But worse perhaps than this was the public odium they brought upon themselves. That this was so was acknowledged in formal meeting at the close of their public life, yet it had existed long before and grew daily stronger.

[Sidenote: _Other signs of decay._]

[Sidenote: _Internal disorder._]

[Sidenote: _Accounts carelessly kept._]

[Sidenote: _Trade leaves them._]

These two causes would have been alone sufficient to bring about the downfall of the companies. But there were other signs of decay in plenty.

Internal disorder was adding to the degradation into which the once honourable a.s.sociations were falling. Even in 1668 the Glovers are compelled to take into account "the disorderly manner of making wardens."

So late as 1832 the Saddlers inflict a fine on their steward for attending meetings in a state of intoxication. The books are much less carefully kept. The Glovers' company came to an untimely end in 1810 through maladministration and carelessness in dealing with the yearly balance sheet[216]. In 1822 so great a company as the Mercers' is found appointing a committee to search for the charter, which is ultimately found in the hands of a private individual whose magnanimity in surrendering what did not belong to him is highly praised by a formal resolution[217]. We have seen already how trade had fallen off. In 1770 a member of the Saddlers'

company paid five guineas "to be for ever excused from serving the office of Steward or Warden." Private interest alone formed the motive of action in commercial dealings. The individual knew nothing of obligations due to society.

[Sidenote: _General demoralisation._]

Society was indeed in a state of rottenness. Outwardly there was plentiful decorum; really there was sufficient sham with its usual concomitant, laxity of morals, in a very marked degree[218]. It could hardly be expected that this should be otherwise in the general disregard which prevailed of all finer instincts: questionable commercial dealings and adulteration of products, on the one hand, were naturally accompanied by brutality and squalor on the other. Commercial success was the only criterion, and as the companies could not stand the test of this touchstone of merit they were doomed.

[Sidenote: _Efforts to delay the end._]

The Gilds of workmen in building trades had been seriously affected, if not destroyed, long before by the Statute 2 and 3 Edward VI. cap. 15, which allowed "any Freemason, roughmason, carpenter, bricklayer, plasterer," etc. "borne in this realme or made Denizon, to work in any of the saide Crafts in anye cittie Boroughe or Towne Corporate ... albeit the saide p'son or p'sons ... doe not inhabyte or dwell in the cittee Borough or Towne Corporate ... nor be free of the same." But in all other trades the law had upheld the companies, and a.s.sociations strong as these were in antiquity were not to be destroyed without a struggle. In the early years of the nineteenth century they began to think about internal reformation, which, had it been accomplished with singleness of purpose, might perhaps have secured their further usefulness and life. The expenses connected with the annual feasts were regulated[219]. We have seen in the foregoing chapter how the senior members began to withdraw from the dissoluteness of the Show. The actions against intruders, which had long become chronic, were pushed on with new vigour. In the hopes apparently of deciding the question once for all the Mercers' company inst.i.tuted a great suit against a Mr Hart in the year 1823 which was looked upon by all parties as a test case. Two years previously a committee had been appointed to search for the charter and other doc.u.ments which might be serviceable to the company in the great struggle they were apparently then meditating. The opinion of counsel was taken, and it being favourable to the company a full meeting unanimously resolved to act upon it. The first thing to be done was to retrench the expenses. It was decided that no dinner could be held that year (1823), and the annual subscriptions to the Infirmary, the Lancaster School, and other charitable objects were suspended. The costs of the actions were to be borne by all the combrethren "rateably and in proportion agreeable to the ancient custom and usage of the Company." But several resignations and withdrawals took place, which show that there was some doubt, if not as to the exact legality, at any rate as to the expediency of the step which was being taken. But the great majority were resolved to press the matter to the issue. Actions against several intruders were consolidated, and that against Mr Hart came on for trial.

Important counsel were engaged, and everything was done on both sides to discover the actual state of the law. The result was a verdict entirely in favour of the company. But the a.s.sessment of damages at a farthing (while the expenses incurred by the company were between six and seven hundred pounds) showed how strongly public opinion ran in a direction contrary to the mere letter of the law[220].

The defendants however in the present case submitted at once, and the company soon recovered its former financial prosperity. Its subscriptions were again paid after a brief interval. But it is noticeable that actions against intruders went on precisely as before. The effect of this great verdict, which was hailed with public dinners and illuminations, was absolutely _nil_.

It however stimulated the efforts of the companies in the direction of reform. In consequence of the action the Mercers resolved that the enrolment of apprentices (which they confessed had been "criminally neglected") should be better carried out in future, and that a _bona fide_ indenture for seven years should be required in all cases before any claim to the freedom of the company could be admitted. As a tangible result a new book of apprenticeship was commenced, which continued to be carefully and neatly kept to the end. Its first entry is dated August 1, 1823, though there are several records of earlier indentures. Its last is July 2, 1835. A new book for recording the pet.i.tions of foreigners to be admitted was also provided. These were comparatively few in number. They extend from July 31, 1823, to June 2, 1834.

[Sidenote: _The Munic.i.p.al Corporations Act._]

Such was the condition of the companies when the Munic.i.p.al Corporations Act[221] was pa.s.sed. No detailed description of this measure, albeit it was "second in importance to the Reform Act alone[222]," is needed here.

As far as the companies were concerned its provisions were simple. It took away from them wholly and entirely all their exclusive privileges of trading.

"Whereas in divers cities, towns, and boroughs a certain custom hath prevailed, and certain bye-laws have been made, that no person, not being free of a city, town, or borough, or of certain guilds, mysteries, or trading companies within the same or some or one of them, shall keep any shop or place for putting to show or sale any or certain wares or merchandize by way of retail or otherwise, or use any or certain trades, occupations, mysteries, or handicrafts for hire, gain, or sale within the same: Be it enacted that, notwithstanding any such custom or bye-law, every person in any borough may keep any shop for the sale of all lawful wares and merchandizes by wholesale or retail, and use every lawful trade, occupation, mystery, and handicraft, for hire, gain, sale or otherwise, within any borough." In these words, which might seem the echo of Magna Carta[223] through the centuries, liberty of trading was made a fact throughout England.

[Sidenote: _End of the companies._]

It is interesting that we have recorded for us the way in which this sweeping change was received by those most concerned. The Mercers had foreseen (July 31, 1835) that it would be advisable to drop all pending actions against foreigners until the result of the Act then before Parliament should be decided. After it had become law the company met, for the last time under the old conditions, on March 25, 1836, to consider their position and to take steps for the future. It was apparently a stormy meeting. An influential minority proposed to divide the property among the members there and then, and so have done with the company. It was however carried "That the chief rents ... be not disposed of, but reserved to meet the payments to be made to the Alms people of St. Chad's Almshouses[224], and for other purposes." The fire engine, the company's weights and measures etc., were sold. The other companies acted in a similar manner. The Saddlers divided at once the funds which remained in the treasurer's hands, and which amounted to 1. 7_s._ 0_d._ for each member[225]. Their arbour was however retained, and the rent from it expended on the annual feast on Show Monday. This arrangement was to continue so long as any of the freemen should be living: on the decease of the last survivor the arbour was to devolve to the town council. Lastly, all books, and whatever else remained to the company, were to be deposited with the wardens for the time being.

[Sidenote: _Partial continuation of the companies._]

For attempts were made, even in the desperate pa.s.s to which the companies seemed to be brought, to prolong the end. A few patriotic members kept up the shadows of the old fraternities. The ancient custom of electing officers was maintained; the Mercers' records bring the lists complete down to 1876. The arbours were repaired, mostly at the cost of private individuals, and at spasmodic intervals, while the Show still continued to afford opportunities for dissolute revelry to the lowest of the town and neighbourhood. The companies themselves fell back into their original condition of voluntary a.s.sociations of individuals united for purposes partly benevolent but mainly social, and of which the state took no cognisance. "No one can give much attention to the subject without coming to the conclusion that feasting was one of the essential and most valued features of the companies in their early days[226]:" it became so again in their later. As they had existed long before external circ.u.mstances brought them into prominence, so they continued long after they had ceased to influence public affairs, and so they lingered on even after the nation had plainly signified that their existence was not only superfluous but injurious. For their endeavours to restrict trade had been, so far as they had been successful, detrimental to the prosperity of the town, while they had allowed the duty of succouring needy workmen to slip entirely from their hands.

The Friendly Societies which had long taken up this very important part of the functions which the mediaeval Gilds had performed rose meanwhile into public favour. Their excellent work was so apparent that an Act of Parliament was pa.s.sed for their encouragement in 1793, and it was even urged that they should be made compulsory.

[Sidenote: _Their property gives them life._]

The companies had to all intents and purposes long forgotten their duty in this respect, and they could not take it up again now, though had this course been possible they might have commended themselves to public favour. There was only one means which kept them alive. The secret of their vitality was their possession of property[227], and as that melted away the companies were found dropping out of existence. For being deprived of their real essence they had nothing to recommend them. Even the Show degenerated into a public scandal, and the companies, like their annual pageant, at length died, one by one, unnoticed and unregretted[228].

[Sidenote: _Return to organisation._]

Yet there was arising, even at the time when the old companies were being destroyed, a movement in favour of some return to organisation and regulation. Organisation indeed seems to have been a characteristic of the English people at all stages of their history. The Saxons had their Frith Gilds and their Monks' Gilds; the English of the Middle Ages had their Merchant, Religious, Social, and Craft Gilds; in the sixteenth century they had their Trade Societies, the direct and in many cases the little-altered successors of the Craft Gilds. Then came the larger Regulated Companies, which also had some features in common with the mediaeval Gilds, more with the sixteenth century societies. The main differences between the earlier a.s.sociations and those of a later date lay in the avowed motive of confederacy and in the nature of the influence they exercised. The ostensible motive of the Gilds was the general welfare: in the case of the companies it was individual gain. The influence of the Gilds may be called a healthy social and moral influence[229]; that of the post-reformation companies in the towns was in the main directed to selfish and political ends[230].

New organisations, adapted to altered conditions of life and new modes of thought, resembling and yet differing from the Gilds, were now to arise and take the place of the companies as these had taken the place of the mediaeval fraternities. The growth of these however will be beyond the scope of the present essay.

It was doubtless necessary that the companies should be pulled down from the lofty heights which they once had occupied. It was requisite that all relics of the detailed system of trade-organisation which the Middle Ages had handed down to us should be broken up, to make room for a _regime_ more conformable to modern conditions of industry. The anarchic reign of individualism through which trade pa.s.sed at the beginning of this century was an unavoidable step in economic development.

But it was a step attended with infinite loss and inestimable suffering, and it is well that proofs are not wanting of the approaching end of unrestrained compet.i.tion and anti-social individualism. Signs of change are not wanting. Experience is continually demonstrating that organisation can accomplish vastly more than individual enterprise; that combination is immeasurably more powerful than compet.i.tion. It is indeed the tracing out of this reaction in favour of combination for common ends, which lends to the economic history of the last hundred years its chief, perhaps its only, human interest.

[Sidenote: _Socialists and other forms of organisation._]

The reaction has manifested itself in various ways. The _Socialists_ have always made State-organisation of labour one of the strongest planks of their platform[231]. At the same time Englishmen have looked with peculiar jealousy on any attempts by the state to extend its sphere of action.

Nevertheless a steady development has been witnessed in this direction; the various Civil Services show a uniform increase with the numbers and requirements of the nation. The Board of Trade, the Local Government Board, the Charity and Ecclesiastical Commissioners, are further indications of the same tendency towards organisation.

[Sidenote: _Trades Unions;_]

The Gilds cannot, as we have seen, be censured for low aims; moreover their endeavours to reach the level they set themselves were constant and sincere. And the latter half of the nineteenth century has seen a repet.i.tion of somewhat similar attempts.

[Sidenote: _their achievements._]

[Sidenote: _Improvement in status of labour._]

The Trades Union movement[232] is one pregnant with promise for the future[233]. Though the Unions were formed in the first instances for the purpose of resistance to the masters, it may be hoped that as the need for this grows weaker the a.n.a.logy which their promoters love to inst.i.tute between them and the old Craft Gilds may become more and more real. They have already done much to raise the condition of labour, and as Friendly Societies they are of the highest value to the workmen[234]. There are signs too that we may even obtain organisations which, with due allowance for altered conditions, may accomplish much of the other good work which Gilds performed for mediaeval industry.

[Sidenote: _Attempts at regulation of trade._]

The Unions already aim at ensuring stability of employment through deliberate regulation of trade. By this means they hope to strike a death-blow at that root-evil of our present industrial system, irregularity of employment and uncertainty of wages.

[Sidenote: _Further necessary approximation to Gilds._]

But they yet fall short of the Gilds in two important particulars, and until these deficiencies are made good Trades Unions can only be considered as insufficient means to a highly desirable end.

[Sidenote: _Appreciation of the common interests of masters and men,_]

In the first place there must be no a.s.sociation of men against masters, or masters against men, but union of men with masters for the common good of the craft. Fifty years ago it was pointed out[235] that "the recent destruction of the old Gilds was a purely negative policy, which required to be followed up by a reconstruction on similar, but modified, lines[236]." But of course nothing was attempted, though it is for their care in seeing that the public was well served that the Gilds are chiefly praised to-day.

[Sidenote: _and of the necessity of ensuring a higher standard of work._]

In the second direction much less advance has been made[237]. Yet it cannot be expected that a high standard of wages is to be maintained unless a high standard of workmanship is also ensured. Improvement in pay can only with justice accompany improvement in skill and application.

Something of the sentiment and tradition of good work which so strongly characterised the Middle Ages must be brought back. As yet it is wofully lacking. Up to the present the Trades Unions have made no real attempt to grapple with this evil, though its removal is a necessary preliminary to anything like completeness in our industrial reformation. Until they can show their ability to direct trade in this respect in a manner more beneficial to the community than competing capitalists have done during the past, the student will find their a.n.a.logy to the mediaeval Gilds incomplete (and that in a point where the latter might be followed with benefit), and the public will consider their usefulness to society unsatisfactory.

APPENDIX I

NON-GILDATED TRADESMEN[238].

The ordinary authorities on Economic history say little or nothing of the non-gildated tradesmen in the towns, though these formed an important portion of the commercial community. To understand fully the conditions under which trade was carried on in mediaeval England the existence of such unfree merchants must be taken into account and their importance appreciated.