to the freedom, an average of about 48 per annum; and 9,554 apprentices
were presented, an average of about 133 per annum. The greatest number
of freemen admitted was in the year 1647 when 82 came on, and the least
in 1666 when but 23 were admitted. With apprentices the greatest number
presented was in the year 1629 when there were 219, and the least again
in the year of the Great Fire when there were but 54.
Between 1674 and 1745, about 75 freemen and 162 apprentices would be
the yearly average.
After the separation in 1745, and indeed down to the beginning of this
century, a respectable average was maintained, being about 40 freemen
and 60 apprentices per annum.
In the hundred years between 1746 and 1845, 2,964 persons were admitted
to the freedom and 4,298 apprentices were presented, being an average
of about 30 of the former and 43 of the latter for each year. The least
number of freemen coming on was in 1845, when only 5 were admitted, and
of apprentices in 1844, when but 4 were presented.
The apprentices always seem to have been a fruitful source of trouble
both to their Masters and to the Company, and numerous are the
entries of their floggings and imprisonments. The term of servitude
was generally seven years, but in a few instances it was eight and
even nine, the age at which boys were taken was usually fourteen, and
before the Indentures were sealed the boy was “presented” to the Court
that it might be seen that he was clean and not deformed or diseased.
If approved, the Indentures were executed and recorded, and in all
cases the apprentice actually lived with his Master, who covenanted
to find him meat, drink, apparel, lodging and all other necessaries
according to the custom of the City. If the boy’s master died or for
other reasons was unable to continue his business, it became necessary
for him to be “turned over” to another master, free of the Company,
and that such turn over should be approved and recorded, otherwise the
apprentice was disqualified for his freedom. When his term expired the
Master brought him to the Hall and “testified” to his faithful service,
whereupon he became entitled to the freedom on payment of a nominal
fine. Sometimes Masters refused to make their apprentices free, in
which cases the Court enquired into the circumstances, and acted in
accordance with the merits of the case.
From the earliest times the custom has prevailed to admit women to the
freedom, mostly by apprenticeship, but also by patrimony, and these
freewomen bound their apprentices, both boys and girls, at the Hall; of
course the ladies were not admitted to the livery, but otherwise they
had the same privileges as freemen so far as the same were compatible
with their sex. At the present time (1890) there is one freewoman of
the Barbers’ Company.
APPRENTICES.
Ordered 17th July, 1551. That Water Lynche whiche was prentise w{th}
John Tholmwoode Barborsurgeon shalbe and ys contented to serve Thomas
Woolf as a prentice from the daye above written untyll the viij{th}
yere of King Edward the sixte and so the sayd Water Lynche his yeres
to be fully ended and ronne out at the feaste of all Saints as may
appere by his Indenture.
19th September, 1552. Ordered that when any prentise dothe goo awaye
from his M{r} the same M{r} shall bring in his Indenture and here to
remayne tyll the prentice come agayne and to be regestred.
It was also ordered that the Beadle should make out all Indentures of
apprenticeship, and any one else presuming to do so should pay a fine
of 3_s._ 4_d._
27th April, 1556. It was ordered that no apprentice should wear a beard
of beyond fifteen days’ growth, and that on breach of this order the
master of the apprentice was to pay a fine of half a mark.
15th October, 1566. Here in this Court John James the appñts of John
Shryve for pylferyng, & so here he had his correction.[170]
[170] That is, he was flogged.
27th May, 1567. Robert Cholmeley complained of his apprentice
for y{t} he doth not his worke as he ought & for his other ill
demeanors And so in the pˀsents of this Court the saide appˀnts
humbled hym upon his knees and pˀmyssed his amendment.
1567. The quarrels between masters and apprentices about this period
were numerous, and occupied a great deal of the time of the Court, who
in dealing with them generally pursued a policy of reconciliation and
made the parties friends again. In certain cases, masters were fined
for ill-treating apprentices, whilst some of the latter had their
Indentures cancelled or “torn in Court” and were either whipped or
ordered to behave better, or to find new masters.
22nd August, 1569. Here was Rich Upton Playntyf agaynst his app̃nts
W{m} Fyshe for that he ranne awaye frome his said M{r} the xxj{th} of
the former moneth and tooke w{th} hym sˀten instruments for surgery
& other things more, w{ch} pˀtyculers were here pˀsently sene & by
the said W{m} Fyshe confessed and that he had no cawse to go frome
his said M{r} but that he wolde have gon to the sea and accordynge to
his desert had correction and punnyshment unto auncyent custom w{th}
roddes.
22nd November, 1569. Memorandˀ upon the xxij{th} day of November 1569
in the afternowne Gyles Swalldell thappeñtꝭ of Chrystofor Swalldell
for goyng forth of his maisters house at unlawfull tymes and houres
& in evell company wastinge and consumyng his M{rs} grocery wares
also therebye he the appntꝭ then had the correction of this hall
accordyng to his desertꝭ as the justice & equytie by the M{r} &
govˀnors thoughte at the request of his said M{r} to be most mete and
convenient. And so the said Gyles Swalldell appntꝭ hathe promysed
here that he wylbe a good faythfull & trusty servant unto his said
M{r} and never hereafter offende any more.
1st June, 1570. Here was John thappntꝭ of Thomas Wayte (for) abusying
of Rog{r} Laborne & his wyfe and his M{r} also and he had favorable
correction for his offencꝭ.
John possibly thought it rather _unfavourable_.
By the next entry it would appear that Master Ralph Soda found the
society of the ladies more congenial to his tastes than the practice of
shaving and bloodletting.
15th February, 1572. Here was Henry Lusshe and witnessed how that his
app̃ntice Rafe Soda ranne awaye ffrom hym and contract hym self to
three wemen and was asked at Westm{r} in the church and also had delt
unhonestly w{th} his mayde srˀvnt.
19th May, 1573. Here was John Newsam and he was appoynted to brynge
in his fyne for not pˀsentynge his apprentice.
Here was John Appowell and he was appoynted the lyke.
9th June, 1573. Here was Olyvˀ Pecocke the covenaunte Sˀvaunt of
Allen Colly beinge comytted to Warde uppon Wednesday last on M{r}
Warden Robynsons comaundment for goynge ffrom his master ffrom the
Sounday untill Wednesdaye next and he was nowe relesed so that his
master paynge his wages he shall serve hym.
21st July, 1573. Pecocke complained to the Court against his master
“ffor not well usinge hym in beatinge hym.”
The next is a quaint piece of dry humour--
6th October, 1573. Here was an order taken between Danyell Botham and
his appˀntice that he should well and trewly sˀve his M{r} and not to
make any more complainte or trouble the M{rs} any more, and yf he do
nott sˀve his M{r} accordyngly he shall have the Almes of the howsse.
The “Alms of the house” were on some other like occasions promised to
troublesome apprentices.
18th October, 1573. Here was John Staples and brought in his
apprentyze for evyll behavio{r} by hym comytted in his masters house
w{th} his masters mayde and he made his submyssion on his knees and
asked his master forgevenes in the courte, and he was forgeven uppon
condyc͠on that he should amend well & faythfullye w{th}out farther
complaint or elles to have the ponnyshment of the howsse.
11th December, 1599. In the matter in controversie betwixt Juliance
Yonge & John Bradley his apprentice it is ordered that the sayd Yonge
shall take his sayd apprentice into his service agayne And that the
sayd Yonge shall use him as hee oughte to doe And that the sayd
apprentice shall well and honestly behave himself towardsˀ his sayd
M{r.}
22nd January, 1600. This daye Daniell Hinkesman brought in his fine
of xl{s} for sufferinge his apprentice to dwell w{th} a gentleman.
This apprentice had probably been let out to hire as a valet by
Hinkesman, who received his wages instead of teaching him his trade.
20th February, 1600. Noah Bayley having been complained of for striking
his apprentice Andrew Mathew, he was fined 40_s._, and at the next
Court Mathew had license to sue Bayley at the Common law for “breaking
his head.”
17th June, 1600. This daye it was ordered that George Langton
apprentice to M{r} ffrederick shalbe comitted to the compter for his
unreverent behaviour towardes his M{r.}
7th August, 1600. John Sares is to be called in question for geveinge
wages to his apprentice.
2nd December, 1600. This daye uppon complaynt made to this Courte it
was ordered that Henry Needham should put awaye his apprentice Willm̄
Webbe for that it was then apparantly pˀved that hee is marryed
w{th}in his terme And it was thereuppon furth{r} ordered that the
pˀsentac͠on should be discharged by a vacat thereuppon to be entered.
5th May, 1601. This daie the wiefe of Thomas Asbridge decessed did
complaine of Marke Nurse her apprentice for absentinge himselfe from
her service and other his misdemeanors towardes her All w{ch} uppon
his humble suite and promise of amendment was forgeeven him.
16th June, 1601. This daie it is ordered that Thomas Shurwin
apprentice to John Urvey shalbe for ever utterly dischardged of his
terme of apprentisship for that it appeareth to the Maisters uppon
hearinge of their controversie that he hath the said apprentice
colorablie.
30th June, 1601. This daye Robert Wallis is dischardged from his
apprentiship for that it appeared to this Court that his maister did
not mayntayne him w{th} sufficient meate drynck and apparrell.
22nd September, 1601. This daye uppon complaynt made by ---- Jelly
apprentice to Hughe ffell that the said ffell had put him oute of his
service before hee had acquainted the M{rs} therew{th} It was ordered
that the said ffell should receive his said apprentice in to his
service againe & that hee should pˀsently inroll him. And that the
said ffell should appeare before the M{rs} at the next Courte.
3rd November, 1601. This daye uppon hearinge of the Controversie
betwixt John Howe & his apprentice It is ordered that hee shall take
home his said apprentice and use him well hereafter And whereas the
said Apprentice hath complayned for that the said Howe dothe not
exercyse the said apprentice in his trade of Barbery & Surgery It is
furth{r} ordered that if the said Howe shall not take a shoppe and
use his trade before Christemas next that the said apprentice shalbe
turned over to anoth{r} of the same arte.
16th March, 1602. This daye it is pˀmised & undertaken before the
M{rs} of this Company by Robert Leadbeater that hee the said Robert
shall & will at the expirac͠on of the apprentisheep of Henry Edwards
his apprentice geve unto the said Henry twoe suites of decent
apparrell & a cloke.
20th April, 1602. I Michaell Braye doe pˀmise and undertake That
at the ende & expirac͠on of the tearme of apprenticeship of George
Parkins my Apprentice I will geve unto him a new suite of apparrell
viz one dublett one pˀ of hose one hatt one pˀ of stockins and one
Cloke of decent apparrell In witnes whereof I have hereunto put my
hand.
22nd February, 1603. This daye it is ordered that Thomas Mownsley
shall for his disobedience to his M{r} be comitted to the Compter.
16th April, 1605. This daye Peter Saunderson certiefied the Court
that hee had offered to inroll his apprentice before the Chamberlin
and it was denyed him because the apprentice could not at the end of
his terme accomplishe the Age of xxiij yeres.
4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that John Udall shall at
the next Courte bringe in his fine of xl{s} for puttinge a waye his
Apprentice Tho. Hobbes w{th} out o{r} M{rs} consent (see 18th June).
4th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that Roger Kiffin shalbe
dischardged of his apprentiship w{th} Richard Bonner for that hee
wanteth meate drinck & apparrell And hee is to finde him selfe a
nother M{r} of this Company. (See 25th June.)
18th June, 1605. This daye it is ordered that John Udall shalbe
committed to the Compter for his contempt.[171]
[171] The contempt being that Udall having “put away” his Apprentice,
(_i.e._, had him locked up in Bridewell, without the leave of the
Court,) and being fined 40_s._ for that offence, had refused to pay
his fine.
25th June, 1605. Richard Bonnẽr is to bringe in his apprentices Roger
Kiffins Indenture at the next Courte or ells hee is to be comitted to
the Compter.
25th June, 1605. This daye Thomas Clemence was fined at x{s} for that
hee was not bound apprentice by the Clark of this Company.
24th September, 1605. This day it is ordered that David Vaughan
apprentice to Richard Davis shalbe pˀntlie dischardged from his said
M{r} for the residue of his terme to come for that his said M{r}
hath given him unlawfull correction as it was affirmed and hath not
trayned him up in the trade that he used being Barbinge and Surgery.
And is to bring in the Apprentices indenture att the next Courte
or ells to be comitted to the Compter for his contempt. And the
appˀntice is in the meane tyme to continue w{th} his freindꝭ And is
not to sˀve any pˀson that useth the trade of silck weavinge any more
w{th} in the liberties of London.
7th January, 1606. This day it is ordered that John Browne and his
apprentice be here at the next Courte. And he is to be comaunded
from our M{rs} to discharge his appˀntice out of Bridewell w{ch} he
holdeth there And then to be before o{r} said M{rs} at their next
Court both he and his apprentice.
14th January, 1606. John Browne is to bringe in his fine for puttinge
away his appˀntice w{th}out the M{rs} order.
5th July, 1608. This daye in the Controversie betwixt Nicholas Braye
and Humfrey Pittꝭ It is ordered for that the M{rs} doe fynde that the
Apprentice is not kept as hee ought to be but is lowsie and also his
M{r} for want of change of apparrell And that therefore wee doe not
fynde him a fit M{r} It is ordered that if the said Nicholas Braye
doe not hereafter use his apprentice in Better Order that then the
apprentice shalbe turned over to anoth{r} freeman of this Company.
23rd May, 1609. This daye Richard Tyler broughte in his fine
accordinge to a former order for puttinge awaye (_i.e._, imprisoning)
his apprentice w{th}out the M{rs} order And it was mittigated to
xx{s.}
19th November, 1611. At this Court it is ordered that John Todd shall
on the next tuesdaies Court bring in his fyne of 40{s} for that he
did not bynde an appˀntice w{ch} is now w{th} him according to the
Custome of this howse.
19th November, 1611. At this Court Robert Hawley the appˀntice of
Thomas Clarke was for his stubbornes & other unsemely pranckꝭ by him
used towardꝭ his M{r} as also for his lewd & bad service brought
before the M{rs} whereupon he promising of amendem{t} his faultꝭ was
for this tyme remitted.
22nd February, 1613. In the complaint made by William Richardson
against his M{r} John Sabyn being heard & proved at this Court by
his owne confession that Sabyn did use unlawfull correction to his
appˀntice. It is ordered that the M{r} shall not use hereafter
any such unlawfull correction for if he doe & his appˀntice make
complaint thereof to the M{rs} of this Company, then the appˀntice
shall be taken awaye from him And further it is ordered that the
appˀntice shall doe his M{r} just & true service, And that the said
Sabyn shall the next Court daie bring in his fyne for not inrowling
of his said appˀntice w{th}in the tyme lymitted by the ordynancꝭ of
this howse.
22nd February, 1613. This daye Joseph Boreman made promise to pˀforme
such order as the M{rs} did heretofore set downe between him and his
appˀntice namely⁾ that he will give to the same appˀntice two suitꝭ
of apparell fitt for such an appˀntice accordinge to the true meaning
of the same w{th}out any fraud.
27th September, 1614. At this Court Raph Dixon the appˀntice of our
M{r} Hassall for manie lewd misdemeano{rs} & for getting a woman
w{th} child, being an appˀntice shold have had the correction of the
howse, but upon considerac͠on had he is to be sent to bridewell.
23rd January, 1615. In the complaint made by Margery Stokes in the
behalf of her grand child John Taft who is thˀ apprentice of one John
Hedlowe for that the said Hedlow haveing receaved w{th} the said
appˀntice the some of Tenn poundꝭ doth now turne him away & refuseth
to restore the monie w{ch} he had w{th} him. It is therefore by this
Court ordered that the said Hedlow shall either receave the same
appˀntice into his service agayne or otherwise repaie the said some
of Tenn poundes wherefore he promised unto this Court to take the
same appˀntice agayne into his service.
14th March, 1615. In the matter of complaint made by the weif of one
Xp̃ofer Greene who is now gone to the East indies of & about her
servaunt or appˀntice for that he kepeth her shop & doth gyve her no
allowaunce towardꝭ the kepeing of her out of the gettingꝭ in the same
shop w{ch} being duely herd at this Court It is ordered that the said
appˀntice shall from henceforth weekelie make unto his M{ris} a trew
& just accompt of such monie as he shall gett in the same shop &
that from henceforth he shall be at the appoyntment of his mistris &
of the M{rs} of this companie and his M{ris} shall have & enjoy all
such benifitt as shalbe gotten by the said shopp.
14th November, 1615. In the complaynt made by the servant of William
Corbett against his M{r} w{ch} beinge examyned at this Court It is
aparyant that the boy hath very stubburnlie & naughtielie behaved
himself unto his M{r} Whereupon it is this daie ordered that the boy
shall goe home agayne w{th} his M{r} & behave himselfe more honestlie
then formerlie he hath done w{ch} the boy promiseth to doe.
18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by M{ris} Wootten against
her appˀntice Thomas Hill for his neclect of service & for pleaing at
dice & whoring It is therefore ordered that the boy be corrected.
18th February, 1616. In the complaint made by David Richardson
against his M{r} ffletcher for lack of vittualls It is ordered that
ffletcher shall take the boy home & kepe him as an appˀntice ought to
be kept.
There are several records of masters being fined for keeping more
than three apprentices, the usual penalty being £5, though this was
sometimes mitigated on petition.
13th June, 1626. This daye John Pinder made complaint against Janson
his appˀntice, this Courte caused the vizard and coate to be brought
into the Parlor, and the apprentice submitted himselfe to his Maister
soe that his punishment was forborne.
For some particulars as to the vizard coate and bulbegger, see p. 393.
The mere sight of them had a softening effect upon Master Janson, as
also upon George Tether, who seems to have caught a glimpse of them
next year.
7th August, 1627. This daye the weife of Salomon Carr made complaint
against her apprentice George Tether formerly bound to Jeffery
Baskervile deceased and he had the bulbegger showed him, whoe upon
his humble submission to his M{ris} was spared in hoape of his better
service to her hereafter.
20th November, 1632. Martine Stamp made complaint ag̃t John Scott
by petic͠on to this Court thereby intimateing that his son Scotts
appˀntice is nowe kept and imployed onely for digging delveing &
planting and pruneing potatoes & tobacco in the Barmoothoes Iland.
(Query Bermudas.)
28th January, 1635. It is ordered that Jonas Gargrave shalbe
prosecuted to be disfraunchised at the charge of this house in regard
he tooke a married mann apprentice knoweingly.
Mr. Heydon’s apprentice, next referred to, was doubtless a gay and
swaggering young gentleman, and the Court in meteing out its amusing
sentence must have been conscious of touching him on a sore place.
9th August, 1647. Mr. Heydon complayneing to this Court of his
apprentice here present in Court ffor his evill and stubborne
Behavior towards him and frequent absences out of his service in
Day time and in late houres at night The said apprentice being in
Court to answer to the same did rudely and most irreverently behave
himselfe towards his said M{r} and the whole Court in sawcy language
and behaviour useing severall Oathes protesting that he will not
serve his M{r} whatever shall come of it This Court did therefore
cause the Haire of the said apprentice (being undecently long) to be
cut shorter.
8th August, 1729. It is ordered that the Clarke do sue M{r.} Lee
M{r.} Pemble and M{r.} Bonzer for binding their Apprentices by
Scriveners and not at the Hall.
4th August, 1741. It is ordered that James Parnell Stevenson who
was this day bound an apprentice to Tho{s.} fford be brought here
12 months hence by his Ma{r} that the Court may be satisfyed of his
being better improved in his Learning.
5th November, 1791. Elizabeth Conyers was apprenticed to Elizabeth
Castle and presented and bound in Court. This is but one of numerous
entries of girl apprentices.
The Registers of apprentices were for a long period kept in Latin,
_e.g._:
28th July, 1658. Mathew Moy fil̃l̃ M.M. nuper de com̃ Staford
vintener̊ defunct: põ: se ap̃p. Tho. Pace Watchmaker pro 7 annis a
die dãt.
The following is an example of a boy being bound to a freewoman of the
Company.
23rd June, 1658. Daniel Alderson fil̃l̃ Jacobi A. nuper Civ. et B. S.
Londini defunct põ: se ap̃p. matri suo Katherine Alderson pro 8 annis
a die dãt.
And here is an instance of a girl, the daughter of a “gentleman,” being
bound to a Barber-Surgeon and to his wife.
18th December, 1660. Katharina Bowghy fiɫ. Georgii B. de Addley in
com̃ Stafford gent. defunct põ: se ap̃p W{mo} Bennett B.C. et Marthæ
uxori ejus pro 7 annis a die dãt.
FREEMEN.
The earliest recorded fine on admission to the freedom was £3, one
Martin Partridge being sworn in on 26th July, 1551, when he paid £1 and
gave security for the remainder.
10th September, 1551. John Bryckett, “toothe drawer,” was admitted “a
brother into this house” and paid £1.
10th November, 1551. On this day four freemen were admitted paying
respectively 6_s._ 8_d._, 10_s._, 2_s._, 10_d._, and another man paid
nil, which indicates that the fines on admission were variable and at
the pleasure of the Court.
19th September, 1552. It was ordered that free journeymen should not
pay quarterage until such time as they set up for themselves and kept
house.
4th July, 1566. It was ordered that in future any one seeking admission
to the freedom if “Inglyshe borne” should pay £4 and any “alyan or
straynger” £5.
7th October, 1567. In this Courte Rich Morrys upon his fre makinge
pˀmyssed to geve the M{rs} a bucke.
21st October, 1567. In this Courte Thomas Symons and Willm fferrat
are sworne and admytted brethren of this Company and are lycenced to
sett open shoppe as parteners to gether w{th}oute Smythefelde bars.
2nd June, 1573. Here was Edward Duffeeld of London a practioner in
phisick & Surgery and required to be a brother of this Company and yt
was agreed that he should pay xl{s} in hand and other xl{s} at S{t.}
James daye.
9th June, 1573. Here was Gabriel Petrol for not being admytted a
Brother [he] occupynge Surgerye w{th}out admyttaunce and he promysed
he would and yt was agreed that he should at a moneth ende bringe in
xl{s} in pˀte of payment of v{li} w{th}out any farther delaye.
3rd June, 1600. Henry Wheelis is appoynted to pˀcure his M{r} to make
him free the next Court or to geve ovˀ his shop in long lane yf not
then to be comitted to the compter.
22nd July, 1600. This daye Henry Wilson of Ratcliffe and Mathewe
Eaton of S{t} Bartholomew in West Smythfeyld were suters to the M{rs}
of this Company to become broth{rs} of the same whereuppon they are
by this Court injoyned to geve their answere the next Court what
gratificac͠on they will bestowe of[172] the Company.
[172] On.
6th November, 1604. This daie Vincent Lowe became humble suiter to
this Companie to be admytted into the same by redempc͠on to w{ch}
request this Courte hath consented pˀvided hee paie to this Companie
in gratificac͠on v{li} of lawfull money of England and doe bestowe a
dinn{r} uppon the Assistantꝭ on Thursday next.