throughout the kingdom with four exceptions:
the _wig-makers_, who held posts sold to them by the State itself;
the _printer-booksellers_, the supervision of whom was kept by
the authorities for political reasons; the _goldsmiths_, because
the sale of precious metals was under special legislation; and
the _apothecaries_, as the control of their trade was considered
necessary for public health. The property of the guilds was sold and
the proceeds, together with the funds in hand, were used for wiping
out their debts. The confraternities were done away with at the same
time, and their wealth handed over to the bishops. All associations of
masters or journeymen were prohibited.
Such an edict, completely revolutionizing the organization of labour,
could not pass without obstruction and resistance. The Parlement,
as defender of the ancient traditions of France, only registered it
under protest and at the express wish of the king; the Six Guilds
were defended by the writings of a man whose name will for ever have
a sinister sound--Dr. Guillotin. The unrest was intense; the freedom
of the corn trade served as a pretext, if not a real cause, for
riots known as the "flour war." Turgot had made a St. Bartholomew of
privileges, therefore all the privileged combined against him. The
king said to him, "Only you and I love the people, M. Turgot." Some
days after, the king dismissed him, and, on August 28, the edict was
repealed. Wardens and masters were reestablished, first in Paris and a
little later in the other towns. But so decayed a system as this could
not suffer even the most passing effacement with impunity. At first it
did not reappear in its entirety and the number of free crafts remained
considerably larger. It could only live at all by reforming itself, so
the rights and expenses of reception were reduced by half, two-thirds,
or sometimes even three-quarters; kindred crafts were fused and the
practice of several crafts at once authorized; women were admitted to
mastership in men's communities and _vice versa_; foreigners, too,
could now aspire to mastership. But the original narrowness persisted;
a new inequality sprang up between _masters_ and _fellows_; the rules
for maintaining internal discipline and the domestic authority of the
employers over the workmen became, not less, but more rigorous; the
journeymen were still forbidden to have common funds, to assemble
without permission, or to be together more than three at a time; to
carry arms, to concern themselves with the hiring of labour, to leave
work unfinished, or to present themselves without a letter of discharge
from their last master. A strike could always be punished as a
desertion of work. A maximum wage was always fixed as well as the time
allowed for the mid-day meal. The regulations for manufacture, however,
became less strict; under Necker's ministry, the manufacturer might
choose whether he would conform to them or not. If he did, he had the
right to have his goods stamped, and stuffs so made were distinguished
by a special selvage; other products received the "stamp of freedom."
The commercial treaty, concluded with England in 1786, severely tried
the system already so weakened. The guilds suddenly found themselves
exposed at many points to foreign competition, and complained bitterly
when the convocation of the States-General gave France the opportunity
of expressing her opinion, along with other more important subjects, on
the existence of the guilds.
The debate reports of 1789 betray a certain indecision on the matter;
the two privileged classes--nobles and clergy--when they were not
indifferent to the whole question, leant towards suppression; the Third
Estate--for the election of which the small crafts had not received
equal treatment with "great" commerce, the liberal professions, and the
rich bourgeoisie--were divided almost equally, one half favouring the
abolition, the other the reformation, which implied the retention, of
the system.
Apparently at first the latter carried the day. On the night of August
4, 1789, the reformation of masterships was one of the numerous motions
voted with enthusiasm. But less than two years later, in March 1791,
in a bill for the taxation of licences, the mover, Dallard, had the
following article (number 8), inserted:
From April 1 next, inclusive, every citizen will be free to carry
on whatever profession or trade seems good to him, after having
procured and paid for a licence.
This meant the end of masterships and wardenships. An indemnity was
to be allowed the masters for the money they had spent, and to the
wigmakers and to the barbers for the posts they had bought. With no
fuss, almost without discussion, and without finding any one to defend
them in the Assembly, the guilds ceased to be after an existence which
had lasted for many centuries.
In June of the same year, a new law was destined to stifle any
inclination they might have shown to come to life again. The pretext
given for condemning them to their fate was the formation of societies
of workers with the object of raising wages. Chapelier, affirming
that it was the duty of the State to assist the infirm and find work
for those who needed it in order to live, protested against every
association which claimed to substitute a collective contract for the
individual contract between master and workers.[144] Article 2 of the
law in question reads:
Citizens of the same condition or profession, middlemen, those who
keep open shops, workmen and _compagnons_ of whatever art, may not,
when they find themselves together, nominate president, secretary
or syndic, keep registers, pass resolutions, make regulations for
what they claim to be their common interests, or bind themselves by
agreements leading to the concerted refusal or to the granting only
at a certain price, of the help of their industry and labours.
According to a phrase taken from a petition addressed by the
master-builders to the municipality of Paris, the above resolutions
and agreements, if they ever happened to be made, had to be declared
"unconstitutional, opposed to liberty and to the declaration of the
rights of Man"; the authors, instigators, and signatories of these acts
or writings were to pay a fine of £500 each, and to be deprived for
a year of their rights of active citizenship. Severer penalties were
provided in all cases of threat and unlawful assembly.
Thus pure reaction, excessive and impracticable, set in against trade
combination; compulsory isolation was established under the false name
of freedom of work, and in consequence the weak were abandoned to
the mercy of the strong, and the poor to the mercy of the rich; the
individual, naked and unarmed, was put face to face with the individual
armed at every point; in the economic domain a mere agglomeration
was substituted for any kind of organization. But besides being
the culminating point of a long evolution, this reaction was the
starting-point of a new development which created the modern Labour
Movement. We must next take a rapid survey of Europe and see what was
the fate of the guilds in other countries.
In Holland, where they had never been very strong, they counted for
nothing after 1766. In Tuscany, from 1759 to 1766, a great inquiry was
held into the state of the _Arti_, and following on the information
obtained, the Archduke Peter-Leopold brought about, by means of
decrees, a reform which was revolutionary in character. On February
3, 1770, he abolished enrolment fees throughout the duchy, with the
exception of two or three small territories like that of Livurnia,
and decided that, in order to ply a trade, it should be enough
henceforth to be inscribed once and for all on a general register. In
consideration of a fee of £2 at most, a man might, if he wanted to,
follow more than one calling or open several shops. The only exceptions
were the doctors, apothecaries, and goldsmiths, who were still subject
to special obligations, and silk manufacturers, who kept a few ancient
privileges. On February 17 of that year all the guild tribunals were
abolished and all their powers vested in a _Chamber of Commerce, Arts,
and Manufactures_, which had not only legal rights but also the duty of
watching over the economic interests of the country, encouraging and
assisting poor craftsmen, and administering the estates formerly held
by the guilds which had thus been wiped out at a stroke of the pen. The
clauses are curious and confirm what we have said concerning the action
of princes. The Archduke expresses his wish that "such matters shall
be regulated by a single authority, on fixed and uniform principles
directed to the universal good of the State." The bakers were no longer
compelled to make loaves of a fixed weight; the merchants were exempted
from paying for weights and measures which they hardly ever used but
which they were forced to possess.[145] The glorious guilds of Florence
had lived for centuries and were to leave their mark behind them for
a long time to come; it was only in 1907 that the winding-up of the
property which had belonged to the _Arte della Lana_ was concluded.
In Lombardy, from 1771 onwards, under the rule of the Empress Maria
Theresa, a similar reform took place; in 1786 it was Sicily's turn;
throughout the rest of Italy, all that remained of the ancient guild
system disappeared under the French domination and the Napoleonic
Code. The same thing happened in Belgium, where, after the decree of
17 Brumaire, Year IV., nothing was left but shadowy guilds, such as
that of St. Arnoldus at Bruges, or the "Nations" at Antwerp.[146] In
Germany the guild system was more tenacious and was only to disappear,
in certain States, when German unity was almost realized. The Code of
the Confederation of Northern Germany declared for its abolition in all
the countries under its jurisdiction.
3. The guilds, then, were long in dying, and in addition to a few
survivals,[147] there were even some attempts made here and there to
revive them during the nineteenth century.
In France, from the days of the Consulate and of the Empire,
professional guilds (notaries, lawyers, solicitors, law-court officers,
stockbrokers, etc.) were formed and still exist. The practice of more
than one profession--such as medicine, dispensing, printing--remained
under the control of the public authority. Butchers and bakers, under
new regulations, remained in this state till 1858 and 1863. In 1805,
three hundred wine-sellers demanded, without success, the restoration
of the old craft guilds and of their own in particular. Under the
Restoration, which undertook the task of restoring institutions which
the storms of the Revolution had destroyed, other petitions of the same
nature found a few partisans in the "_Chambre Introuvable_" and in some
of the General Councils;[148] but although "the small" crafts were
in favour of this return to the past, "great" trade, which had been
hostile to wardenships and masterships, was strongly opposed to it. The
Chamber of Commerce of Paris and the bankers were among the first to
fight and defeat these ideas.
It is among Catholics especially that such ideas have been awakened;
inspired by sincere pity for the misery of the working classes who
have been so long without protection, they have often been filled with
the desire to create an organization for the propagation of social
peace between masters and workers. During the reign of Louis-Philippe,
Buchez, Villeneuve Bargemont, La Farelle, and Buret tried to bring the
guild idea to life again. In 1848 it publicly reappeared for a short
time, when the provisional government received hundreds of deputations
classed according to their trades, and Louis Blanc nominated, according
to craft guilds, delegates for the Commission of the Luxembourg, and
when _compagnonnage_ paraded its beribboned canes and splendid works of
art in the processions of the republican festivals; but it was already
modified; masters and workmen formed separate groups. More recently,
in 1891, it has been advocated in eloquent but vague terms by Pope Leo
XIII., and Catholic circles, founded by M. de Mun, have tried to put it
into practice.
But it has always encountered obstacles which have arrested its
progress. First there have been disagreements between those who favour
the idea. Should the guild be optional or compulsory, open or closed?
What share should masters and workmen take in it? Should it aim only at
mutual assistance, or should it be competent to act in disputes between
members? On the one hand there were those who were afraid of reviving
the tyrannical monopoly of the old wardenships and on the other those
who were afraid of forming, without meaning to do so, the framework for
a socialistic organization of labour. All this was enough to paralyse
those who might have been willing to join. But there was an even
greater difficulty; though some of the great employers, those of the
Val des Bois for example, supported the cause, the working classes, not
unreasonably, stood aloof, uneasy and defiant. They dreaded any sort of
patronage in which the heads would bombard them with pious exhortations
and hold up to them the dismal virtue of resignation; they remembered
M. Claudio Jannet's confession that he looked to Christianity "to solve
the social question by inspiring masters with the spirit of justice
and charity, and by making the less-favoured classes _accept their
lot_." They could not forget that the Holy Father had written that
the guilds should have "religion for their guide," and they thought
they had a foretaste of the fate in store for them, in the statutes of
association of the printer-bookseller-bookbinders of Paris in the new
model (1879): "_Art._ III. To belong a man must be a Catholic. _Art._
IV. Must bind himself not to work, or employ another on Sunday. _Art._
V. To print no irreligious book." In short, they were afraid of putting
themselves under the yoke of the confessional and of losing their
liberty of thought, and they looked on an institution from which were
excluded in advance all who did not hold a certificate of orthodoxy, as
too much resembling the Middle Ages, and as an anachronism in a society
where rights are equal for all citizens irrespective of religion.
A few theorists[149] no doubt prided themselves on enlarging this
narrow conception; but the compulsory guilds, open and federated, which
they dreamed of instituting, were so different from the old guilds that
there was really nothing in common except the name.
It was in Austria, in surroundings less cut off from the past than
in France, that guilds more resembling the original type awoke to
an appearance of life.[150] Created by law in 1883, they have set
before themselves some of the aims of the _Arti_ of Florence, viz.
the safeguarding of the honour of the trade and, to this end, the
regulation of apprenticeship; the foundation or assistance of
institutions for technical instruction; the exaction of a preliminary
examination from any one who wishes to set up as a craftsman or
merchant; the buying of raw material at the expense of the community;
the provision of arbitrators to settle trade differences, and the
insurance of members against sickness, etc. They even try, as in old
times, to secure the legal monopoly of a craft and to forbid hawking,
etc. They remind one very much of what I have called the _capitalistic
guilds_ of the Middle Ages, and those of great commerce and "great"
industry, with the sole difference that they are compulsory for all
who carry on the same trade. (See p. 28.) All the authority, in fact,
is in the hands of the masters, and although they are reminded of
their duties towards the workers, the latter are subordinate, can
only present petitions, and are only allowed to decide as to the
administration of benefit funds. It is more than doubtful whether this
reproduction of the most hierarchical form of the ancient guilds has
much chance of spreading at a time when ideas of equality have made
such headway and when the working classes are strong enough to refuse
meekly to submit to the conditions employers lay down. It must also
be remembered that "great" industry, for and by whom this method was
formerly designed, is excepted from Austrian legislation, which forces
it on the "small" trades, to which this renewal of the regulations
of the old statutes seems to be a great hindrance. Imitation of this
system, which is itself only a more or less successful imitation, has
so far not gone farther than Hungary and Germany (the _Innungen_). In
Belgium, Switzerland, and even in France, Christian associations are
to be found on the same model. They always include two groups which
never assimilate; masters and workmen who have separate representation
and pay unequal subscriptions. The principle is always Charity, the
devotion of one class to another, no doubt an honourable sentiment, but
one with which is mingled a protective spirit it seems impossible to
do away with. For Pope Leo XIII. himself, in his Encyclical of May 16,
1891, states that, in civilized society, it is impossible that every
one shall rise to the same level, and that, in consequence, there will
always be rich and poor. "Just as, in the human body, the members, in
spite of their diversity, adapt themselves so marvellously to each
other as to form a perfectly proportioned whole, which may be called
symmetrical, so, in society, the _two classes_ are destined by nature
to unite in harmony, and to maintain together a perfect balance." Life
and experience, however, would seem to prove the opposite. The only
thing to be gained by these attempts to return to a time that has
disappeared for ever is the combination of crafts--a necessity which
seeks to-day, as it has always done, its legitimate satisfaction. But
new methods of production and sale demand new forms of organization
of sellers and producers, and have brought us to the system, evolved
by those concerned, spontaneously, without prejudiced or preconceived
theories, by the direct force of circumstances--the system of _Trade
Unionism_, which has succeeded the guild system as the defender of
trade interests.
AUTHOR'S BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arte dei medici, speziali e merciai. (State Archives of Florence.)
Arte di Calimala. (Statutes, edition Filippi Giovanni, Torino, 1889.
Gr. 8vo.)
Arte di Por Santa Maria. Statutes, Archives of Florence, and for all
the other _Arti_.
ASHLEY (W. J.). Economic History.
BODIN (JEAN). De la République. (Paris, 1576-1578. Folio.)
BOISSONNADE (P.). Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou,
depuis le XI^e siècle jusqu'à la Révolution. (Paris, H. Champion,
1900. 2 vols. 8vo.)
BONOLIS. Rivista italiana per le scienze giuridiche. (Vol. xxvii.
fasc. i. and ii.)
BOUGLE (G.). Essais sur le régime des castes. (Paris, F. Alcan, 1908.
Travaux de l'année sociologique. 8vo.)
BOURGEOIS (A.). Les Métiers de Blois. (2 vols. 1895.)
BRISSON (PIERRE). Histoire du travail et des travailleurs. (Paris,
Delagrave, no date. 16mo.)
BUCHER (KARL). Études d'histoire et d'économie politique. (Paris, F.
Alcan, 1901. 8vo.)
CANTINI. Legislazione toscana.
CUNNINGHAM (W.). Outlines of English Industrial History (with E. A.
MacArthur). (Cambridge, 1895. 8vo.)
DAVIDSOHN (ROBERT). 1. Geschichte von Florenz.
2. Forschungen zur Geschichte von Florenz. (Berlin, E. S. Mittler
und Sohn, 1896-1908. 4 vols. 8vo.)
DEJOB (CHARLES). Le Marchand de vin dans les vieilles communes de
l'Italie. (Paris, Société Française d'Imprimerie et de Libraire,
brochure. 8vo. 1907.)
DOREN (ALFRED). 1. Entwicklung und Organisation der Florentiner
Zünfte. (1897, Leipzig, in Staats- und socialwissenschaftliche
Forschungen, by Schmoller.)
2. Studien aus der Florentiner Wirtschaftgeschichte. (Stuttgart,
1901. 8vo.).
DRAPÉ (ALPH.). Recherches sur l'histoire des corps d'arts et métiers
en Roussillon sous l'ancien régime. (Paris, Arthur Rousseau, 1898.
8vo.)
FAGNIEZ (GUSTAVE). Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie
et du commerce en France. (2 vols., Paris, Alph. Picard et fils,
1898-1901. 8vo.)
FILIPPI (GIOVANNI). See _Arte di Calimala_.
FLACH (J.). Les Origines de l'ancienne France. (Larose, 1893-1904. 3
vols. 8vo.)
FRANKLIN. 1. La Vie privée d'autrefois. Comment on devenait patron.
(Paris, Plon, 1889. 12mo.)
2. La Vie privée d'autrefois. La Cuisine. (Paris, Plon, 1888.
12mo.)
GERMAIN-MARTIN. 1. La Grande Industrie sous le règne de Louis XIV.
2. La Grande Industrie sous le règne de Louis XV.
3. Les Associations ouvrières au XVIII^e siècle. (Paris, Arthur
Rousseau, 1899 and 1900. Gr. 8vo.)
GODART (JUSTIN). L'Ouvrier en soie (1st volume). (Paris, Arthur
Rousseau, 1899. 8vo.)
HARTMANN (MORITZ). Zur Wirtschaftgeschichte Italiens im fruher
Mittelalter. (Gotha, 1904.)
HAUSER (HENRI). 1. Ouvriers du temps passé. (Paris, F. Alcan, 1898.
8vo.)
2. Les Compagnonnages d'arts et métiers à Dijon aux XVII^e et
XVIII^e siècles (with his pupils). (Paris, A. Picard et fils, 1907.
8vo.)
3. Les Pouvoirs publics et l'organisation du travail dans
l'ancienne France. (Revue d'Histoire moderne et contemporaine,
1907-1908.)
HAYEM (H.). Domaines respectifs de l'association et de la société.
(Paris, Arthur Rousseau, 1907. 8vo.)
LACROIX (PAUL). Moeurs, usages et costumes au moyen âge et à l'époque
de la Renaissance. (Paris, Firmin-Didot et C^ie, 1878. 8vo.)
LAMPRECHT. Deutsche Wirtschaftsleben im Mittelalter. (Leipzig, Dürr,
1886. 4 vols. 8vo.)
LA SORSA. Gli Statuti degli orefici e sellai fiorentini al principio
del secolo XIV. (Florence, 1901.)
LEVASSEUR (ÉMILE). Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie
en France avant 1789. (2nd edition, 2 vols. 8vo. Paris, Arthur
Rousseau, 1901.)
Livre des métiers (le). (Édition Depping, Paris, 1879.)
LUCHAIRE (ACHILLE). Les Communes françaises à l'époque des capétiens
directs. (Paris, Hachette, 1890. 8vo.)
MARTIN-SAINT-LÉON (E.). 1. Histoire des corporations de métier.
(Paris, Guillaumin & C^ie, 1897. 8vo.)
1. _Bis._ Second edition. (Paris, F. Alcan, 1909. 8vo.)
2. Le Compagnonnage. (Paris, Armand Colin, 1901. 18mo.)
MICHELET (JULES). Histoire de France. (Édition Marpon et Flammarion,
Paris, 1879.)
MISUL. Le Arti fiorentine. La Camera di commerzio. (Florence, 1904.
8vo.)
MORE, THOMAS. Utopia.
PERRENS (F. T.). Histoire de Florence. (Paris, 6 vols. 8vo.)
PIGEONNEAU. Histoire du commerce de la France. (2 vols. 8vo. Paris,
Léopold Cerf, 1887.)
PIRENNE. Histoire de Belgique. (8vo. Brussels, 1900.)
RENARD (GEORGES). 1. Les Corporations de Florence au XIII^e siècle.
(Revue du Mois, September 1908.)
2. Les Banquiers florentins en France au XIII^e siècle. (Revue
Économique Internationale, November 1908.)
3. La Révolution sociale au XIV^e siècle. (Revue Internationale de
l'Enseignement, January 1909.)
RICHARD (GASTON). La Femme dans l'histoire. (Paris, O. Doin et fils,
1909. 18mo.)
RODOCANACHI. Les Corporations ouvrières à Rome depuis la chute de
l'Empire romain. (2 vols. in folio, Paris, Alf. Picard et fils,
1893.)
SAND (GEORGE). Le Compagnon du tour de France, novel.
SCHMOLLER. Die Strassburger Tucher- und Weberzunft: Urkunden und
Darstellung. (Strasbourg, 1899.)
SOLMI (ARRIGO). Le Assoziazioni in Italia avanti le origini del
Comune. (Modena, 1898.)
TAMASSIA (NINO). Chiesa e popolo. (Modena, 1901.)
VANDERKINDERE. Le Siècle des Artevelde. (Brussels, 1879. 8vo.)
WEBB (BEATRICE AND SIDNEY). History of Trade Unionism. (London,
Longmans, Green & Co., 1911.)
WORMS (ÉMILE). Histoire commerciale de la Ligue hanséatique. (Paris,
1864. 8vo.)
ZELLER (JULES). Histoire d'Allemagne. (Paris, Perrin et C^ie. 8vo.)
EDITOR'S BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS IN ENGLISH
*ASHLEY (W. J.). An Introduction to English Economic History. 2 vols.
Part I., The Middle Ages. 1888. 5s. (especially Chap. II.); Part
II. The End of the Middle Ages. 1893. 10s. 6d. (especially Chaps.
I.-III.)
Surveys, Historic and Economic. 1900. 9s. O.P.
*The Economic Organisation of England. 1914. 2s. 6d. Philip and
James Van Artevelde. O.P.
BRENTANO (L.). _See_ Smith, Toulmin.
CUNNINGHAM (W.). Growth of English Industry and Commerce. 3 vols.
1903-5.
GROSS (C.). The Gild Merchant. 2 vols. 1890. 24s.
KROPOTKIN (PETER). Mutual Aid. 1902. 3s. 6d.
LAMBERT (Rev. J. M.). Two Thousand Years of Gild Life. 1891. 18s.
LIPSON (E.). Economic History of England. Vol. I. Black, 1915. 7s. 6d.
PENTY (A. J.). Old Worlds for New. Allen & Unwin, 1917. 3s. 6d.
ROGERS (J. E. THOROLD). Six Centuries of Work and Wages. 1890. 10s.
6d. (remainders 4s. 6d.).
ROUND (J. H.). The Commune of London. 1899.
SALZMANN (L. F.). English Industries of the Middle Ages. 1913. 6s. 6d.
SMITH (TOULMIN). English Gilds, with an Introduction by Professor
Brentano (Early English Text Society).
STALEY (EDGECOMBE). Guilds of Florence.
*UNWIN (GEORGE). The Gilds and Companies of London. 1908. 7s. 6d.
*Industrial Organisation in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.
1904. 7s. 6d.
_Printed by_ R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, _Edinburgh_.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] _Panetier_, one charged with the distribution of bread in big
establishments.
[2] _Bouteillier_, an official for the inspection and superintendence
of wine in a royal household.
[3] A short study and a detailed bibliography of the origin of guilds
will be found in M. Martin-Saint-Léon's _Histoire des corporations de
métier_, book i., 2nd edition. We recommend it to the reader, but do
not ourselves accept all the author's opinions. As, however, he chiefly
gives the German, English, and French sources of information, we add a
list of Italian works, or works concerning Italy, which deal with the
same subject, classifying them according to the theories they adopt.
The theory of the separate creation of each guild is defended by
M. Arrigo Solmi (_Le Assoziazioni in Italia avanti le origini del
Commune_, 1898), but since then the works and criticisms of Messrs.
Robert Davidsohn, Alfred Doren, Hartmann, and Bonolis have deprived
his arguments of all that was strongest and most original in them. M.
Solmi, in an article in the _Rivista Italiana di Sociologia_, ix. 1
(Roma, 1905), entitled "Sulla storia economica d'Italia nel medio evo,"
himself recognized that the persistence of certain ancient institutions
and the division of labour in the great royal or feudal domains appear
to have played an important part in the organization of crafts. M.
Nino Tamassia has specially emphasized, amongst other causes, the part
played by the influence of religious congregations and fraternities.
[4] The origin of the cities having been so different (see J. Flach,
_Les Origines de l'ancienne France_), the causes which predominate in
each must have been equally diverse.
[5] The _Arte dei Fabbri_, for instance, extended over all the suburbs
of Florence.
[6] In France, for example, a long war was fought between the guilds
and those whom they called _chambrelans_.
[7] A similar organization existed at Strasburg. The _Zunft_ (guild)
included several _Antwerke_, see Schmoller, _Die Strassburger Tücher
und Weberzunft Urkunden und Darstellung_.
[8] R. Davidsohn, _Forschungen zur Geschichte von Florenz_.
[9] A. Doren, _Entwicklung und Organisation der Florentiner Zünfte_; G.
Renard, _La Révolution sociale au XIV^e siècle_.
[10] The following may be consulted on this subject: Davidsohn,
_Forschungen zur Geschichte von Florenz_, vol. iii. p. 221;
Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 277;
Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du commerce
en France_, vol. ii. pp. 170, 190, 201.
[11] H. Hauser, _Ouvriers du temps passé_, p. 40.
[12] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, pp.
84, 86, 291; Franklin, _La Vie privée d'autrefois_, p. 78; Fagniez,
_Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du commerce en
France_, vol. i. p. 309.
[13] Hauser, _Ouvriers du temps passé_, pp. 59-76; Boissonnade, _Essai
sur l'organisation en Poitou, etc._, pp. 53, 64, 68; Martín-Saint-Léon,
_Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 89 ; Fagniez, _Documents
relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du commerce en France_, vol. i.
p. 268.
[14] E. Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie
en France avant 1789_, pp. 1, 321; Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des
corporations de métier_, p. 117; Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à
l'histoire de l'industrie et du commerce en France_, vol. i. pp. 231,
245, 282.
[15] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 121.
[16] Hauser, _Ouvriers du temps passé_, p. 62; Fagniez, _Documents
relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du commerce en France_, vol. i.
pp. 36, 220.
[17] Avenel, _Histoire économique de la propriété, des salaires, des
denrées et tous les prix en général_, passim.
[18] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou,
depuis le XI^me siècle jusqu'à la Révolution_, vol. ii. p. 150.
[19] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, pp. 135,
291, 294.
[20] Vanderkindere, _Le Siècle des Artevelde_, p. 132; E. Levasseur,
vol. i. p. 315, note.
[21] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 280.
[22] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. p. 290.
[23] Quotation from Beugnot's edition, p. 429.
[24] _Le Livre des métiers_, xxv. p. 65.
[25] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. pp. 1, 245; E. Levasseur, _Histoire des
classes ouvrières et de l'industrie en France avant 1789_, vol. i. p.
312.
[26] Consult the following for information concerning the legal and
economic status of women: Gaston Richard, _Les Femmes dans l'histoire_,
p. 282; Hauser, _Ouvriers du temps passé_, pp. 142-160; Fagniez,
_Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du commerce en
France_, vol. i. pp. 259-261, 277, 310, vol. ii. p. 204.
[27] Consult W. J. Ashley's _Economic History_, concerning _guildae_
and _hanses_. A bibliography will be found in vol. i. See also Émile
Worms.
[28] _Statutes of the Arte di Calimala_ (book ii. art. 23).
[29] For information on this subject consult A. Doren and Davidsohn for
Florence; Pirenne for Flanders; Schmoller and Lamprecht for Germany.
[30] It is certain that in Great States the statutes of the different
towns were connected, and it is probable that they were so in the
period preceding the formation of Great States.
[31] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, pp. 266
and 290; Rodocanachi, _Les Corporations ouvrières à Rome depuis la
chute de l'Empire romain_, p. lix.
[32] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. ii. p. 189.
[33] _Statutes of the Calimala_, bk. ii. art. 35 and 44.
[34] Rodocanachi, _Les Corporations ouvrières à Rome depuis la chute de
l'Empire Romain_.
[35] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. ii. p. 59.
[36] Justin Godart, _L'Ouvrier en soie_, p. 88, note.
[37] Rodocanachi, p. xcii.
[38] Brisson, _Histoire du travail et des travailleurs_, p. 23.
[39] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 275.
[40] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. pp. 1, 274.
[41] _Statuts de Calimala._
[42] La Sorsa, _Gli statuti degli orefici e sellai fiorentini al
principio del secolo xiv._
[43] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. ii. pp. 71, 149.
[44] Brisson, _Histoire du travail et des travailleurs_, p. 22.
[45] Franklin, _La Vie privée d'autrefois_, p. 25.
[46] Georges Renard, _Les Banquiers florentins en France au XIII^me
siècle_.
[47] Paul Lacroix, _Moeurs, usages et costumes du moyen âge et à
l'époque de la Renaissance_, pp. 234 and 430.
[48] _Statutes of the Calimala_, bk. iii. art. 20-22.
[49] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, pp. 11, 190-200.
[50] Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie en
France avant 1789_, vol. i. p. 335.
[51] Brisson, _Histoire du travail et des travailleurs_, p. 19;
Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation de travail en Poitou_, vol. i.
p. 287.
[52] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, pp.
271-274.
[53] Paul Lacroix, _Moeurs, usages et costumes au moyen âge et à
l'époque de la Renaissance_, p. 317.
[54] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. p. 113.
[55] Franklin, _La Vie privée d'autrefois_, vol. i. pp. 66-67;
Rodocanachi, _Les Corporations ouvrières à Rome_, p. lxxxviii.
[56] A. Doren, _Entwicklung und Organisation der Florentiner Zünfte_.
[57] Rodocanachi, _Les Corporations ouvrières à Rome depuis la chute de
l'Empire romain_, p. cxii.
[58] Franklin, _La Vie privée d'autrefois_, p. 67.
[59] _Statutes of the Arte dei medici, speziali e merciai_.
[60] _Statutes of the Arte di Calimala_.
[61] Charles Dejob, _Le Marchand de vin dans les vieilles communes de
l'Italie_, p. 14.
[62] See the statutes of the _Arte di Calimala_, and of the _Arte di
Por Santa Maria_.
[63] E. Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie en
France avant 1789_, vol. i. pp. 293-298.
[64] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. p. 146.
[65] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, pp. 273,
287.
[66] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. pp. 40, 52, 93.
[67] _Ibid._
[68] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. pp. 89, 112.
[69] Consult Rodocanachi and Boissonnade on this subject.
[70] Rodocanachi, _Les Corporations ouvrières à Rome depuis la chute de
l'Empire Romain_, p. xxv.
[71] Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie en
France avant 1789_, vol. i. pp. 561.
[72] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 110.
[73] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou_,
etc., vol. ii. p. 276; Bourgeois, _Les Métiers de Blois_, passim.
[74] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. pp. 145, 250.
[75] Boissonnade, vol. ii. p. 276.
[76] Paul Lacroix, _Moeurs, usages, et costumes au moyen âge et à
l'époque de la Renaissance_, p. 442.
[77] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation en Poitou_, etc., vol. ii.
p. 293.
[78] Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie
en France avant 1789_, vol. i. p. 343; Boissonnade, _Essai sur
l'organisation en Poitou_, etc., vol. i. p. 172.
[79] Franklin, _La Vie privée d'autrefois. La cuisine_, p. 230.
[80] The word as here used must not be confused with its meaning in
connection with the Florentine Guilds, see p. 8.
[81] The _number_ of members composing a guild also contributed to its
social status; but this was a factor of very much less importance.
[82] Ribot, _Essai sur l'imagination créatrice_, p. 234; Tarde,
_Psychologie économique_, bk. i. chap. v. §§ iv. v.
[83] A. Doren, _Studien aus der florentiner Wirthschaftgeschichte_.
[84] Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières_, etc., vol. i. p. 343.
[85] Perrens, _Histoire de Florence_, vol. vi. chap. v.
[86] The inhabitants of Perpignan were classed in three _mains_ (major,
middle, and minor). See Drapé.
[87] Ach. Luchaire, _Les Communes françaises à l'époque des capétiens
directs_, pp. 207-215.
[88] Georges Renard, _Revue économique internationale_, Jan. 1909,
article entitled "La révolution sociale au XIV^e siècle."
[89] Davidsohn, _Forschungen zur Geschichte von Florenz_, vol. iii.
[90] _Livre des métiers_, p. 1.
[91] Fagniez, _Documents relatifs à l'histoire de l'industrie et du
commerce en France_, vol. i. p. 75.
[92] Franklin, _La Vie privée d'autrefois, comment on devenait patron_,
p. 70; Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 275.
[93] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou_,
etc., vol. ii. p. 250.
[94] Fagniez, vol. i. p. 115.
[95] Karl Bücher, _Études d'histoire et d'économie politique_, passim.
[96] Macaulay, _History of England_ (Everyman), vol. i. p. 323.
[97] Germain-Martin, _La Grande Industrie sous le règne de Louis XIV_,
p. 232.
[98] E. Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières_, etc., vol. i. p.
590.
[99] Thomas More, _Utopia_.
[100] Ashley.
[101] André Liesse, _Le Travail_.
[102] Beatrice and Sidney Webb, _History of Trade Unionism_, p. 41.
[103] Macaulay, _History of England_ (Everyman), vol. i. p. 292.
[104] Germain-Martin, _La Grande Industrie sous le règne de Louis XV_.
[105] Beatrice and Sidney Webb, _History of Trade Unionism_, p. 13.
[106] Page 24. Their position was the same in the _Arte della seta_.
[107] Macaulay, _History of England_ (Everyman), vol. i. p. 323, note.
[108] Hauser, _Ouvriers du temps passé_, chap. x.
[109] Mantoux, _La Révolution industrielle au XVIII^me siècle_, p. 55.
[The song is quoted in full in J. Burnley's _Wool and Wool-combing_,
pp. 161 ff.--EDITOR.]
[110] Mantoux, _La Révolution industrielle au XVIII^me siècle_.
[111] See Levasseur, _Histoire des classes ouvrières_, etc., chap.
vi.; Hauser, _Les Compagnonnages d'arts et métiers_, etc., p. 8 and
_passim_; Martin-Saint-Léon, _Le Compagnonnage_.
[112] Hauser, _Les Compagnonnage d'arts et métiers à Dijon au XVII^me
et XVIII^me siècles_, p. 168.
[113] Du Bellay; see also Grévin, prologue to _La Trésorière_.
[114] Jules Zeller, _Histoire d'Allemagne_.
[115] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou_,
vol. ii. pp. 354-357.
[116] Germain-Martin.
[117] Ashley.
[118] Fagniez, _Corporations et syndicats_, p. 23.
[119] Quoted by Michelet, _Histoire de France_, vol. v. p. 312.
[120] Levasseur, vol. ii. p. 138.
[121] J. Bodin, _De la République_, bk. iii. chap. viii.
[122] See Boissonnade, vol. ii. pp. 360, 465; Bourgeois, vol. ii.
p. 243. The master saddlers of Blois (1593) asked the king to grant
them statutes "similar to those of Tours and other free towns of this
kingdom."
[123] They even formed guilds, as, for instance, the dressmakers'
guild, which owed its existence to Colbert.
[124] Ashley, _Economic History_, vol. ii. p. 13.
[125] Mantoux, _La Révolution industrielle au XVIII^me siècle_, p. 65.
[126] _Cantini, Legislazione toscana_, x. chap. xxix. and xxx.
[127] Misul, _Le Arti Fiorentini_, passim.
[128] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou,
depuis le XI^me siècle jusqu'à la Révolution_, vol. ii. p. 79.
[129] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 348.
[130] Pigeonneau, _Histoire du Commerce de la France_, vol. i. p. 180.
[131] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou,
depuis le XI^me siècle jusqu'à la Révolution_, vol. ii. p. 123.
[132] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 358.
[133] "Poids de marc"; _marc_, ancient weight of eight ounces
(Larousse).
[134] Mantoux, _La Révolution industrielle au XVIII^me siècle_, p. 67.
[135] Boissonnade, vol. ii. p. 430.
[136] Boissonnade, _Essai sur l'organisation du travail en Poitou_,
etc., vol. ii. pp. 120, 488.
[137] W. J. Ashley.
[138] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 312.
[139] Mantoux, _La Révolution industrielle au XVIII^me siècle_, pp.
195-208.
[140] Montesquieu, bk. xxiii. chap. xv.
[141] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, p. 523.
[142] Mantoux, _La Révolution industrielle au XVIII^me siècle_, pp.
472, 487.
[143] Beatrice and Sidney Webb, _History of Trade Unionism_, p. 44.
[144] For the whole of the preceding consult Martin-Saint-Léon,
_Histoire des corporations de métier_, pp. 511, 516; Hayem, _Domaines
respectifs de l'association et de la société_, p. 23; Jaurès, _La
Constituante_, pp. 600-630.
[145] Misul, _Le Arti Fiorentine; La Camera di Commerzio_.
[146] E. Vandervelde, _Enquéte sur les associations professionnelles
d'artisans et ouvriers en Belgique_, vol. i.
[147] J. Paul-Boncour in _Le Fédéralisme économique_, p. 14, gives a
list of the guilds which survive in France.
[148] On this subject see Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations
de métier_, bk. vii.; and Paul Louis, _Histoire du mouvement syndical
en France_, p. 67.
[149] Martin-Saint-Léon, _Histoire des corporations de métier_, bk.
vii. chap. iii., "The Guilds of the Future."
[150] Hubert-Valleroux, Les _Associations ouvrières et les associations
patronales_, p. 130; Altmann, _Le Régime corporatif des métiers en
Autriche et en Allemagne au XIX^me siècle_.
Transcriber's Note:
Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as
possible.
Italic text has been marked with _underscores_.
Letters preceded by a ^caret appeared as superscripts to the end of
the word.
OE ligatures have been expanded.
End of Project Gutenberg's Guilds in the Middle Ages, by George Renard