THE BARBERS UNINCORPORATE.
The origin of the Barbers’ Guild partook of a religious character; and the meeting together of men of the craft for religious observances, for attending the funerals and obits of deceased members and their wives, and for feasting once a year, gradually transformed a semi-social and religious guild into what ultimately became a purely secular or “trade guild.” This religious origin is borne out by the very important Return made by the Barbers of London, to the Writ of 12th Rich. II, and is strengthened by reference to the Returns made by the Barbers of Lincoln and of Norwich (both which latter are preserved at the Record Office), and which clearly point to those guilds being of a religious character; indeed the Barbers of Norwich do not seem to have had a single secular or trade ordinance in their constitution.
1388. In the Return of the Barbers of London to the Writ of Richard II, the Masters recite that they “have found a document amongst the articles of their records made of the time to which memory runneth not,” concerning the points upon which the fraternity was founded;
Primerement al honourance de Dieu et touz ses Seyntes et pur excitac͠on les c͠oens des gentz a bien faire et perseverance avoir et bien faitz. . . . .
Firstly to the honour of God and all his Saints, and to stir up the commons of the people to do well, and to have perseverance in well doing. . . . .
Regulations were made enjoining charity, attendance at funerals and obits, against the enticing away of the servants of others, providing for the amicable settlement of disputes, and the like.
The articles above briefly referred to, contain nothing in particular as to trade regulation or inspection, leaving a pretty certain inference that they were made for the governance of a social and religious guild or fraternity. We shall presently see that in 1308, the Company partook of the nature of a trade guild, and we may therefore reasonably presume that the articles made in the time to which memory in 1388 did not run, were drawn up previous to 1308, and therefore without much hesitation we may assign the origin of the Barbers’ Company to at least the xiijth. century.
In the early part of the reign of Edward II, and indeed for a long while previously, the Barbers were practitioners in the art of Surgery; at all events they performed the minor operations of that craft, such as bleeding, tooth-drawing, cauterization, and the like.
The Barbers having been accustomed to assist the monks in the surgical operations performed by them in early times, acquired a degree of proficiency which enabled them to practise as Surgeons themselves. Up till about the xijth. century the practice of Surgery and Medicine was however almost wholly confined to the Clergy, who seem to have enjoyed the double privilege of curing men’s bodies as well as their souls. In 1163 the Council of Tours, under Pope Alexander III, considering that a practice which involved in its operations the shedding of blood, was incompatible with the holy office of the clergy, forbad them to interfere in any matter of Surgery; the consequence of this edict was that they gave over the operations of Surgery but continued to practise the healing art of Medicine.
As already said, the Clergy very frequently employed the Barbers as their assistants, and committed to them the preparation of the medicated baths and the performance of sundry minor surgical operations. No doubt the Edict of Tours was hailed with joy by the Barbers, who thus found a lucrative practice thrown in their way, and seized the opportunity of practising as Surgeons “on their own account,” calling themselves Barber-Surgeons, and practising both Barbery and Surgery.
c. 1307. The archives preserved at the Guildhall have many entries concerning the Barbers’ Company, and in Letter-Book D. 157B. there is an ordinance concerning the Barbers of London, which shows that at this time they were occupied in Surgery, and advertised their profession in an objectionable manner, which was very properly forbidden by the City authorities.
De Barbours. Et que nul barbier ne soit se ose ne si hardy qil mette sank en leur fenestres en apiert ou en view des gentz, mais pryvement le facent porter a Thamise sur peine des doux souldz rendre al oeps des Viscountz.
Concerning Barbers. And that no barbers shall be so bold or so hardy as to put blood in their windows, openly or in view of folks, but let them have it privily carried unto the Thames, under pain of paying two shillings to the use of the Sheriffs.
1308. The first express entry which we have concerning our Company is the presentation and admission of Richard le Barber, as Supervisor or Master of the Barbers, before the Court of Aldermen in 1308 (Letter-Book C. 96).
Ric’s le Barbour ex oppõito ecc̃lie omñi scoꝜ parue elect’ est et p’sentatˀ pˀ Barbitonsores london die Martˀ p’xˀ p’t fm̃ Sc̃e Lucie virgĩs Anno R. E. fiɫ R. E. sc̃do coram dñis Nichõ de ffarndon tũc maiore london Johñe de Wengũue cetˀisqʒ Aldermĩs ad custodiendˀ officiũ BarbitonsoꝜ &c. Et admissus est et jurˀ q’d quolibet mense faciet scrutiniũ pˀ totñ officiũ suũ et si quos invenˀit lupanarˀ id alio mõ inhonestos et in scandalũ officii &c. eos distringat & distriaõem in cam’am apportari faciet &c.
Richard le Barbour dwelling opposite to the Church of Allhallows the Less, was chosen and presented by the Barbers of London, on Tuesday next after the feast of Saint Lucy the Virgin (13th December) in the second year of the reign of King Edward, son of King Edward, before Sir Nicholas de Farndon, then Mayor of London, John de Wengrave and other Aldermen, to have supervision over the trade of the Barbers &c. And he was admitted and made oath that every month he would make scrutiny throughout the whole of his trade, and if he should find any among them keeping brothels, or acting unseemly in any other way, and to the scandal of the trade, he was to distrain upon them, and cause the distress to be taken into the Chamber (of London) &c.
The foregoing record does not appear very creditable to the reputation of the Barbers of Edward the Second’s time, but it should be remembered that in those days, and for a long period before and afterwards, the Barbers superintended the Baths (Bagnios) and that these places were not infrequently the resort of improper characters; a few of our predecessors had perhaps, under the circumstances, been somewhat lax in their morality, and let us hope that Richard le Barber administered to those whom he found offending, due correction according to his oath and their deserts.
It would not seem from the terms of the admission, that the Master was at that period elected annually, and the Office was probably held by one man for a considerable number of years. There is no entry in the City books (which have been carefully examined for the purpose) of another admission to the Office until the year 1376, when two Masters were appointed, and then for some years subsequently two new Masters were sworn in annually.
1309. In this year we find the first record of an admission of a Barber to the freedom of the City, and several others occur about this period (see [Freemen]).
1310. On Wednesday next after the feast of the Nativity, 4th Edward II, Gerard the Barber was sworn keeper of the Gate of Newgate (Letter-Book D. 113), and there are other entries of Barbers being appointed keepers or porters at the City gates; from one of these, in 1375, it would seem that they were to keep a strict watch that no lepers should enter the city, and it was doubtless on account of their surgical knowledge enabling them to distinguish those afflicted with leprosy, that these offices were conferred upon them.
1310. On Monday before the feast of St. Gregory the will of Richard le Barber, our first Master, was proved in the Court of Husting. To Katherine his wife and Johanna his daughter, he left tenements and rents in Bread Street, Cordwainer Street, Queenhithe, Candlewike Street, and Whitecrouche Street. To Thomas de Mangrave his apprentice, a shop in Bread Street; to the fabric of London Bridge 20s., and the residue to pious uses.
1312. The earliest admission of a Surgeon (not a Barber Surgeon) to the freedom is that of “Magister Johẽs de Suthwerk cirurgicus,” who was sworn on Friday before the feast of St. Barnabas, 5th Edward II, and who paid nothing for his freedom, being admitted at the instance of Hugh de Waltham, Town Clerk.
Among the Archives at Guildhall are various entries relating to early Barbers, which, although not touching upon the history of our Company, may properly be preserved in these pages, and I shall therefore give translations of a few of them.
1315. On Monday next after the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the 8th Edward II, by common assent of the Mayor and Aldermen in the Hustings of pleas of Land, there was granted and demised to William de Dounesheued, Barber to Sir John de Sandale, Chancellor of our Lord the King, a certain house belonging to the Bridge of London, to have and to hold to the said William for his whole life, he paying yearly on the usual days two and a half marks to the keepers for the time being of the said Bridge, which said house is situate between a house belonging to the said Bridge in which John Mew now dwells towards the West, and a house belonging to Thomas le Maderman towards the East, in the Parish of Saint Dionis Backchurch London. And the said William, the said house and its appurtenances in all needful manner shall sustain, and against wind and rain cause the same to be defended during the whole term of his life.
And there was a proviso that if the rent should remain unpaid for a whole year that the Bridge Keepers should re-enter. (Letter-Book E. 28B.)
1319. On Thursday after the feast of St. Valentine, 13th Edward II, there was enrolled an obligation by which Roger the Barber (servant to John de Dallinge, Sheriff of London) and Margaret his wife, were bound to pay £100 to Sir John de Laugecombe, Rector of the Church of Laumaz Heys (sic) before the feast of Easter. (Letter-Book E. 85.)
1320. On Wednesday next after the feast of Saints Fabian and Sebastian, 13th Edward II, Lawrence the Barber, one of the men sworn to keep the Poultry Market on Cornhill, laid an information against John Bakon that he the said John was a forestaller of the Market. (Letter-Book E. 96B.)
1320. In the same year among the names of the Citizens assessed to contribute to a fine of £1,000 to the King, occurs that of Thomas the Barber. (Letter-Book E. 106B.)
1320. On Monday next before the feast of St. Margaret the Virgin, 14th Edward II, the Wardship of Alice, Joane and Agnes, children of John de Wynton, Barber, deceased, was given to Joane his widow; several shops and houses in the City belonging to the deceased are scheduled as for the benefit of the Wards, and Robert de Lamyngton, John de Bristolle, Barber, and Roger de Croidon were bound as sureties. (Letter-Book E. 114.)
Instances also occur of City Wards (sons of Barbers deceased) being apprenticed by the Chamberlain to various trades.
1340. In 14th Edward III, Hamo the Barber was assessed by the City at £10 as his contribution towards a forced loan of £5,000 to the King (Letter-Book F. 33) and six years later (1346) Hamo was again assessed at 20s. towards a “present” of 3,000 marks to the King.
1370. On 14th March, 44th Edward III, the wardship of Alice (aged 3 years), daughter of Nicholas the Barber, was given to Gilbert Prince, who was to use her legacy of 40 marks for her benefit.
1374. On the 28th July, 1374, Lawrence de Weston, Barber (Master of the Company in 1376), and Margaret his wife, mother of the said Alice, came before the Mayor, &c., and proved that the said Alice was dead, whereupon Gilbert Prince, the Executor of Nicholas the Barber’s will, was discharged, and the money paid to Lawrence and Margaret de Weston. (Letter-Book G. 244 and 317B.)
Reverting now from individuals to the Company, we find that the Barbers existed as a Trade Guild, but unincorporated certainly from the year 1308, and that they were at first ruled by one Master, and later on (in 1376) by two Masters, appointed annually. This Company of Barbers was composed of two classes of Members—viz., those who practised Barbery proper (perhaps including phlebotomy and tooth drawing), and those who practised Surgery, and who were, for distinction sake, called Barber-Surgeons (in the City books they are spoken of as “Barbers exercising the faculty of Surgery”). For aught we know to the contrary, a perfect harmony and good understanding existed between these two sections of the Company, and it is probable that the ranks of the latter were continually recruited from the former.
1381. The earliest evidence of the existence of our Hall is to be found in Harl. MS. 541, which contains a list of Companies’ Halls in the City, temp. 5 Richard II, by which it appears that the Barbers’ Hall was then, as now, in the Parish of Saint Olave, Silver Street, and doubtless on the same site; the entry is, “Barbar hall ye p’yssh of Seynt Oluf in Sylverstrete.” In 1490 the Hall is known to have been on the same site.
1388. In this year Richard II sent his writs all over the Kingdom to enquire into the nature and constitution of the several guilds and fraternities, religions, social or craft, and the returns to these writs, which must have been an immense number, were formerly kept among the Records at the Tower of London. Herbert, in his History of the Livery Companies, refers to his fruitless endeavours to discover these returns, and I have made diligent enquiry at the Record Office for them also, with the undoubted result that all of those which relate to the London Trading Guilds are lost. There are, however, a great number relating to London religious guilds and to trade guilds all over the country. Two of these concerning the Barbers of Norwich and of Lincoln are so highly interesting that I have preserved them in [Appendix A].
Amongst our Archives at Barbers’ Hall, is a vellum book of Ordinances written out fair in 1658, and therein is to be found a copy of the return made by the Barbers of London to the writ of Richard II, and which the Company caused to be extracted from the Tower Records in 1634. It is certified by William Colet as agreeing with the original, but unfortunately Mr. Colet (although he was Deputy-Keeper of the Records) or his copyist has made one or two mistakes, which necessitate a little hiatus in the translation, and he has put the year as the 11th instead of the 12th of Richard II. That the latter year is the correct one is abundantly proved by the dates on the original writs and on the numerous returns still in existence at the Record Office, as also by the names of the Masters certifying, who are recorded at Guildhall as having been admitted 10th September, 12th Richard II.
Richard II was more solicitous as to the funds and property of the Guilds, than he was about their observances, and our predecessors seem to have quickly acquainted him with their pecuniary position, “the which Company have neither tenements nor rents to their common use.”
The Masters recite an old document which they found in their strong box, and which will well repay perusal; it opens with a devout dedication to the Trinity, the Virgin Mary, and the glorious company of heaven, and the first Ordinance being expressly made in honour of God and all saints, and with the intention of stirring up the people to do well and to persevere therein, we must all approve of it. It provides firstly, that decayed brethren shall have an allowance of 101⁄2d. per week, if their poverty have not come about by their own folly. The second and third Ordinances relate to attendance at funerals and obits of deceased members. Then follow certain rules, that no man shall entice away another’s servant; the Masters to settle disputes, payment of quarterage, refusal of office, absence from Mass and the yearly feast, the livery clothing, &c., &c. It is well to observe here the evidence of the antiquity of our livery, of the quarterage, and of the feast, all of which have come down to these days.
Some later Ordinances are added, which were apparently made in 1387. This return is probably the only one extant of the whole of those made by the London trade guilds, and is therefore of the highest interest. A copy of the original (which is in Norman French), together with a translation, follows.
Copia extracta ex Bundell’ Fraternitatum et Gildar’ Civitatis London remaneñ de Recordo prout patet in Rotulis dñi Regis infra Turrim London.
Anno xjo.[29]
Ricardi Secundi.
Johan Heydon et Hen Cook Mestres[30] William Chapman et William Gomine Surveyours de la Compaignie appelle ffraternite des Barbers de la Citee de Londres dauncien temps ordeigne certifiant au Counsail ñre Sr. le Roy en sa Chancellarie la forme manere et condicion de touz articles obseruancez et lour circumstances contenuz en la paper de dite Compaignie en la forme quesuyt la quel compaignie nont nul teñt ne rent a lour c͠oe oeps les queles articles la dite Compaignie nont usez en lour temps forsqz soulement pur auer lour vesture un foitz per añ et paier lour quarterage pur sustiner pouerez geñtz de mesme la Compaignie et un foitz per añ assembler pur manger et eslire neuells Mestres et Surveiours sanz ascun autre article de sontz escript mettre en use forsqz ceux qˀ tan soulement sont faitz al honour de dieu mes purtant qils ont trouez un paper one les articles de sontz escriptz fait del temps donc memorie ne court ils les ont p’sentez a vrẽ tressages discrecions.
Ceste endenture fait en nom̃ de Dieu omnipotent pier et fitz et seynt Esperitz et de nr̃e Dame Seynt Marie et de tout la gloriouse Compaignie de Ciel de la foundacion et de Lordinance de la fraternite des Barbers de la Cite de Londres tesmoigñ coment et sur queux pointz la dite Fraternite est funduz et ordeigne.
Primerement al honourance de Dieu et touz ses Seyntes et pur excitac͠on les coẽns des geñtz a bien faire et perseuerance auoir en bien faitz est ordeigne qˀ si ascun frere de cel fraternite qi ad este de cell fraternite per vij anz sil cheit en mischief ou en pouerte pˀ auenture issint qil neit de quoy il purra viure de son propre et ces ne luy aucigne de sa propre folye qu donqz il auera chescun semaigne de lour c͠oe boyste xd. oᵬ. pur sa sustenance.
Item quant ascun frere du dite fraternite soit mort les freres de la dite fraternite serront la veyle al dirige et le jour al Messe et al dirige et al Messe del Moys obit et qˀ chescun tiel frere mort eit xxx messes de lour c͠oe Boyste et qˀ chescun frier qˀ soit absent sanz reasonable eucheson a ascun des ditz iiij foitz qil mette a lour c͠oe Boyste en noun de ses offrandes et dispences queux il deust auer fait sil eust este en p’sent iijd.
Item quant ascun Meistre de la dite Fraternite eit feme Mort qˀ les freres de la dite ffraternite soient a La Vigile et a la Messe le jour de sont enterment et a la Moys obit et quel frer qˀ soit absent a ascun de tres foitz qil paie pur chescun foitz qil soit absent en lieu des costages et autres dispences queux il ferreit sil feusse present a lour c͠oe boyst iijd.
Item qˀ nul frere de la dite Fraternite abette autri seruant hors des seruice son Meistre priuement ne apertement.
Item si ascun debate surdre pˀ entre ascuns des freres qˀ dieu defend et ces soit redresse per amour per la consideration des Meistres de la dite Fraternite . . . . . faire bonement et qˀ nul ne sue vers autre en autre manere autant qil ad assaie sil puisse pˀ leide des ditz Mestrez estre recorde.
Item qˀ chescun frere de la dite ffraternite veigne chescun quarter del an et paie son quarterage a Collectors decell issint qˀ les dits Collectors ne.
Item accorde est entre toutz les ditz freres qˀ quel de eux qˀ refuse son office quant ces vient a luy sil voet estre de ces allegge qil paie a lour c͠oe boyst.
Item si ascun frere soit absent a lour Messe et Manger quant il serra un foitz en lan qil paiera a tant en offrandes et toutz autres choes come un.
Item qˀ nul des ditz freres allowe autre hors de sa Meason.
Item si ascun frere per auenture tarie ses paiements entre añ et demy qil face gree demz les ij anz sanz rien outre le certain doñ. Et sil ad luy soient . . . . . . p’donez issint qil paie ce gest aderer. Et a ceux pointz tenir solonc amendement si mistier soit qils soient amendez ceste Fraternite sont entre jurez et ont chescun de eux pleine sa foy et si fra chescun qi serra de la dite ffraternite. Et accorde est entre eux . . . . . . endenture soient enclos en lour c͠oe boyst et lautre demurge vers les Mestres qˀ serront pur le temps de la dit fraternite.
Item chescun frere du dit fraternite paie en arres pur son Drap auant la mayn xld. ameyns.
Item qˀ chescun frere garde la liuere ij anz enterrement deuant qil le donne ou vende ou aliene la liuere en ascun manere sur peyne de paier al compaignie un noble dor sur lour grace.
Item est ordeyne le dymenge ps̃ch ensuant lassumpc͠on de nr̃e Dame lan le Roy Richard sẽde xjo. qe les Surveiours du dit Mistier soient esluy per lassent de tout la ffraternite et nemy per les Mestres.
Item qˀ nul du dit Fraternite paie plus pur son mangre qˀ xiiijd, en apres.
Item ordeyne est qˀ chescun Meistre qˀ eslisera ascun autre home pur estre en son lieu cesta sauoir pur estre Meistre celuy qˀ eslisera tiel home pur estre Meistre apres lan serra obligee per mesme luy a la Compaignie pur la monoy en un obligacon.
Convenit cum Recordo
Willũs Colet.
A Copy taken from a Bundle “of the Fraternities and Guilds of the City of London” which remains of record, as the same is seen in the Rolls of the Lord the King, at the Tower of London.
Anno 12.
Richard II.
John Heydon and Henry Cook, Masters, William Chapman and William Gomine, Surveyors of the Company called the Fraternity of Barbers of the City of London of ancient time established, certifying to the Council of Our Lord the King, in his Chancery, the form manner and condition of all the articles, customs and their circumstances contained in the Records of the same Company in the form following:—The which Company have neither tenements nor rents to their common use, And these articles the said Company have not used in their time excepting only for to have their Livery once a year, and to pay their quarterage to maintain the poor folk of the same Company, and once a year to assemble to feast, and to elect new Masters and Surveyors without any other article of their writing to put forward except those which only are made to the honour of God; but, however, as they have found a document amongst the articles of the Records, made of the time to which memory runneth not, they have presented it to your most wise discretions.
This Indenture made in the name of the Omnipotent God, the Father and Son and the Holy Ghost, and of our Lady Saint Mary and of all the glorious Company of Heaven, concerning the foundation of the Government of the Fraternity of Barbers of the City of London Witnesseth how and upon what points the said Fraternity is founded and ordained.
Firstly to the honour of God and all his Saints, and to stir up the Commons of the people to do well, and to have perseverance in well doing, it is ordained that if any brother of this Fraternity who has been of this Fraternity for seven years by chance fall into trouble or into poverty, and if he have nothing of his own by which he may be able to live, and it be not through his own folly, that then he shall have each week from their common box tenpence half penny for his sustenance.
Item. That when any brother of the said Fraternity dies the brethren of the said Fraternity shall go on the Vigil to the dirge, and on the day[31] to the Mass, and to the dirge and to the mass of the month’s obit, and that each such brother dead have thirty masses from their common box,[32] and that each brother who is absent without reasonable excuse at any of the said four times, shall put into their common box in place of his offerings and expenses, as he ought to have done if he had been present, three pence.
Item. When any Master of the said Fraternity has a wife dead, the brethren of the said Fraternity shall be at the Vigil and at the Mass on the day of her burial and at the month’s obit, and that brother who is absent at any of the three times shall pay for each time that he be absent, in place of the costs and other expenses which he would have borne if he had been present, three pence to their common box.
Item. That no brother of the said Fraternity entice any servant from the service of his master, privily or openly.
Item. If any dispute arise between any of the brethren, which God forbid, it is to be amicably settled by the decision of the Masters of the said Fraternity [and they are] to deal plainly,[33] and that no one sue another in other manner than at the assize (?) [and then only] if he be empowered by leave of the said Masters to be recorded.
Item. That each brother of the said Fraternity shall come each quarter of the year and pay his quarterage to the collectors[34] . . . . . .
Item. It is agreed between all the said brethren that whoever of them refuses his office when it comes to him, if he wishes to be relieved of it, that he pay to their common box.
Item. If any brother be absent from their Mass and Feast when it shall be once a year, he shall pay so much in offerings and all other things as one present.
Item. That none of the said brethren put [?] another out of his house.
Item. If any brother by chance delay his payments beyond a year-and-a-half, that he make acquittance within two years without any [penalty] beyond the ordinary fine. And if he be thus forgiven that he settle the matter at once.
And to hold these points pursuant to amendment alone if the Mystery will that they be amended, this Fraternity are sworn among themselves and have each of them pledged his troth, and so from each who shall [hereafter] be of the said Fraternity. And it is agreed amongst them that this Indenture be enclosed in their common box, and the counterpart be held by the Masters for the time being of the said Fraternity.
The document which the Masters found amongst their records made in “the time to which memory runneth not” probably ends here, and the following Items (see the third one) were doubtless additional Ordinances made circa 1387.
Item. That each brother of the said Fraternity pay in pledge for his livery, when he has the same, forty pence at the least.
Item. That each brother keep the livery two whole years before he may give, or sell, or alienate it in any manner, under pain of paying to the Company for their pardon, a noble of gold.
Item. It is ordained that on the Sunday following the Assumption of our Lady in the 11th year of King Richard the Second,[35] that the Surveyors of the said Mystery be elected by the assent of all the Fraternity, and no longer by the Masters.
Item. That none of the said Fraternity hereafter pay more than fourteen pence for his feast.
Item. It is ordained that each Master who shall choose any other man to be in his place, that is to say for to be Master; he who shall choose such man to be Master for the year shall be bound by himself for him, in an obligation to the Company for the money.[36]
It agrees with the Record,
William Colet.
Coeval with our Company of Barbers there existed in the City of London, another Fraternity or Guild, that of the Surgeons, in no way connected with the Barbers, but, like them, existing by prescription only and unincorporated. It is not to be expected that these two Companies would, in the days of so much trade protection and jealousy, exhibit an over-friendly feeling towards one another, and the records of the period, though meagre, show that this was the case. The Surgeons’ Guild at no time appear to have been a numerous body, indeed there is reason to believe that frequently their numbers were less than a dozen, and they possibly never exceeded twenty.
In the researches undertaken for the purpose of this work, various references to the Surgeons’ Guild have turned up, and although at this early period there was much in common between the two Fraternities, I have considered it quite apart from the subject in hand to go into any detail concerning that Guild, more especially as it has recently been so ably and fully dealt with by Mr. D’Arcy Power in his “Memorials of the Craft of Surgery.”
1376. In the 50th Edward III, the Barbers made a complaint to the Mayor and Aldermen against unskilled practitioners in Surgery, and prayed that two Masters should be yearly appointed to inspect and rule the craft, and that none should be admitted to the freedom of the City, but upon due examination of their skill; and this was granted by the Court, entered of record and Lawrence de Weston and John de Grantone were chosen Masters. The following is a translation of the original record concerning this matter.[37]
To the honourable Lords, and wise, the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London, shew the good folks, the Barbers of the same city, that whereas from one day to another there resort men, who are barbers, from uppelande[38] unto the said city, who are not instructed in their craft, and do take houses and intermeddle with barbery, surgery, and the cure of other maladies, while they know not how to do such things, nor ever were instructed in such craft; to the great damage, and in deceit, of the people, and to the great scandal of all the good barbers of the said city:—therefore the said good folks do pray that it may please your honourable Lordships, for the love of God, and as a work of charity, to ordain and establish that from henceforth no such stranger, coming to the said City from uppelande, or from any other place, of whatsoever condition he be, shall keep house or shop for barbery within the same city, before that he shall be found able and skilled in the said art and office of barbery, and that, by assay and examination of the good folks, barbers of the same city, whom out of the said craft it may please you to ordain thereunto. And that it may please you to ordain and establish, that from henceforth there shall always be two good men of their said craft chosen by their common assent to be Wardens of the craft; and that such two persons shall be presented unto the Mayor, Recorder, and Aldermen, of the said city, and sworn before them well and lawfully, to the best of their power and knowledge, to rule their said craft; and that the said Masters may inspect the instruments of the said art, to see that they are good and proper for the service of the people, by reason of the great peril that might ensue thereupon; and that on the complaint of such two Masters, all rebellious persons in the said craft, shall be made to come before you, and whosoever shall be found in default against this Ordinance shall pay to the Chamber 40 pence. And that from henceforth no man of their craft shall be admitted to the franchise of the said city, if he be not attested as being good and able, upon good examination before you made. And that no foreigner shall keep house or shop in their craft within the said city, or the suburbs thereof. And that this Ordinance shall be enrolled in the Chamber of the Guildhall of London, for all time to last.
And the same was granted unto them. Whereupon, Laurence de Westone and John de Grantone were chosen Masters of the Barbers. [Letter-Book H. 28.]
The foregoing ordinance must surely have given umbrage to the Surgeons’ Guild as it placed the Barbers upon an equal footing with them in the examination of Surgeons, the inspection of their instruments, etc.; and this more especially as seven years previously (in 1369) the Surgeons had obtained from the same Court an Ordinance investing them with the power of presenting the defaults of all unskilful Surgeons.
1382. As an example of a quack Surgeon’s method of practice, and of his rogueries and punishment, the following case of Roger Clerk will be found interesting:—
Roger Clerk, of Wandelesworth,[39] on the 13th day of May in the 5th year (Richard II), was attached in the Chamber of the Guildhall of London, before the Mayor and Aldermen, to make answer, as well to the Mayor and Commonalty of the City of London, as to Roger atte Hacche, in a plea of deceit and falsehood: as to which, the same Roger said, that whereas no physician or surgeon should intermeddle with any medicines or cures within the liberty of the city aforesaid, but those who are experienced in the said arts, and approved therein, the said Roger Clerk, who knew nothing of either of the arts aforesaid, being neither experienced nor approved therein, nor understood anything of letters, came to the house of him, Roger atte Hacche, in the parish of St. Martin, in Ismongereslane, in London, on Thursday, the morrow of Ash Wednesday, in the 5th year, etc.; and there saw one Johanna, the wife of the aforesaid Roger atte Hacche, who was then lying ill with certain bodily infirmities, and gave the said Roger, her husband, to understand, that he was experienced and skilled in the art of medicine, and could cure the same Johanna of her maladies, if her husband desired it.
Whereupon, the said Roger atte Hacche, trusting in his words, gave him 12 pence, in part payment of a larger sum which he was to pay him, in case the said Johanna should be healed. And upon this, the same Roger Clerk then and there gave to the said Roger atte Hacche an old parchment, cut or scratched across, being the leaf of a certain book, and rolled it up in a piece of cloth of gold, asserting that it would be very good for the fever and ailments of the said Johanna; and this parchment, so rolled up, he put about her neck, but in no way did it profit her; and so, falsely and maliciously, he deceived the same Roger atte Hacche. And he produced the said parchment here in Court, wrapped up in the same cloth, in proof of the matters aforesaid.
And the said Roger Clerk personally appeared, and the said parchment was shown to him by the Court, and he was asked what the virtue of such piece of parchment was; whereupon, he said that upon it was written a good charm for fevers. Upon being further asked by the Court what were the words of this charm of his, he said;—“Anima Christi, sanctifica me; Corpus Christi, salva me; in isanguis Christi, nebria me; cum bonus Christus tu, lava me.”[40] And the parchment being then examined, not one of those words was found written thereon. And he was then further told by the Court, that a straw[41] beneath his foot would be of just as much avail for fevers, as this said charm of his was; whereupon, he fully granted that it would be so. And because that the same Roger Clerk was in no way a literate man, and seeing that on the examination aforesaid, (as well as on others afterwards made,) he was found to be an infidel, and altogether ignorant of the art of physic or of surgery; and to the end that the people might not be deceived and aggrieved by such ignorant persons, etc.; it was adjudged that the same Roger Clerk should be led through the middle of the City, with trumpets and pipes, he riding on a horse without a saddle, the said parchment and a whetstone, for his lies, being hung about his neck, an urinal also being hung before him, and another urinal on his back. [Letter-Book H. 145.]
1390. In connection with the Surgeons’ Guild, four Master Surgeons of the City were sworn before the Mayor, etc., in this year, and they were to make scrutiny amongst persons practising the art of Surgery, and to present defaults. [Letter-Book H. 248.] It will be remembered that in 1369 a somewhat similar Ordinance was made for the Surgeons’ Guild, and this one in 1390 was probably obtained as a set off to the powers vested in the Barbers by their Ordinance of 1376, and by way of assertion of equal rights with them in matters surgical. Anyhow it is very clear that there were two distinct bodies within the City ruling the craft of Surgery at this period, each, no doubt, claiming jurisdiction over its own members, and both anxious and ready to interfere with outsiders, and probably with each other. It is curious to note that in the Ordinance of 1390, above referred to, the Masters inspecting are authorised to make scrutiny not only of men, but of “women undertaking cures, or practising the art of Surgery”; and here, in the 19th century, we find history repeating itself, and women again “intermeddling in matters surgical.”
As might be expected the dual scrutiny exercised over persons practising surgery, by two distinct and antagonistic Companies, produced considerable jealousy and unpleasantness, and there are various records extant indicative of cases of attempted interference with the Barbers’ privileges, one of which is distinctly stated to have been the work of the Surgeons and Physicians, as doubtless also were the others.
1410. By Letter-Book I. 94, it appears that the Ordinances for the Barbers made in 1376 were confirmed to them with the significant addition that they should enjoy the same, “without the scrutiny of any person or persons of any other craft or trade, under any name whatsoever other than the craft or trade of the said Barbers, either as to shaving, making incision, blood letting or any other matters pertaining to the art of Barbery or of Surgery, in the craft of the said Barbers now practised, or to be practised hereafter.” This Ordinance is, I think, clearly directed against the Masters of the Surgeons’ Guild, who had sought to exercise their authority over the Barbers using the faculty of Surgery.
1415. Complaint having been made to the Mayor and Aldermen, concerning the unskilful and fraudulent practice of certain Barbers in matters of Surgery, the privileges of the Barbers were again recorded, though the Company who had hitherto nominated their own Masters, were somewhat shorn of that privilege, as the Mayor, etc., directed the names of all the Barber (Surgeons) to be brought before them, and after due enquiry, they selected two of them for Masters, and gave them their charge and oath.
1416. “Certain trustworthy and discreet” Barber (Surgeons) complained to the Mayor, etc., that notwithstanding the last order, there were still unruly members in the craft, and a fresh Ordinance was enacted which imposed a penalty on offenders.
The Ordinances above referred to are to be found in Letter-Book I. 149, and are as follows:
Be it remembered, that on the 10th day of April, in the 3rd year, etc. (1415) it was intimated in a relation, and not without alarm, unto Thomas Fauconer, Mayor, and the Aldermen, how that some barbers of the said city, who are inexperienced in the art of surgery, do oftentimes take under their care many sick and maimed persons, fraudulently obtaining possession of very many of their goods thereby; by reason whereof, they are oftentimes made to be worse off at their departure than they were at their coming: and that, by reason of the inexperience of the same barbers, such persons are oftentimes maimed; to the scandal of such skilful and discreet men as practise the art of surgery, and the manifest destruction of the people of Our Lord the King.
And the said Mayor and Aldermen, wishing to obviate an evil and a scandal such as this, as also, to provide a fitting remedy for the same, and considering first, how that the said barbers by themselves, without the scrutiny of any other persons of any other trade or craft,[42] or under any name whatsoever, have supervision and scrutiny over all men following the craft of barbery, and within the liberty of the said city dwelling, as to all manner of cases touching the art of barbery or the practice of surgery, within the cognizance, or to come within the cognizance, of the craft of the said barbers;—as by a certain Ordinance, made and ordained in the time of Richard Merlawe,[43] late Mayor, and the then Aldermen, and in the Chamber of the said City of London enrolled, of record fully appears;—did determine and ordain that in future, by the more substantial part of all the barbers following the practice of surgery, and dwelling within the liberty of the said city, there should be chosen two of the most skilful, most wise, and most discreet men, of all the barbers following such practice of surgery, and dwelling within the liberty of the said city; seeing that oftentimes under their scrutiny and correction there would be found cases of possible death and maiming, where, if ignorant and indiscreet men should undertake the management thereof—the which might God forbid—in their judgment grievous errors might unexpectedly ensue, by reason of such unskilfulness. And that the same Masters, so often as they should be thus chosen, on election should be presented to the Mayor and Aldermen, for the time being, there by the said Mayor and Aldermen to be accepted and sworn etc.
And lest perchance a difference of opinion might in future as to such election arise, therefore, the said Mayor and Aldermen, after taking counsel on the matter aforesaid, on Friday, the 3rd day of May, in the same year (1415), caused to be brought before them the name of every barber who followed the practice of surgery and dwelt within the liberty of the said city, in order that, after enquiring into the duties and experiences of their practice and skill, in manner theretofore approved and customary, they might be the better able to accept such Masters. And hereupon, because that, among other names, Simon Rolf and Richard Wellys, citizens and barbers of the said city practising the art of surgery, as well for their knowledge and probity, as for the different kinds of difficult cures that had been sagaciously performed and effected by them, were by trustworthy testimony, upon sound and umblemished information, commended before any others, precept was given by the said Mayor and Aldermen to Baldwin Tettisbury, one of the serjeants of the said Mayor, to summon the said Simon and Richard for Monday the 6th day of May then next ensuing, to appear before the said Mayor and Aldermen in the Chamber of the Guildhall aforesaid, there to make the oath to them by the said Mayor and Aldermen to be administered.
Upon which Monday the said Simon and Richard, by virtue of such summons, appeared before the Mayor and Aldermen in the Chamber aforesaid. And hereupon the said Simon and Richard were then accepted by the said Mayor and Aldermen, and sworn upon the Holy Evangelists of God, well and faithfully to watch over and oversee all manner of barbers practising the art of surgery, and within the liberty of the said city dwelling; to maintain and observe the rules and ordinances of the craft or practice aforesaid; no one to spare, for love, favour, gain, or hate; diligently without concealment to present unto the Chamberlain of the said City, for the time being, such defaults as they may find; at all times, when duly required thereto, well and faithfully to examine wounds, bruises, hurts, and other infirmities, without asking anything for their trouble; and what they should find, at their discretion, when duly required thereto, distinctly to certify unto the Mayor and Aldermen of the said City, for the time being; as also, well and faithfully to conduct themselves from thenceforth in future; and all other things to do and perform, which of right are befitting or requisite for the masters or overseers of such practice to do.
Afterwards, on the fourth day of July, in the 4th year, etc. (1416) before Nicholas Wottone, Mayor, the Recorder, and the Aldermen, in full Court, upon truthful information of certain trustworthy and discreet men of the craft of Barbers, practising the art of surgery aforesaid, as of other able and substantial men of the said city, it was stated how that, notwithstanding the Ordinance aforesaid, very many inexperienced men of the said craft of Barbers, indiscreetly practising the art of surgery, did presume, and in their presumption pretend, that they were wiser than the Masters inspecting, and, as to certain infirmities—indiscreetly excusing themselves therein, on the insufficient grounds that they are not liable to the peril of maiming or of death—did altogether disdain to give notice of the same to the said Masters inspecting, according to the Ordinance aforesaid, or to be discreetly examined by them as to the same, or diligently to be questioned thereon. Upon which pretence, they did not hesitate daily to take sick persons, in peril of death and of maiming, under their care, without shewing such sick persons, or such infirmities and perils, unto the same Masters inspecting; by reason of which presumption or unskilfulness, such sick persons were exposed to the greatest peril, either of maiming or of death. Wherefore, the said Mayor and Aldermen were prayed that, for the common advantage of the whole realm, and the especial honour of the said city, they would deign to provide some sure remedy for the same.
And accordingly, the Mayor and Aldermen, assenting to the said petition, as being just and consistent with reason, having taken diligent counsel as to the matters aforesaid, and considering that very many of such persons in these times are more in dread of loss or payment of money than amenable to the dictates of honesty or a safe conscience, did ordain and enact, that no barber, practising the art of surgery within the liberty of the said City, should presume in future to take under his care any sick person who is in peril of death or of maiming, unless he should show the same person, within three days after so taking him under his care, to the Masters inspecting, for the time being, by the barbers practising the art of surgery within the liberty of the said City to be elected, and to the Mayor and Aldermen presented, and by them specially to be admitted; under a penalty of 6s. 8d. to the Chamber of London in form underwritten to be paid, so often as, and when, against this Ordinance they should be found to act; namely, 5 shillings to the use of the Chamber of the Guildhall, and 20 pence to the use of the craft of the Barbers.
1423. In this year certain Ordinances were made by the Mayor (Sir William Walderne) and Court of Aldermen which are entered in Letter-Book K. 6B. This record relates to what Mr. D’Arcy Power, in his “Memorials of the Craft of Surgery,” has termed a “Conjoint College” of the Physicians and Surgeons, and has little to do with our Company, beyond the fact that the scrutiny and oversight of persons practising Surgery is given to the Masters of the Surgeons’ Guild. The subject of these Ordinances and many very interesting remarks thereon and on the Conjoint College may be seen at p. 52, &c., of Mr. D’Arcy Power’s work; and the record itself is set forth in full at p. 299; furthermore, extracts from it, so far as the same relate to the privileges and practice of the Surgeons, are to be found in the beautiful old vellum MS. formerly belonging to that Guild, and now in the possession of the Barbers’ Company.
Armed with this additional authority, the Surgeons’ Guild again sought to interfere with and scrutinize the Barber-Surgeons of the Barbers’ Company. These latter, however, must have had good friends at Court, and were not slow in asserting and obtaining confirmation of their rights and privileges, as will be seen by reference to the following record in Letter-Book K. 27B.:—
1424. Memorandum. That on Friday the 10th day of November in the third year of the reign of Henry the Sixth from the Conquest before John Michell, Mayor, Thomas Knolles and other Aldermen, and Simon Seman and John Bithewater, Sheriffs of the City of London, It was granted and ordained that the Masters of the faculty of Surgery within the craft of Barbers of the same city, do exercise the same faculty even as fully and entirely as in the times of Thomas Fauconer late Mayor, and other Mayors, it was granted unto them, notwithstanding the false accusation (calumpnia) which the Rector and Supervisors of Physic and the Masters of Surgery pretend concerning a certain ordinance made in the time of William Walderne late Mayor (1423) and entered in the letter book K, folio 6, the which, they now endeavour to enjoin upon the said Barbers.
1451. With the exception of a few references (which are noticed elsewhere) the City records are silent concerning the Barbers’ Company until this year, when the Master and Wardens, styled here “Gardiani,” with certain honest men of the Mystery of Barbers, brought a Bill before the Mayor and Aldermen, praying them to establish certain Ordinances, and to enter them of record, which was granted and done.
These Ordinances provided for the enforcement of stated penalties in cases of disobedience and related to attendance upon summons, settlements of disputes, refusal of office, admission of members, evil speaking, assemblies and payments, instruction of “foreyns,” employment of aliens. They are to be found in Letter-Book K. 250, and are the first written in English, all previous ones being either in Latin or Norman French in the originals.
Memorandum qd. xxvto. die ffebruarii Anno regni Regis Henrici Sexti post conquestˀ vicesimo nono veniunt hic in Curˀ Dñi Regis in Camˀa Guyhald Civitatis london coram Nich̃o Wyfold Maiore & Aldermannis ejusdem Civitatꝭ magistˀ & Gardianˀ necnon cẽti probi homines misterˀ barbitonsoꝜ Civitatꝭ p’dcẽ & porrexerunt dcisˀ Maiore & Aldermannis quandam billam sive supplicacioñe vˀboꝜ sequentˀ seviem continentem Unto the ryght Worshipfull and Worshipfull lord and souvˀaignes Mair and Aldremen of the Citee of London,
Besechen most mekely all pˀsones enfˀunchised in the craft and mistier of Barbours wythin the said Citee That it please unto your lordshippˀ and Right wise discrecions for to consider howe that for as moche as certein ordinances been establisshed made and entred of Record in the chaumber of the yeldhall of the said Citee all pˀsonnes of the said Craft have fully in opinion for to obeye observe and kepe theim and noon other in eny Wise, So been yr. many and divˀse defaultes often tymes amonges your said besechers not duely corrected for default of such other ordinances to be made and auctorised sufficiently of record in the said chaumber, like it therefore unto your said lordshippe and grete Wisdoms of your blessed disposicons for the pˀpetuell Wele and good Rule of the said Craft for to establissh and make these ordinaunces here folowyng pˀpetuelly to endure and for to be observed and putte in due execucion in the same craft And to be auctorised of record in the said chaumber for evˀ And your said besechers shall pray god for you.
FFirst that evˀy barbour enfˀauncheised householder and other occupier of the same craft holdyng eny shopp of barberye wythin the Citee of london shall be redy att all manˀ som̃ons of the Maisters and Wardeins of the same craft for the tyme being that is to sey for the Kyng the Mair or for eny Worshipp of the said Citee And yef eny man occupying the said craft in manˀe and fourme aforesaid absent him from eny such som̃ons wythoute cause reasonable and thereof duely convict than he to pay at the chaumber of the yeldhall xiijs. iiijd. that is to say vjs. viijd. to the same chaumber and other vjs. viijd. to the almes of the said craft. Also that evˀy man enfˀauncheised under the fourme abovesaid that disobeyeth and kepeth not his houre of his som̃ons at eny tyme wtoute cause reasonable and yˀof[44] duely convict shall paye to the almesse of the said craft at evˀy tyme yt. he maketh such defaute ijd. And yef eny of theim what so evˀ he be of the same craft that disobeye this ordinance he shall paye to the chaumber of the yeldhall iijs. iiijd. at evˀy tyme that he maketh such default.
Also that yef eny matˀe of debate or difference be betwene eny pˀsoones of the said craft Which god defend, that none of theim shall make eny pursuyt at the comˀon lawe unto the tyme yt. he that findeth him aggreved in that pˀtie hath made his compleint unto the maister and Wardeins of the same craft for the tyme being and they to ffynyssh the matˀe and the cause of the said compleint Wythin vj dayes after such compleint made and yef they conclude not and ffynyssh the same matˀe Wythin the said vj dayes that yanne it be lefull to either pˀtie to take the benefice of the comˀon lawe Wythin this Citee So alwayes that the pˀtye ageinst whom the compleint is made be not fugityf And what pˀsone of the said craft that doth contrarie this ordinance shall paye at evˀy tyme at the chaumber of the yeldhall xiijs. iiijd. that is to sey vjs. viijd. to ye said chaumber and oyr. vjs. viijd. to ye almesse of ye said craft.
Also that noon able pˀsone of the said craft enfˀauncheised shall refuse eny manˀ office or clothing pˀtinent to the said craft Whan and What tyme that he be by his bretheren be abled and elect yrto upon pein to paye at the chaumber of the yeldhall xls. that is to wete xxs. to the same chaumber and other xxs. to the said almesse Also what man of the said craft that absenteth him fro the said eleccion Wythoute cause reasonable or absent him fro the dyner to be made the same day and will not paye therto his pˀt thanne he shall paye at the said chaumber iijs. iiijd. that is to sey xxd. to the same chaumber and other xxd. to the almes of the said craft.
Also that the maisters and Wardeins of the same craft that nowe be or in tyme to come shall be, shall not take admitte or resceive eny pˀsone in to the bretherhede or clothing of the same craft Wythoute the com̃on assent of the bretheren of the said craft or the more pˀt of theim upon pein of eviˀch such maister or Wardein that doth contarie this ordinance xxs. that is to say xs. to the chaumber and xs to the almesse of the said craft.
FFurthermore it is ordeigned that from hens forward yef eny man occupying the said craft be imfouled and of evell Will and malice so be unavised to revile or reprof eny man of the same craft that is to seye for to lye him or wyth other dishonest Wordes misgovˀne him in presence of the said maisters and Wardeins or in eny oyr. places and pˀof[45] by the report of the said maisters and Wardeins be duely convict what so evˀ he be of the same craft that is so misgovnˀed at eny tyme shall paye at the said chaumber for evˀy such default vjs. viijd. that is to say to the same chumber iijs. iiijd. and to the Almes of the said craft iijs. iiijd.
Also it is ordeigned that evˀy man enfˀauncheised of the said craft under fourme aforesaid shall assemble with his ffelashipˀ of the same craft by thassignement of the said maisters and Wardeins being for the yeer in a certein place limited by theim at iiij tymes of the yeer And at evˀy such quarter day in the yeer evˀy brother enfˀauncheised and being of the clothing therof shall paye to the almes abovesaid iijd. And evˀy man that is so enfˀauncheised of the same craft and is not of the clothing of the same shall paye to the same almes jd. Which iiij dayes be these that is to saye the tewesday next after all hallown day the tewesday next after candelmasday the tewesday next after Trinite sonday and the tewesday next after lammas day to thentent that the said maisters and Wardeins shall enquere amongꝭ the said compaignye so assembled that yef eny default ranker or discord be hadd or moved amongꝭ theim that thanne the said maisters and Wardeins shall sett theim at rest accord and in unite to that they canne or may, after the fourme and custume as have been before used And what parsonne of the said craft be absent eny of the said dayes wythoute cause reasonable he shall paye for evˀy such day iiijd. to the expenses of the said maisters.
Also it is ordeigned and establisshed that no barbour nor other able pˀsonne using barbourye shall enfourme eny foreyn nor him teche in no wise in eny manˀ point that belongeth to the craft of barbourye or surgˀye wherby the same foreyn shall pˀceyve and take by his own capacite and exˀcise unto the tyme that the same foreyn be bounden appˀntice to a pˀsone barbour or other pˀsonne able enfˀauncheised using the same craft Wythin the Citee of london upon peyne to paye at the chaumber of the yeldhall for evˀy such defaute iiij marc, that is to say to the same chaumber xxvjs. viijd. and to the Almes of the said craft other xxvjs. viijd.
And also that no barbour nor other able pˀsoone occupying the same craft shall take eny Alien nor stˀaunger in to his sˀvice unto the tyme that the same alien or stˀaunger be examined by the maistˀ and Wardeins of the same craft of his abilite and Connyng And thereupon the maistˀ and Wardeins With other vj or viij of the moost able and Kunnyng pˀsonnes of the craft shuld taxe him after his abilite after that hem semeth that he be worthy to take yeerly for his salarie And also that no Barbour shall take eny alien or stˀaunger that hath been or wtin sˀvice wyth an other barbour enfˀauncheised before that he knowe well that the same sˀvnt hath complete his covenantes wyth his former maister upon pein to paye for evˀy such defaute at evˀy tyme that he be founde defectif ayenst eny of these ordinances at the said chaumber xiijs. iiijd. that is to wete to the same chaumber vjs. viijd. and to the said almesse vjs. viijd. and also make restitucion of the damage unto the pˀtie that findeth him greved.
And also that no man occupying the said craft shall pˀcure eny other mannes sˀvnt oute of sˀvise upon the peyn aforesaid and damage unto the pˀtie pleintif And also it is ordeigned that from hensforward that no harbour enfˀauncheised nor eny other able pˀsoons occupying the said craft shall not take into his sˀvice eny stˀaunger or forein for lasse time thanne a yeer And what pˀsone enfˀauncheised or occupying the said craft disobeys this ordinance shall renne in the pein of xiijs. iiijd. that to be devided in manˀ and fourme above said.
And also that no pˀsons of the said craft of barbours nor other able pˀsone occupying the same craft huyre no ffˀaunchised man of the same craft oute of his shopp ne dwellyng place upon pein of xls. that is to wete to the said chaumber xxs. And to the Almesse of the said Craft other xxs.
Qua quidem billa coram dˀcĩs maiore & Aldermannis lectˀ & per eosdem plenius intellectꝭ Qua videtur eisdem qˀd omnes articuli in dˀca billa contentꝭ sunt boni & honesti ac racioni consomˀ, &c., &c. (The articles were ratified confirmed and ordered to be entered of Record in the books of the Chamber of London.)
Nothing is now heard of the Surgeons’ Guild for some years, although they were still in existence. It is quite probable, that finding the Barbers had invariably obtained the protection and countenance of the City authorities, whenever their privileges had been assailed or called in question, they had given over their attempts at interference with them as hopeless, and allowed our worthy predecessors to continue to “exercise the faculty of surgery,” in peace; and being unmolested they doubtless grew in numbers, in importance, and in the knowledge of their art, until it was admitted that their position as one of the Guilds, warranted them in applying for a Charter of Incorporation, which was granted to them by Edward IV in 1462.
1413. Before proceeding to refer to this important epoch in the history of our Company, it will be well to introduce a very remarkable letter, which was written by Thomas Arundell, Archbishop of Canterbury (formerly of York), to the Mayor, etc., of London, in which he complained that the Barbers, being, alas! “without zeal for the law of God,” kept their shops open on the Sabbath days, and he besought the Mayor and Aldermen (his “sons in Christ, and dearest friends”) to put a stop to this practice. No trade, perhaps, has from the earliest days, down to our own times, owned such persistent breakers of the Fourth Commandment as have the Barbers. Our records abound with by-laws, enacted and renewed over and over again on this subject, and details of the delinquencies of numerous Barbers in this respect, and of their punishments by fine and imprisonment crop up everywhere.
The Archbishop’s letter reveals to us the fact, that nearly 500 years ago, men were constituted much as they are now; in that “that which touches the body or the purse, is held more in dread than that which kills the soul,” and he shrewdly suggests that the clerical punishment of “the greater excommunication,” should be augmented by a fine to be levied by the Civil authority. This letter is so deeply interesting that no apology is needed for reproducing it here. The original is to be found in Letter-Book I. 125.
1413. On the 24th day of July, in the first year, etc. (Henry V) the Reverend Father in Christ, and Lord, Thomas, by Divine permission, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England, and Legate of the Apostolic See, sent here, to the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London, certain Letters Close of his, containing words as follow:—
“Sons in Christ and dearest friends.—We know that you do seek for the things which are of above, and that you will the more readily incline to our desires, the more surely that the things as to which we write are known to tend to the observance of the Divine law, the maintenance of public propriety, and the rule of the Christian profession. We do therefore write unto you on this occasion, to intimate that when we were presiding of late in our Provincial Council, holden at London, with our venerable brethren, the Suffragan Bishops, and our clergy of the Province of Canterbury, it was publicly made known unto us with universal reprobation, that the Barbers of the City of London, over the governance of which city you preside, being without zeal for the law of God, and not perceiving how that the Lord hath blessed the seventh day and made it holy, and hath commanded that it shall be observed by no abusive pursuit of any servile occupations, but rather by a disuse thereof, in their blindness do keep their houses and shops patent and open on the seventh day, the Lord’s Day, namely, and do follow their craft on the same, just as busily, and just in the same way, as on any day in the week, customary for such work. Wherefore we, with the consent and assent of our said Suffragans and clergy, in restraint of such temerity as this, have determined that there must be made solemn prohibition thereof in the City aforesaid, and that, of our own authority, and that of our said Provincial Council; and not there only, but also throughout the Diocese of London, and each of the cities both of our own Diocese and of our Province of Canterbury; to the effect, that such barbers must not keep their houses and shops patent or open, or follow their craft, on such Lord’s Days for the future, on pain of the greater excommunication; in the same manner as it has been enacted and observed of late in our time, as to the City and Diocese of York, as we do well recollect. But, dearest children, seeing that so greatly has the malice of men increased in these days, a thing to be deplored—that temporal punishment is held more in dread than clerical, and that which touches the body or the purse more than that which kills the soul, we do heartily intreat you, and, for the love of God and of His law, do require and exhort you, that, taking counsel thereon, you will enact and ordain a competent penalty in money, to be levied for the Chamber of your City, or such other purpose as you shall think best, upon the Barbers within the liberty of your City aforesaid, who shall be transgressors in this respect; that so at least, those whom fear of the anger of God does not avail to withold from breach of His law, may be restrained by a scourge inflicted upon their purse, in the way of pecuniary loss; knowing that we in the meantime, after taking counsel hereon, will devise measures for the prevention of this, and for the due publication of our Provincial enactment aforesaid. Fare you well always in Christ.
Written at Ikham[46] on the 13th day of the month of July.
Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury.”
An Ordinance was forthwith made thereupon, to the effect, that no barber, his wife, son, daughter, apprentice, or servant, should work at such craft on Sundays within the liberty of the city, either in hair cutting or shaving, on pain of paying 6s. 8d. for each offence; 5s. thereof to go to the new work at the Guildhall, and the remainder to the Wardens or Masters of the Barbers within the city.[47]
1422. In August of this year Henry V died, and thirty-two of the City Companies assisted at his obsequies, going in procession and carrying torches. From an entry in Letter-Book K. IB., it appears that the Barbers bore four torches on this occasion.
1447. This year the Company seem to have contributed 40s. towards the cost of the Roof of the Chapel at Guildhall, as appears by the following entry in Journal IV, 198 (25th October, 26 Henry VI)—
Itmˀ gardiani misterˀ barbitonsoꝜ & importaverunt in Cur xls. sterlingoꝜ pˀse & misterˀ sua ad coopturam Guyhaɫd Sc̃. Capelle.
