CHAPTER XII

OF THE TRADESMAN'S LEAVING HIS BUSINESS TO SERVANTS

It is the ordinary excuse of the gentlemen tradesmen of our times, that

they have good servants, and that therefore they take more liberty to be

out of their business, than they would otherwise do. 'Oh!' says the

shopkeeper, 'I have an apprentice--it is an estate to have such a

servant. I am as safe in him as if I had my eye upon the business from

morning till night; let me be where I will, I am always satisfied he is

at home; if I am at the tavern, I am sure he is in the counting-house,

or behind the counter; he is never out of his post.

'And then for my other servants, the younger apprentices,' says he, 'it

is all one as if I were there myself--they would be idle it may be, but

he won't let them, I assure you; they must stick close to it, or he will

make them do it; he tells them, boys do not come apprentices to play,

but to work; not to sit idle, and be doing nothing, but to mind their

master's business, that they may learn how to do their own.'

'Very well; and you think, Sir, this young man being so much in the

shop, and so diligent and faithful, is an estate to you, and so indeed

it is; but are your customers as well pleased with this man, too, as you

are? or are they as well pleased with him, as they would be, if you were

there yourself?'

'Yes, they are,' says the shopkeeper; 'nay, abundance of the customers

take him for the master of the shop, and don't know any other; and he is

so very obliging, and pleases so well, giving content to every body,

that, if I am at any other part of the shop, and see him serving a

customer, I never interrupt them, unless sometimes (he is so modest) he

will call me, and turning to the ladies say, "There's my master, Madam;

if you think he will abate you any thing, I'll call him;" and sometimes

they will look a little surprised, and say, "Is that your master?

indeed, we thought you had been the master of the shop yourself."'

'Well,' said I, 'and you think yourself very happy in all this, don't

you? Pray, how long has this young gentleman to serve? how long is it

before his time will be out?' 'Oh, he has almost a year and a half to

serve,' says the shopkeeper. 'I hope, then,' said I, 'you will take care

to have him knocked on the head, as soon as his time is out.' 'God

forbid,' says the honest man; 'what do you mean by that?' 'Mean!' said

I, 'why, if you don't, he will certainly knock your trade on the head,

as soon as the year and a half comes to be up. Either you must dispose

of him, as I say, or take care that he does not set up near you, no, not

in the same street; if you do, your customers will all run thither. When

they miss him in the shop, they will presently inquire for him; and as,

you say, they generally take him for the master, they will ask whether

the gentleman is removed that kept the shop before.'

All my shopkeeper could say, was, that he had got a salve for that sore,

and that was, that when Timothy was out of his time, he resolved to take

him in partner.

'A very good thing, indeed! so you must take Timothy into half the trade

when he is out of his time, for fear he should run away with

three-quarters of it, when he sets up for himself. But had not the

master much better have been Timothy himself?--then he had been sure

never to have the customers take Timothy for the master; and when he

went away, and set up perhaps at next door, leave the shop, and run

after him.'

It is certain, a good servant, a faithful, industrious, obliging

servant, is a blessing to a tradesman, and, as he said, is an estate to

his master; but the master, by laying the stress of his business upon

him, divests himself of all the advantages of such a servant, and turns

the blessing into a blast; for by giving up the shop as it were to him,

and indulging himself in being abroad, and absent from his business, the

apprentice gets the mastery of the business, the fame of the shop

depends upon him, and when he sets up, certainly follows him. Such a

servant would, with the master's attendance too, be very helpful, and

yet not be dangerous; such a servant is well, when he is visibly an

assistant to the master, but is ruinous when he is taken for the master.

There is a great deal of difference between a servant's being the stay

of his master, and his being the stay of his trade: when he is the

first, the master is served by him; and when he is gone, he breeds up

another to follow his steps; but when he is the last, he carries the

trade with him, and does his master infinitely more hurt than good.

A good tradesman has a great deal of trouble with a bad servant, but

must take heed that he is not wounded by a good one--the extravagant

idle vagrant servant hurts himself, but the diligent servant endangers

his master. The greater reputation the servant gets in his business, the

more care the master has upon him, lest he gets within him, and worms

him out of his business.

The only way to prevent this, and yet not injure a diligent servant, is

that the master be as diligent as the servant; that the master be as

much at the shop as the man. He that will keep in his business, need

never fear keeping his business, let his servant be as diligent as he

will. It is a hard thing that a tradesman should have the blessing of a

good servant, and make it a curse to him, by his appearing less capable

than his man.

Let your apprentice be in the business, but let the master be at the

head of the business at all times. There is a great deal of difference

between being diligent in the business _in_ the shop, and leading the

whole business _of_ the shop. An apprentice who is diligent may be

master of his business, but should never be master of the shop; the one

is to be useful to his master, the other is to be master of his master;

and, indeed, this shows the absolute necessity of diligence and

application in a tradesman, and how, for want of it, that very thing

which is the blessing of another tradesman's business is the ruin of

his.

Servants, especially apprentices, ought to be considered, as they really

are, in their moveable station, that they are here with you but seven

years, and that then they act or move in a sphere or station of their

own: their diligence is now for you, but ever after it is for

themselves; that the better servants they have been while they were with

you, the more dangerous they will be to you when you part; that,

therefore, though you are bound in justice to them to let them into your

business in every branch of it, yet you are not bound to give your

business away to them; the diligence, therefore, of a good servant in

the master's business, should be a spur to the master's diligence to

take care of himself.

There is a great deal of difference also between trusting a servant in

your business, and trusting him with your business: the first is leaving

your business with him, the other is leaving your business to him. He

that trusts a servant in his business, leaves his shop only to him; but

he that leaves his business to his servant, leaves his wife and children

at his disposal--in a word, such a trusting, or leaving the business to

the servant, is no less than a giving up all to him, abandoning the care

of his shop and all his affairs to him; and when such a servant is out

of his time, the master runs a terrible risk, such as, indeed, it is not

fit any tradesman should run--namely, of losing the best of his

business.

What I have been now saying, is of the tradesman leaving his business to

his apprentices and servants, when they prove good, when they are honest

and diligent, faithful, and industrious; and if there are dangers even

in trusting good servants, and such as do their duty perfectly well,

what, then, must it be when the business is left to idle, negligent, and

extravagant servants, who both neglect their masters' business and their

own, who neither learn their trade for themselves, nor regard it for the

interest of their masters? If the first are a blessing to their masters,

and may only be made dangerous by their carrying away the trade with

them when they go, these are made curses to their masters early, for

they lose the trade for themselves and their masters too. The first

carry the customers away with them, the last drive the customers away

before they go. 'What signifies going to such a shop?' say the ladies,

either speaking of a mercer or a draper, or any other trade; 'there is

nothing to be met with there but a crew of saucy boys, that are always

at play when you come in, and can hardly refrain it when you are there:

one hardly ever sees a master in the shop, and the young rude boys

hardly mind you when you are looking on their goods; they talk to you as

if they cared not whether you laid out your money or no, and as if they

had rather you were gone, that they might go to play again. I will go

there no more, not I.'

If this be not the case, then you are in danger of worse still, and that

is, that they are often thieves--idle ones are seldom honest ones--nay,

they cannot indeed be honest, in a strict sense, if they are idle: but

by dishonest, I mean downright thieves; and what is more dangerous than

for an apprentice, to whom the whole business, the cash, the books, and

all is committed, to be a thief?

For a tradesman, therefore, to commit his business thus into the hand of

a false, a negligent, and a thievish servant, is like a man that travels

a journey, and takes a highwayman into the coach with him: such a man is

sure to be robbed, and to be fully and effectually plundered, because he

discovers where he hides his treasure. Thus the tradesman places his

confidence in the thief, and how should he avoid being robbed?

It is answered, that, generally tradesmen, who have any considerable

trust to put into the hands of an apprentice, take security of them for

their honesty by their friends, when their indentures are signed; and it

is their fault then, if they are not secure. True, it is often so; but

in a retail business, if the servant be unfaithful, there are so many

ways to defraud a master, besides that of merely not balancing the cash,

that it is impossible to detect them; till the tradesman, declining

insensibly by the weight of the loss, is ruined and undone.

What need, then, has the tradesman to give a close attendance, and

preserve himself from plunder, by acquainting himself in and with his

business and servants, by which he makes it very difficult for them to

deceive him, and much easier to him to discover it if he suspects them.

But if the tradesman lives abroad, keeps at his country-house or

lodgings, and leaves his business thus in the hands of his servants,

committing his affairs to them, as is often the case; if they prove

thieves, negligent, careless, and idle, what is the consequence?--he is

insensibly wronged, his substance wasted, his business neglected; and

how shall a tradesman thrive under such circumstances? Nay, how is it

possible he should avoid ruin and destruction?--I mean, as to his

business; for, in short, every such servant has his hand in his master's

pocket, and may use him as he pleases.

Again, if they are not thieves, yet if they are idle and negligent, it

is, in some cases, the same thing; and I wish it were well recommended

to all such servants as call themselves honest, that it is as criminal

to neglect their master's business as to rob him; and he is as really a

thief who robs him of his time, as he that robs him of his money.

I know, as servants are now, this is a principle they will not allow,

neither does one servant in fifty act by it; but if the master be

absent, the servant is at his heels--that is to say, is as soon out of

doors as his master, and having none but his conscience to answer to, he

makes shift to compound with himself, like a bankrupt with his creditor,

to pay half the debt--that is to say, half the time to his master, and

half to himself, and think it good pay too.

The point of conscience, indeed, seems to be out of the question now,

between master and servant; and as few masters concern themselves with

the souls, nay, scarce with the morals of their servants, either to

instruct them, or inform them of their duty either to God or man, much

less to restrain them by force, or correct them, as was anciently

practised, so, few servants concern themselves in a conscientious

discharge of their duty to their masters--so that the great law of

subordination is destroyed, and the relative duties on both sides are

neglected; all which, as I take it, is owing to the exorbitant sums of

money which are now given with servants to the masters, as the present

or condition of their apprenticeship, which, as it is extravagant in

itself, so it gives the servant a kind of a different figure in the

family, places him above the ordinary class of servants hired for wages,

and exempts him from all the laws of family government, so that a master

seems now to have nothing to do with his apprentice, any other than in

what relates to his business.

And as the servant knows this, so he fails not to take the advantage of

it, and to pay no more service than he thinks is due; and the hours of

his shop business being run out, he claims all the rest for himself,

without the above restraint. Nor will the servants, in these times, bear

any examinations with respect to the disposing of their waste time, or

with respect to the company they keep, or the houses or places they go

to.

The use I make of it is this, and herein it is justly applicable to the

case in hand; by how much the apprentices and servants in this age are

loose, wild, and ungovernable, by so much the more should a master think

himself obliged not to depend upon them, much less to leave his business

to them, and dispense with his own attendance in it. If he does, he must

have much better luck then his neighbours, if he does not find himself

very much wronged and abused, seeing, as I said above, the servants and

apprentices of this age do very rarely act from a principle of

conscience in serving their master's interest, which, however, I do not

see they can be good Christians without.

I knew one very considerable tradesman in this city, and who had always

five or six servants in his business, apprentices and journeymen, who

lodged in his house; and having a little more the spirit of government

in him than most masters I now meet with, he took this method with them.

When he took apprentices, he told them beforehand the orders of his

family, and which he should oblige them to; particularly, that they

should none be absent from his business without leave, nor out of the

house after nine o'clock at night; and that he would not have it thought

hard, if he exacted three things of them:--

1. That, if they had been out, he should ask them where they had been,

and in what company? and that they should give him a true and direct

answer.

2. That, if he found reason to forbid them keeping company with any

particular person, or in any particular house or family, they should be

obliged to refrain from such company.

3. That, in breach of any of those two, after being positively charged

with it, he would, on their promising to amend it, forgive them, only

acquainting their friends of it; but the second time, he would dismiss

them his service, and not be obliged to return any of the money he had

with them. And to these he made their parents consent when they were

bound; and yet he had large sums of money with them too, not less than

£200 each, and sometimes more.

As to his journeymen, he conditioned with them as follows:--

1. They should never dine from home without leave asked and obtained,

and telling where, if required.

2. After the shutting in of the shop, they were at liberty to go where

they pleased, only not to be out of the house after nine o'clock at

night.

3. Never to be in drink, or to swear, on pain of being immediately

dismissed without the courtesy usual with such servants, namely, of a

month's warning.

These were excellent household laws; but the question is, how shall a

master see them punctually obeyed, for the life of all laws depends upon

their being well executed; and we are famous in England for being remiss

in that very point; and that we have the best laws the worst executed of

any nation in the world.

But my friend was a man who knew as well how to make his laws be well

executed, as he did how to make the laws themselves. His case was thus:

he kept a country-house about two miles from London, in the summer-time,

for the air of his wife and children, and there he maintained them very

comfortably: but it was a rule with him, that he who expects his

servants to obey his orders, must be always upon the spot with them to

see it done: to this purpose he confined himself to lie always at home,

though his family was in the country; and every afternoon he walked out

to see them, and to give himself the air too; but always so ordered his

diversions, that he was sure to be at home before nine at night, that he

might call over his family, and see that they observed orders, that is,

that they were all at home at their time, and all sober.

As this was, indeed, the only way to have good servants, and an orderly

family, so he had both; but it was owing much, if not all, to the

exactness of his government; and would all masters take the same method,

I doubt not they would have the like success; but what servants can a

man expect when he leaves them to their own government, not regarding

whether they serve God or the devil?

Now, though this man had a very regular family, and very good servants,

yet he had this particular qualification, too, for a good tradesman,

namely, that he never left his business entirely to them, nor could any

of them boast that they were trusted to more than another.

This is certainly the way to have regular servants and to have business

thrive; but this is not practised by one master to a thousand at this

time--if it were, we should soon see a change in the families of

tradesmen, and that very much for the better: nor, indeed, would this

family government be good for the tradesman only, but it would be the

servant's advantage too; and such a practice, we may say, would in time

reform all the next age, and make them ashamed of us that went before

them.

If, then, the morals of servants are thus loose and debauched, and that

it is a general and epidemic evil, how much less ought tradesmen of this

age to trust them, and still less to venture their all upon them, leave

their great design, the event of all their business with them, and go

into the country in pursuit of their pleasure.

The case of tradesmen differs extremely in this age from those in the

last, with respect to their apprentices and servants; and the difference

is all to the disadvantage of the present age, namely, in the last age,

that is to say, fifty or sixty years ago, for it is not less, servants

were infinitely more under subjection than they are now, and the

subordination of mankind extended effectually to them; they were content

to submit to family government; and the just regulations which masters

made in their houses were not scorned and contemned, as they are now;

family religion also had some sway upon them; and if their masters did

keep good orders, and preserve the worship of God in their houses, the

apprentices thought themselves obliged to attend at the usual hours for

such services; nay, it has been known, where such orders have been

observed, that if the master of the family has been sick, or indisposed,

or out of town, the eldest apprentice has read prayers to the family in

his place.

How ridiculous, to speak in the language of the present times, would it

be for any master to expect this of a servant in our days! and where is

the servant that would comply with it? Nay, it is but very rarely now

that masters themselves do it; it is rather thought now to be a low

step, and beneath the character of a man in business, as if worshipping

God were a disgrace, and not an honour, to a family, or to the master of

a family; and I doubt not but in a little while more, either the worship

of God will be quite banished out of families, or the better sort of

tradesmen, and such as have any regard to it, will keep chaplains, as

other persons of quality do. It is confessed, the first is most

probable, though the last, as I am informed, is already begun in the

city, in some houses, where the reader of the parish is allowed a small

additional salary to come once a-day, namely, every evening, to read

prayers in the house.

But I am not talking on this subject; I am not directing myself to

citizens or townsmen, as masters of families, but as heads of trade, and

masters in their business; the other part would indeed require a whole

book by itself, and would insensibly run me into a long satirical

discourse upon the loss of all family government among us; in which,

indeed, the practice of house-keepers and heads of families is grown not

remiss only in all serious things, but even scandalous in their own

morals, and in the personal examples they show to their servants, and

all about them.

But to come back to my subject, namely, that the case of tradesmen

differs extremely from what it was formerly: the second head of

difference is this; that whereas, in former times, the servants were

better and humbler than they are now, submitted more to family

government, and to the regulations made by their masters, and masters

were more moral, set better examples, and kept better order in their

houses, and, by consequence of it, all servants were soberer, and fitter

to be trusted, than they are now; yet, on the other hand,

notwithstanding all their sobriety, masters did not then so much depend

upon them, leave business to them, and commit the management of their

affairs so entirely to their servants, as they do now.

All that I meet with, which masters have to say to this, is contained in

two heads, and these, in my opinion, amount to very little.

I. That they have security for their servants' honesty, which in former

times they had not.

II. That they receive greater premiums, or present-money, now with their

apprentices, than they did formerly.

The first of these is of no moment; for, first, it does not appear that

apprentices in those former days gave no security to their masters for

their integrity, which, though perhaps not so generally as now, yet I

have good reason to know was then practised among tradesmen of note,

and is not now among inferior tradesmen: but, secondly, this security

extends to nothing, but to make the master satisfaction for any

misapplications or embezzlements which are discovered, and can be

proved, but extend to no secret concealed mischiefs: neither, thirdly,

do those securities reach to the negligence, idleness, or debaucheries

of servants; but, which is still more than all the rest, they do not

reach to the worst of robbery between the servant and his master, I mean

the loss of his time; so that still there is as much reason for the

master's inspection, both into his servants and their business, as ever.

But least of all does this security reach to make the master any

satisfaction for the loss of his business, the ill management of his

shop, the disreputation brought upon it by being committed to servants,

and those servants behaving ill, slighting, neglecting, or disobliging

customers; this does not relate to securities given or taken, nor can

the master make himself any amends upon his servant, or upon his

securities, for this irrecoverable damage. He, therefore, that will keep

up the reputation of his shop, or of his business, and preserve his

trade to his own advantage, must resolve to attend it himself, and not

leave it to servants, whether good or bad; if he leaves it to good

servants, they improve it for themselves, and carry the trade away with

them when they go; if to bad servants, they drive his customers away,

bring a scandal upon his shop, and destroy both their master and

themselves.

Secondly, As to the receiving great premiums with their apprentices,

which, indeed, is grown up to a strange height in this age, beyond

whatever it was before, it is an unaccountable excess, which is the ruin

of more servants at this time than all the other excesses they are

subject to, nay, in some respect it is the cause of it all; and, on the

contrary, is far from being an equivalent to their masters for the

defect of their service, but is an unanswerable reason why the master

should not leave his business to their management.

This premium was originally not a condition of indenture, but was a kind

of usual or customary present to the tradesman's wife to engage her to

be kind to the youth, and take a motherly care of him, being supposed to

be young when first put out.

By length of time this compliment or present became so customary as to

be made a debt, and to be conditioned for as a demand, but still was

kept within bounds, and thirty or forty pounds was sufficient to a very

good merchant, which now is run up to five hundred, nay, to a thousand

pounds with an apprentice; a thing which formerly would have been

thought monstrous, and not to be named.

The ill consequences of giving these large premiums are such and so

many, that it is not to be entered upon in such a small tract as this;

nor is it the design of this work: but it is thus far to the purpose

here--namely, as it shows that this sets up servants into a class of

gentlemen above their masters, and above their business; and they

neither have a sufficient regard to one or other, and consequently are

the less fit to be trusted by the master in the essential parts of his

business; and this brings it down to the case in hand.

Upon the whole, the present state of things between masters and servants

is such, that now more than ever the caution is needful and just, that

he that leaves his business to the management of his servants, it is ten

to one but he ruins his business and his servants too.

Ruining his business is, indeed, my present subject; but ruining his

servants also is a consideration that an honest, conscientious master

ought to think is of weight with him, and will concern himself about.

Servants out of government are like soldiers without an officer, fit for

nothing but to rob and plunder; without order, and without orders, they

neither know what to do, or are directed how to do it.

Besides, it is letting loose his apprentices to levity and liberty in

that particular critical time of life, when they have the most need of

government and restraint. When should laws and limits be useful to

mankind but in their youth, when unlimited liberty is most fatal to

them, and when they are least capable of governing themselves? To have

youth left without government, is leaving fire in a magazine of powder,

which will certainly blow it all up at last, and ruin all the houses

that are near it.

If there is any duty on the side of a master to his servant, any

obligation on him as a Christian, and as a trustee for his parents, it

lies here--to limit and restrain them, if possible, in the liberty of

doing evil; and this is certainly a debt due to the trust reposed in

masters by the parents of the youth committed to them. If he is let

loose here, he is undone, of course, and it may be said, indeed, he was

ruined by his master; and if the master is afterwards ruined by such a

servant, what can be said for it but this? He could expect no other.

To leave a youth without government is indeed unworthy of any honest

master; he cannot discharge himself as a master; for instead of taking

care of him he indeed casts him off, abandons him, and, to put it into

Scripture words, he leads him into temptation: nay, he goes farther, to

use another Scripture expression: he delivers him over to Satan.

It is confessed--and it is fatal both to masters and servants at this

time--that not only servants are made haughty, and above the government

of their masters, and think it below them to submit to any family

government, or any restraints of their masters, as to their morals and

religion; but masters also seem to have given up all family government,

and all care or concern for the morals and manners, as well as for the

religion of their servants, thinking themselves under no obligation to

meddle with those things, or to think any thing about them, so that

their business be but done, and their shop or warehouse duly looked

after.

But to bring it all home to the point in hand, if it is so with the

master and servant, there is the less room still for the master of such

servants to leave any considerable trust in the hands of such

apprentices, or to expect much from them, to leave the weight of their

affairs with them, and, living at their country lodgings, and taking

their own diversions, depend upon such servants for the success of their

business. This is indeed abandoning their business, throwing it away,

and committing themselves, families, and fortunes, to the conduct of

those, who, they have all the reason in the world to believe, have no

concern upon them for their good, or care one farthing what becomes of

them.

The Complete English Tradesman (1839 ed.) · 第 12 / 25 章