wages." If he refused, "he was to be committed to jail till he found surety to enter into service; if he departed before the term agreed, he was to be imprisoned. None were to pay more than the old wages upon pain of forfeiting double what they had paid; if the workman took more, he was to be committed to jail, the overplus wages to go to the king's use." Two years later another statute was passed (25 Ed. III. s. 2) which interfered not only with labourers in husbandry, but also with those in several other branches of industry. "Carters, ploughmen, and other servants were to serve by the whole year or by other usual terms, and not by the day. No one was to go out of the town where he dwelt, in winter, to serve in summer, if he could get work therein. The wages of servants in husbandry and of certain artificers were fixed by the Act. Cordwainers and shoemakers were not to sell boots or shoes in any other manner than they were wont in the 20th year of the reign of Ed. III. Saddlers, horsesmiths, tailors, and others not mentioned in the Act were to be sworn before the justices to do and use their crafts and offices in the manner they were wont to do in the said 20th year and time before, and any one breaking this statute after such oath was to be punished by fine and imprisonment. If labourers or artificers left their work and went into another county, process was to be issued to the sheriff to arrest and bring them back."

By 12 Richard II. it was further enacted that "no servant or labourer, whether man or woman, should depart out of the hundred where he dwelt, to serve elsewhere, unless he brought a letter patent containing the cause of his going and the time of his return; and if he was to return, under the king's seal, which for this purpose was to be in the keeping of some man of the hundred. A servant wandering about without such testimonial was to be put into the stocks till he gave surety to return to his place." By the same statute it was also provided "that he or she who used to labour at the plough and cart, or other service in husbandry, till twelve years of age, should so abide and not be put to any other mystery." In the following year (13) Richard II. c. 8) it was ordained that "the justices were to settle and proclaim between Easter and Michaelmas what should

be the wages of day labourers." In order to prevent the rural population from apprenticing their children to trades in cities and boroughs, and thereby reducing the number of servants in husbandry below the proper level, it was enacted by 7 Hen. IV., "that no person was to put a son or daughter apprentice within a city or borough, except he had land or rent to the value of 20s. a year at the least, on pain of a year's imprisonment. And every person offering to apprentice a child in a city or borough was obliged to bring a bill sealed by two justices of the county, testifying the value of the said land or rent."

§ 43. This economical heresy of fixing prices and wages by law was not confined to legislative enactment, for we find that in 1350 the Mayor of London issued a regulation fixing the wages and prices in all trades in the city. The same thing is repeated in the ordinances of the craft-guilds, agreed to after the plague, the invariable rule being that nobody "shall take for working in the said trade more they were wont heretofore." In 1362, when a fearful tempest destroyed the roofs of a great number of houses, there was issued a royal order, that materials for roofing, and the wages of tilers, shall not be enhanced by reason of the damage done by the late tempest." It does not appear, therefore, that the object of the Statutes of Labourers was merely to grind down the wages of the poor, although at a later date they were frequently used for that purpose; the regulations then enacted were part of the policy of the time, as similar measures were provided against usury, and many other

matters.

§ 44. The condition of things caused by the plague, and the circumstances arising therefrom, seem to have had the effect of producing quite a change in the relationship of labour and capital; the opposing interests of the workmen and their employers were now for the first time brought face to face on a large scale; the endeavours of the labourers to raise their wages were naturally shown in the strongest form in those trades which were the most developed, such as the cloth manufactures, in which there existed a large working-class element. In 1350 a petition was presented by the MasterShearmen to the authorities of the city of London, "in which

they complain that they could no longer have journeymen at the same rate of wages as formerly; and that now the men will not work otherwise than by the cloth, and then so greatly hurry over the same, that they do great damage to the folks to whom such cloths belong." They therefore prayed that the old customs of fixing wages, etc., should be re-established, under penalties. It appears from one of their ordinances of the same year that strikes had been resorted to by the journeymen, as a means of procuring satisfaction for their fellow-workers; it was therefore" ordained that from henceforth, if there be any dispute moved between any master and his man in the said trade, such dispute shall be settled by the warden of the trade." If the workman did not submit to the warden, he was "to be punished by the mayor and aldermen at their discretion." similar enactment is contained in the statutes of the alien weavers of 1362.

A

§ 45. The building trades acquired a standing of some importance at an early stage of our history; the beautiful cathedrals, churches, and old palaces attest the skill of the building operatives, and especially of the masons, at that date. The master of that day was the architect-not a contractor— the masters and foremen under him were held responsible for the work done, the workmen generally being answerable to them for their workmanship and conduct. In smaller buildings such as dwelling-houses, and the like, the owner was his own master; he found the capital, and generally conducted the work, having masters and foremen when required to see after the necessary details; hence we find that there were regulations as to the wages of the master, defining what amount he might retain of the wages of the journeymen, or that he should not deduct anything for himself, as the case might be. Sometimes the work was taken in the gross, that is, by contract, as is proven by the statutes of the London masons in 1356. The building trades were the nearest approximation to our modern forms of industry, the persons who carried on the trade on their own account being fewer, and the number of dependent workmen greater, than in any other trades; and therefore the relations between masters and workmen were somewhat

similar to what they are now. Strikes were frequent in those trades, even at that time; thus, in England, the "Royal mandate as to the workmen who have withdrawn from the Palace of Westminster," tells of a strike in those trades; the two laws then enacted against combinations, congregations, and chapters of workmen-34 Ed. III. c. 9 and 3 Hen. VI. c. 1—were directed against workmen in the building trades only; their peculiar position is apparent from the fact that all the legal regulations as to wages cited by Eden, refer, by the side of those employed in agriculture, exclusively to workmen engaged in the building trades.

$ 46. The combinations, which grew up in those trades, and which in that early age took the form of trade unions, were the result of exceptional circumstances; the growth of a distinct class of journeymen, with special interests and distinctive views, gave rise to the necessity, and called into existence these organisa

Hence we find journeymen in other trades forming similar associations in the city of London, and the authorities were afraid that the workmen would abuse their power and use the unions as a means of raising wages. Accordingly, in 1383, the city authorities issued a proclamation forbidding all congregations, covins, and conspiracies of workmen in general; in 1387 three journeymen cordwainers, wishing to found a fraternity, united with a friar preacher, in order that he might obtain for them a confirmation from the Pope, and thus secure them against the before-mentioned prohibition; but they were arrested and lodged in Newgate, under the powers of the proclamation, before their plan could be carried out. About the same time there existed a religious fraternity of the saddlers, they had their own livery and six governors: but the masters being of opinion that this association might be used as a means of raising wages, it was, at their request, suppressed by the city authorities. A similar fate befel the brotherhood of tailors in 1415, in which year the city authorities expressly reproached the wardens of the tailors'-guilds because societies existed among their workmen, although they were subject to the wardens' control. These likewise had their livery, held meetings and religious services, and lived together in common.

The associations, however, in spite of this attempted suppression, continued to exist, and in 1417 they petitioned the authorities to allow them to hold religious services, and "to do other things which theretofore they had been wont to do."

§ 47. While the city authorities were thus attempting to suppress the independent organisations of the workmen, they tried to soften the harsh effects of their action by always decreeing "that the serving-men in the trade aforesaid should in future be under the governance and rule of the masters of such trade, the same as the serving-men in other trades in the same city are wont, and of right bound to be." There was also added, for their protection, this injunction, "That the said masters must properly treat and govern their serving-men in the trade, in such manner as the serving-men in the city have been wont to be properly treated and governed." A means of appeal against the decisions of the guild-masters is likewise given to the workmen, for it is ordained: "That if any serving-man should in future wish to make complaint to the mayor and aldermen for the time being, as to any grievance unduly inflicted upon him by the masters aforesaid, such mayor and aldermen would give to him his due and speedy need of justice as to the same." It would appear that there was a tendency in certain trades to follow employments without having been first apprenticed, hence we find the following in the leather-sellers' ordinance, "That from henceforth, no one shall set any man, child, or woman, to work in the same trade, if such person be not first bound apprentice, and enrolled in the trade, their wives and children only excepted."

§ 48. The government of the craft-guilds and the regulations issued by the masters seem to have either given satisfaction, or to have stifled complaints: the latter would appear to have been the case in some places, for it is enacted by Richard II., "that no varlets called yeoman should wear liveries ;" and in another, "that no livery should be given under colour of a guild or fraternity, or any other association, whether of gentry, or servants, or commonalty." In some instances, the masters and wardens of the guilds really protected the workmen against their employers: several curious examples of which are