Four years afterwards it was ordained that no man, let his condition be what it might, should be permitted to wear a gown or garment cut or slashed into pieces in the form of letters, rose leaves, and posies of various kinds, or any such-like devices, under the penalty of forfeiting the same, and the offending tailor was to be imprisoned during the King's pleasure.
In the third year of the reign of Edward IV. an Act was promulgated by which cloth of gold, cloth of silk of a purple colour, and fur of sables were prohibited to all knights under the estate of lords. Bachelor knights were forbidden to wear cloth of velvet upon velvet, unless they were Knights of the Garter; and simple esquires, or gentlemen, were restricted from the use of velvet, damask, or figured satin, or any counterfeit resembling such stuffs, except they possessed a yearly income to the value of £100, or were attached to the King's Court or household.
It was also forbidden to any persons who were not in the enjoyment of £40 yearly income to wear any of the richer furs; also girdles of gold, silver, or silver-gilt were forbidden.
TRAVELLING IN A HORSE LITTER.
From the MS. 118 Français in the Bibliothèque Nationale (late Fourteenth Century).
No one under the estate of a lord was permitted to wear indecently short jackets, gowns, &c., mentioned by Monstrelet, or pikes or poleines to his shoes and boots exceeding two inches in length. No yeoman, or person under the degree of a yeoman, was allowed bolsters or stuffing of wool, cotton, or cadis in his purpoint or doublet under a penalty of six shillings and eightpence fine, and forfeiture awarded; the unfortunate tailor making such short or stuffed dresses, or shoemaker manufacturing such long-toed shoes for unprivileged persons, being under the pain of cursing by the clergy for the latter offence, as well as the forfeit of twenty shillings—one noble to the King, another to the cordwainers of London, and the third to the Chamber of London.
It will readily be seen that these laws were necessarily the cause of great hindrance to trade, which was, indeed, not the least of the evils occasioned by these absurd laws. Richard Onslow, Recorder of London, 1565 (given in Ellis's "Original Letters," vol. ii.), describes an interview which he had with the civic tailors, who were puzzled to know whether they might "line a slop-hose not cut in panes, with a lining of cotton stitched to the slop, over and besydes the linen lining straight to the leg."
The statutory laws, however, were not the only hindrance to trade, since it would appear that during the Plantagenet period dishonesty in trade was as rife as it is at the present time, and foreign competition as keen; the conditions, however, were slightly different, the foreign merchants obtaining high prices for their goods, instead of dumping cheap goods into the country at low prices. The remedy was directed to the enforcement of greater honesty in trade dealings, rather than to fortify themselves behind tariff walls.